Colin Powell, Feb 2003. "There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more," Powell said, at one point holding up a vial of simulated biological agent -- an image broadcast around the world. "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent," he said at the time. Jan, 2004 Powell said it was an "open question" whether or not such arms would be found and he conceded the possibility Iraq might not have had any when the war began. Colin Powell, Sep. 2004. "I think it's unlikely that we will find any stockpiles," link to article
How is this flip-flopping? Powell was just wrong. He didn't flip flop, he took a position, and ended up being wrong. That's like a baseball expert saying the Phillies will win the NL East before the season, and then after seeing how poorly they performed, this expert changes his mind and picks another team later in the season. Now, this expert didn't flip-flop, he saw what happened with his own eyes and thus, and came to a new conclusion. I'm not comparing baseball to real world issues, I'm just using this example because I don't think this is a true form of flip-flopping. flip flopping ,IMO, is when a person struggles to pick a side before the development/result (related to the issue debated) takes place.
Mulder, Where is the flip-flop. The first statment he is saying that they have 'em. The second one is that they probably wont find them. Two different things. The middle statement appears to be someone "interpreting" his words. Why dont you post what he actually said so we can draw our own conclusions.
i don't really get the criticism of being a flip-flopper, as Faos notes, we are all flip-floppers, the real idiots are the ones who deny they are. What's wrong with changing directions when we realize that we're going in the wrong direction? it's called learning. What's wrong is when you go full steam in one direction, find out you are wrong, but keep going in that direction anyway, making up new justifications of doing so, in basketball its called an airball.
Because "changing ones mind when one realizes they were wrong" would be seen as weak to the "Cowboy" Conservatives. Plus, it's not good PR and politics. This will be Bush's demise. He will choke on his own pride (and desire to prove to his daddy that's he's a "big boy!"). And we're *all* going along for the ride!
I love how Fonda Kerry tailors his speech to his audience. Reminds of me of when he was in Detroit and said he had a big SUV, then went to speak to the Sierra Club and said he didn't own an SUV -- the family owns it. Can you say two face? Granted, it's not as bad as betraying troops who are in POW torture cells and having your words used to torture your former "Band of Brothers", but it's using the same principles.
"I have a clear vision and a strategy to win the war on terror." -- Bush, July 19, 2004. "I don't think you can win (the war on terror)." -- Bush, Aug. 30, 2004. "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win.” -- Bush, Aug. 31, 2004.
I doubt it will serve his side as well as the abuses and distortions of Kerry's record by the Bush campaign as served them. They are so good at it. Personally I think Kerry ought to set the record straight and use the Bush attacks against them. For instance, The Bush campaign claimed Kerry voted to strike billions from the Intelligence budget. That fact is that Kerry wanted to strike money for an airforce satellite that was never launched. His vote wasn't taking money from intel gathering, but getting a refund on something never used. Since the Bush folks made it an issue, if I were Kerry I would play the ad talking about explain the real deal, then make the counter charge that the Bush govt. is in favor of wastefull spending since apparently they think the billions of dollars for a spy satellite never launched was a good thing. Then have a tag like John Kerry, will look after your tax dollars and eliminate govt. waste.
I'm gonna steal from Jim Hightower now... enjoy! "FLIP-FLOPPER-IN-CHIEF" I'm sure that George W has been anxiously awaiting my priceless political advice, so here it is: If you're a toad, don't try to call a frog ugly. This refers to Bush's toadiness in trying to label John Kerry a flip-flopper on a variety of issues. Kerry has indeed changed his positions on several matters and thank goodness he has, since most shifts were to a more progressive position! But who is the flip-flopper-in-chief? His Georgeness, of course. For example in his 2000 presidential run, Bush declared that gay marriage was a matter for the states to decide now he's crying for a Constitutional amendment to federalize and criminalize the issue. He also promised in 2000 that he would put our nation's Social Security trust fund in a lock box so politicians couldn't spend it on their pet projects but he has now totally looted that "lock box," having spent all the money the trust fund will build up through the year 2013 on such pet projects as his tax giveaways to the rich. Then there's Osama bin Laden. Remember Bush's braggadocio after September 11, declaring that he'd get Osama "dead or alive?" Three years later, Osama is still on the loose and George meekly says, "I don't know where he is. ... I truly am not that concerned about him." One of his most acrobatic flip-flops was on the need for a "Patients Bill or Rights," se we can sue HMOs that wrongfully deny us medical treatment. In his 2000 campaign, Bush loudly bragged that he had "delivered" such a bill for Texans while he was governor of Texas. But this was a lie, for he actually had vetoed the state legislation. Yet, in 2000, he promised a national patients bill of rights. As president, however, Bush has done a double flip-flop, threatening to veto a patients bill and adamantly claiming in federal court that states cannot pass their own laws. No one can beat George W when it comes to flip-flops. He does more flipping than IHOP." jimhightower.com
