He Flips! He Flops! He leads the U.S!

[kmack]

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=118263

Interesting articles, note how each one links to a source, I've read through and info checks out! Bit outdated, but still exceptionally relevant, check out the first topic on the list

I wish we could have an honest president in my life time!

*edit* lol, this thread is gonna turn into a shootout :smoking:

 

[ChareltonHest]

He Flips! He Flops! He leads the U.S!

John Kerry?


C.H.

 

[ChareltonHest]

I'm no fan of Bush either.

They are both different shades of the same color IMHO.

Both would pass unconstitutional laws like the PATRIOT Act; both would expand Gov't.


C.H.

 

[kmack]

He Flips! He Flops! He leads the U.S!

John Kerry?


C.H.

exactly! bush attacks kerry's flip-flopping, and then look at this, he is a hypocrit.

I'm no fan of Bush either.

They are both different shades of the same color IMHO.

Both would pass unconstitutional laws like the PATRIOT Act; both would expand Gov't.


C.H.

we really can't know for sure what Kerry would have dont to be honest.

K.M.

 

[willyd]

I dont necessarily like Bush but in my mind by flip flopping a person isnt doing anything wrong. For example, when John Kerry "flip-flopped" I didnt see what the problem is. Hes approached with an issue and at first hes one way but then after more research hes another. I mean thats what should happen. I think its alright if John Kerry or George Bush are "flip floppers."

South Park: "The strength of our nation is the ability to say one thing and do another"

 

[Bodacious]

WHO CARES?!?!

Kerry lost, get over it.

 

[Calanen]

Both would pass unconstitutional laws like the PATRIOT Act; both would expand Gov't.

Has the Supreme Court struck this down as unconstitutional? They might have I don't know - just asking. Bits of it might be, but Im sure the whole thing is still there.

 

[gh0st]

No one cares that either flip flop. I'm glad Bush is president over an idiot like Kerry (which is the obvious attempted parallel of this thread). Of course they both flip flop. I dont give a shit how they blast each other. Bush is dumbass, and Kerry is a wuss. I'll take the dumbass, especially in these times. :dozey:

 

[GhostFox]

I actually thought Kerry would be a fairly similar president to Bush in terms of policy. Personality they are completely different guys, but they both had smart people working for them and they seemed to say a lot of the same things. Half the time they would spend the debate agreeing with each other. If Kerry had won, I don't think you would see any signifigant foriegn policy changes from today. That ball has already been put into motion, and no one is going to stop it.

 

[gh0st]

I actually thought Kerry would be a fairly similar president to Bush in terms of policy. Personality they are completely different guys, but they both had smart people working for them and they seemed to say a lot of the same things. Half the time they would spend the debate agreeing with each other. If Kerry had won, I don't think you would see any signifigant foriegn policy changes from today. That ball has already been put into motion, and no one is going to stop it.

The reason they were so nice to each other is because they both want to look like nice guys when they are probably both assholes. As policy goes, they are incredibally different, I'm not sure where youre coming from. Explain?

 

[staticprimer]

My personal favorite

…Bush says war on terror is unwinnable: "I don't think you can win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/30/04]

…Bush says he will win the war on terror: "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/31/04]

If it weren't for his whole 'OMG look at Kerry, he's a flip-flopper!!' campaign, I wouldn't really care about it. All politicians do it, and Bush is no different.

 

[ChareltonHest]

Has the Supreme Court struck this down as unconstitutional?

Heck, the Supreme Court would declare the constitution unconstitutioanl. Don't think they make the right desisions all the time.

As for the unPATRIOT Act, there may be parts of it that are downright unconstitutional, but the real danger is that it is another "cut" against freedom. Add it to the other tiny infringments over the years and you get a monster.

Liberty is rarely destoyed in one visious stab. More often than not, it dies of a thousand seamingly harmless, at the time, cuts. Add up all the babby steps that our "leaders" have passed over this century and you'll see the mess we are in.


C.H.

 

[GhostFox]

I'm not sure where youre coming from. Explain?

My point was that Bush's policies on the war on terror seem to be so entrenched that I don't think Kerry could have done anything to dislodge him. I think the US would be in a very similar place today with Kerry in charge. I may well be wrong, but that was just the general impression I got from the pre-election run up.

 

[Absinthe]

WHO CARES?!?!

Kerry lost, get over it.

Another obtuse connection from Bodacious.

This has very little to do with having a temper tantrum over election results. It has to do with the fact that, despite all his accusations of John Kerry being a flip-flopper, Bush is no better.

Of course, anything being remotely related to the election is usually greeted with "STFU get over it" crap from your camp.

 

[Bodacious]

This has very little to do with having a temper tantrum over election results. It has to do with the fact that, despite all his accusations of John Kerry being a flip-flopper, Bush is no better.

But Kerry isn't president, he lost, why bring it up? The point is moot. It is not like bringing Bush's flip flopping up is going to keep him from being elected.

Of course, anything being remotely related to the election is usually greeted with "STFU get over it" crap from your camp.

And for good reason. It is the equivilant of beating a dead horse.

 

[Absinthe]

But Kerry isn't president, he lost, why bring it up?

This isn't about Kerry, nor is it about the election.

The point is moot. It is not like bringing Bush's flip flopping up is going to keep him from being elected.

I see, so we shouldn't criticize him. Hell, let's also stop criticizing his plans for social security and his aggressive foreign policy! Let's just completely bury anything flawed with Bush because, hey, he ain't going nowhere.

Regardless of wether or not you agree with what Bush does or not, such a line of thinking is ridiculous and potentially dangerous. If he's a flip-flopper then it deserves to be brought up, especially when hindsight would supply the notion that he's a hypocrite. I most certainly wouldn't encourage any "shut up and move on" attitudes if there were issues with Kerry (if he was elected).

And for good reason. It is the equivilant of beating a dead horse.

I repeat: This isn't about Kerry, nor is it about the election.

 

[jondy]

I was going to reply with pretty much the same thing, but I see Absinthe beat me to it, so I think I'll just wait for another one of Bodacious' inane responses

 

[Bodacious]

This isn't about Kerry, nor is it about the election.

Ok, so bringing up Bush's flip flopping isn't because Kerry was given the moniker of "Flip Flopper"?

I see, so we shouldn't criticize him. Hell, let's also stop criticizing his plans for social security and his aggressive foreign policy! Let's just completely bury anything flawed with Bush because, hey, he ain't going nowhere.

Quote me saying you shouldn't critisize bush. My argument that it is useless.

 

[Absinthe]

Ok, so bringing up Bush's flip flopping isn't because Kerry was given the moniker of "Flip Flopper"?

If you wish to interpret it that way, okay. While I would agree that the "flip-flopper" title is an extension from the election (and tbh, I can understand why some would still be bitter over that), the actual subject matter is not. So to dismiss the entire argument as post-election angst is indicative of one either not understanding the topic or simply not wishing to deal with it.

Quote me saying you shouldn't critisize bush. My argument that it is useless.

You're right. You did not tell us to not criticize Bush, but argued that it was useless.

I, however, don't think it's useless. I think it contributes to political awareness, and it's only proper that people know more about the man leading our country. Because even if he has been elected again, the public still has the ability to voice itself and hold an influence over his actions.

 

[Fishlore]

There has been a grand total of 1 Democratic president in the last quarter century. One, and he was very close to the center. The left and the liberal media are just upset that their message is so far from reality. No new ideas of their own, so why not bash Bush at every turn.

 

[Bodacious]

If you wish to interpret it that way, okay. While I would agree that the "flip-flopper" title is an extension from the election (and tbh, I can understand why some would still be bitter over that), the actual subject matter is not. So to dismiss the entire argument as post-election angst is indicative of one either not understanding the topic or simply not wishing to deal with it.

You can't deny that if Kerry wasn't called a flip flopper this thread would not exist.

You're right. You did not tell us to not criticize Bush, but argued that it was useless.

I, however, don't think it's useless. I think it contributes to political awareness, and it's only proper that people know more about the man leading our country. Because even if he has been elected again, the public still has the ability to voice itself and hold an influence over his actions.

Fair enough.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

You should have put USA or united states...

Sorry, but it just sounds better when you sing it.

 

[Absinthe]

You can't deny that if Kerry wasn't called a flip flopper this thread would not exist.

Perhaps under a different name and wording, but I'm quite certain the actual subject matter (without the "flip-flopper" overtones) would have been brought up at some time or another.

 

[jondy]

There has been a grand total of 1 Democratic president in the last quarter century. One, and he was very close to the center. The left and the liberal media are just upset that their message is so far from reality. No new ideas of their own, so why not bash Bush at every turn.

Questioning people in power is what keeps them in check. Don't be shortsighted, and don't stereotype

 

[GhostFox]

Questioning people in power is what keeps them in check.

I don't think there is any simple act citizens can do that is greater then always questioning the leadership and asking themselves where it can improve. I think that in of itself is patriotic. However at the same time the questioning should be fair and logical, not based of political prejudaces. If you question in order to further your political idealogy you are betraying your nation and its trust.

 

[jondy]

I don't think there is any simple act citizens can do that is greater then always questioning the leadership and asking themselves where it can improve. I think that in of itself is patriotic. However at the same time the questioning should be fair and logical, not based of political prejudaces. If you question in order to further your political idealogy you are betraying your nation and its trust.

There are always grey areas; and opinions always differ. But I'm glad you agree, GhostFox, that's all gravy

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Good. Then you could incorperate he says immediately into your future arguements; since you've agreed.