Next US President

clones_jer · 08-13-2007, 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by mramseyISU

At least he isn't a scientologist? While Joseph Smith was a couple taco's short of a combo platter I'd say most of his followers are well meaning do gooders(except for the polygimists). The Tom Cruises of the world on the other hand are a different sort entirely.

"We're reporting live from South Park, Colorado where Tom Cruise and John Travolta still refuse to come out of the closet"

mramseyISU · 08-13-2007, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by Tom Cruise

But I'm not in the closet.

That made me laugh.

CY ST8T · 08-13-2007, 12:54 PM

Not to start a huge debate or anything, but can you sum up shortly where Romney is such a flip flopper. Yes he originally stood as a pro choice early in his career, but since then changed his stance to pro life. I don't believe finding the errs in your thinking and changing a stance like that hardly makes you a flip flopper.

clone52 · 08-13-2007, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by CY ST8T

Not to start a huge debate or anything, but can you sum up shortly where Romney is such a flip flopper. Yes he originally stood as a pro choice early in his career, but since then changed his stance to pro life. I don't believe finding the errs in your thinking and changing a stance like that hardly makes you a flip flopper.

If you're a democrat, its flip-flopping. If you're a republican, its just finding the errors in your thinking. Simple as that.

DaddyMac · 08-13-2007, 01:49 PM

He SAID..."I am absolutely committed towards keeping pro-abortion laws"
He SAYS... "I would welcome the overturning of Roe V. Wade"

He SAID...“If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern...I promise more effective leadership than Kennedy on winning full equality for gays and lesbians...and I oppose a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and I support gays serving openly in the military. My opponent [Ted Kennedy] cannot do this. I can and will.”
He SAYS..."I'm against gay marriages and gay civil unions"

He SAID...I didn't want to overturn jury verdicts. And so I never granted a single pardon in my four years in office, a fact I am enormously proud of today"
He SAYS..."I may pardon Scooter Libby"

He SAID..."I don't line up with the NRA."
He says..."I'm a card carrying NRA member"

On capture of Osama Bin Laden
He SAID...""It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person,""
He says..."He's going to pay, and he will die,"

People ought to listen to Deace's WHO show. I don't know if Steve has a personnal vendetta against Romney or something. But a healthy portion of his show lately has been spent on calling out Mitt's flips.

Anybody remember that SNL skit from the '04 election where Seth Meyers was impersonating Kerry at one of the debates and said "President Bush says I'm a flip-flopper. But what he doesn't tell you is when I made my anti-war statements, I was talking to an anti-war crowd. And when I made my pro-war statements, I was talking to a pro-war crowd. That's not flip-flopping, that's pandering. An I believe the American people deserve a president who knows the difference".

Sounds about right.

mjones34 · 08-13-2007, 01:51 PM

Why people look down upon one changing his/her mind? Granted sometimes it is because the person is just trying to appeal to a certain audience. More often than not, people generally become more educated on an issue and seriously believe different than what they did. People seem to use that as a reason to not like someone. To me, I respect a person more who says "I used to think this way, but now I know this and I believe differently now."

Whitey · 08-13-2007, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by mjones34

Why people look down upon one changing his/her mind? Granted sometimes it is because the person is just trying to appeal to a certain audience. More often than not, people generally become more educated on an issue and seriously believe different than what they did. People seem to use that as a reason to not like someone. To me, I respect a person more who says "I used to think this way, but now I know this and I believe differently now."

I think that you're free to change your mind, unless you're doing it in an election year to pander to the electorate.

jdoggivjc · 08-13-2007, 02:00 PM

Because some people (i.e., Hillary Clinton and her stance on the war in Iraq) do it because it's politically convenient to do so. It made her look good to vote for the war back in '03, and it makes her look good with her constituents to be against it now. If the majority of Americans weren't opposed to the war, Hillary would be claiming how she was one of the biggest supporters in sending the troops over there. Instead, she claims to be against the war, and opens herself up to the criticism that she's against the war because right now it's popular to be so.

clone52 · 08-13-2007, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by mjones34

Why people look down upon one changing his/her mind? Granted sometimes it is because the person is just trying to appeal to a certain audience. More often than not, people generally become more educated on an issue and seriously believe different than what they did. People seem to use that as a reason to not like someone. To me, I respect a person more who says "I used to think this way, but now I know this and I believe differently now."

In politics, most of the time its pandering. To think that most politicians just become more educated and change their mind is naive.

acs4isu · 08-13-2007, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by DaddyMac

People ought to listen to Deace's WHO show. I don't know if Steve has a personnal vendetta against Romney or something. But a healthy portion of his show lately has been spent on calling out Mitt's flips.

I think that fact that Romney is a Mormon is enough to discount him in Deace's book. Nothing short of an Oral Roberts clone will satisfy Deace, IMHO.

Wesley · 08-13-2007, 02:54 PM

Who will vote for Billary? Bill would be the first First man and probably secretary of State. Bill would move out of Harlem. Bill could read to the kids and start a village. Bill's underwear on ebay would become famous again. Bill could be on meet the press more easily. Bill could throw out the pitch at Washington National games. Bill would be grinning like a Cheshire cat.

alaskaguy · 08-13-2007, 03:45 PM

Add John Edwards to the list of flip floppers. Edwards voted for the war authorization but now says that, given the same circumstances (i.e., believing that Saddam had nuclear weapons), he would vote against the war authorization. In other words, he would risk the destruction of the USA in favor of 3rd-world values. If Saddam really had a nuclear missile, John Edwards would tolerate Saddam's possession and use of such weapons.

mjlane · 08-13-2007, 04:08 PM

I caught one of those political talk shows on Sunday morning and they were discussing the straw poll from Saturday. They stated that Romney was getting grilled by a local radio talk show host and started to fight back a little bit. I immediately assumed that they were referring to Deace, but they didn't play any audio clips or anything.

Anyone know anything more about that story?

benjay · 08-13-2007, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by alaskaguy

If Saddam really had a nuclear missile, John Edwards would tolerate Saddam's possession and use of such weapons.

Holy exaggeration, batman!

DaddyMac · 08-13-2007, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by alaskaguy

Edwards voted for the war authorization but now says that, given the same circumstances (i.e., believing that Saddam had nuclear weapons), he would vote against the war authorization.

Are you sure about that quote?

Could it mean more of "if we knew then what we know now = REAL circumstances".

I couldn't care less about John Edwards - not trying to defend him. But that quote seems overly outrageous and comes off as out of context or misinterpreted.