The McCain Flip-Flop Diaries, pt. 1
Since some of the Republicans around here have had the vapors because people are saying that McCain is a flip flopper (I believe the term "waffle" is the current talking point to go with) and because a disagreement with the first item in a list apparently renders the entire list null and void, I've decided to reformat the master list of McCain flip flops so that no one's delicate constitution is damaged. I also hope to show that by comparison with McCain, Obama is the Rock of Gibralter when it comes to philosophical consistenty.
1. On reckless tax cuts
2001 - 2004 - First, it is notable that Senator McCain stood so astride the Republican anti-tax position that he was one of only two Republican senators to oppose the 2001 tax cuts and one of only three GOP senators to oppose the 2003 reductions ... Second, Senator McCain's stated reason for opposing the Bush tax cuts rhetorically allied him with the most radical anti-growth elements of national politics. Senator McCain argued, "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us at the expense of middle-class Americans who need tax relief." ... Third, Senator McCain not only voted against the Bush tax cuts, he joined leading liberal senators in offering and voting for amendments designed to undermine them. All in all, Senator McCain voted on the pro-tax side of 14 such amendments in 2001 and 2003. - The Club for Growth White Paper on McCain's Economic Record
Left to their devices, Democrats will impose a massive $100 billion tax hike, almost $700 per taxpayer every year. John McCain has also long sought permanent and immediate reform of the estate tax, and supports raising the exemption from taxation on estates up to $10 million while cutting the tax rate to 15 percent.
Flip Flop scale - Moby Dick on a steel cable. This one alone loses him his mavericky credentials, as well as lying in the wording about a tax "hike", which was passed and signed into law by Bush and the Republicans. It also flushes any credibility he had on fiscal matters down the toilet, never to return.
2.Windfall Oil Profits Tax
May 2008 - "I am against obscene profits"
Today - John McCain does not support a windfall profits tax
Flip Flop scale - Swordfish on a 130# line
3. Warrantless wiretapping
February 2008 - McCain votes to gives telcos retroactive immunity
Flip Flop scale - Swordfish on a 130# line
4. Privatizing Social Security
2004/2008 - McCain's statements on privatizing SS in 2004 and 2008
Flip Flop scale - In this case, McCain's policy hasn't changed, it's his definition of privatizing. In other words, private accounts using SS taxes are no longer considered privatization by McCain (unlike every other English speaker in the US). So on policy he gets a wall mounted Bass, on abuse of the English language this is a Swordfish on a 130# line.
5. Changing the Republican platform to allow abortion in the case of rape, incest, or to preserve the life of the mother
2000 - McCain criticizes Bush for not being willing to change the party platform
2007 - McCain still wants GOP's Abortion Platform changed
2008 - Silence
Flip Flop scale - This is one of those "prospective flip flops" beloved of Republicans. Right now it's a farm raised trout on a dock, but if the platform isn't changed before the convention it's a freshly landed Chinook
6. Estate Tax
June 2002 - "Farm and family-owned business assets accounted for less than three percent of the total value of these estates in 1999. In most estates that are taxable and include a business or farm, the business or farm does not even constitute the majority of the estate. In fact, the American Farm Bureau Federation has acknowledged that it could not cite a single example of a farm having to be sold to pay estate taxes. These facts belie the argument that we must repeal the estate tax to save family businesses and farms to assure that they do not have to be liquidated to pay estate taxes." - John McCain, speech on Senate Floor 6/12/2002
June 2006 - "In his 1906 State of the Union Address, President Theodore Roosevelt proposed the creation of a federal inheritance tax . Roosevelt explained: 'The man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the State because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government.' Additionally, in a 1907 speech he said: 'Most great civilized countries have an income tax and an inheritance tax. In my judgment both should be part of our system of federal taxation.' He noted, however, that such taxation should 'be aimed merely at the inheritance or transmission in their entirety of those fortunes swollen beyond all healthy limits.'
"I agree with President Roosevelt, and I remain opposed to full repeal of the estate tax." - John McCain, speech on Senate Floor 6/8/2006
Flip Flop scale - Farm raised trout on the dock. He would have done better if he didn't say he has "long sought permanent an immediate relief" and that he's changed the reform he's asking for substantially. Also, he's taken to calling it the "Death Tax", a sure wingnut giveaway.
7. Indefinite detention of terrorism suspects
June 2008 - (After an additional 5 years without charges being brought) "“These are enemy combatants, these are people who are not citizens, they are not and never have been given the rights that the citizens of this country have,” he said. “Our first obligation is the safety and security of this nation and the men and women who defend it.”
Flip Flop scale - Swordfish on a 130# line
8. "Litmus test" (committment to overturn Roe v. Wade) for all Supreme Court appointments
2008 - McCain said he would not have a "litmus test" for judges.
Flip Flop scale - Farm raised trout on the dock. I'd rate it higher, but he's the Republican nominee, they always lie about litmus tests and judicial appointments so he's graded on a curve.
9. Forcing telecoms to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity
2002 - 2008 - For McCain, A Switch On Telecom Immunity?
Flip Flop scale - At first, I thought this was a rare trip flop, but it appears to be the even rarer mega flop. I don't know how to rate this one because the more I read his statements the more confused I become on what his position is.
10. Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository
July 2002 - McCain votes to create Yucca Mountain nuclear water storage facility - 2002 Senate Vote #167
May 2008 - “I would seek to establish an international repository for spent nuclear fuel that could collect and safely store materials overseas that might otherwise be reprocessed to acquire bomb-grade materials. It is even possible that such an international center could make it unnecessary to open the proposed spent nuclear fuel storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.” — John McCain, 5/27/08
Flip Flop scale - Freshly landed Chinook. Given where it was said, a blatant pander to Nevada voters, so it gets 4 megapimps on the pandermonium.
11. Changing relations with Cuba
1995 - 2000 - A cornucopia of mavericky thinking on Cuba(pdf)
February 2008 - McCain Declares Cuba Policy a Success
Flip flop scale - Swordfish on a 130# line, especially because he has stated in the past that the Cuban embargo was not a successful policy. Oh, and the speech was given in Miami, so it gets 5 megapimps on the pandermonium.
12. On negotiating with Hamas
2006 - "They're the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it's a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that." - John McCain, interview on Sky News "World News Tonight"
2008 - Barack Obama's foreign policy plans have even won him praise from Hamas leaders. Ahmed Yousef, chief political adviser to the Hamas Prime Minister said, "We like Mr. Obama and we hope he will win the election. He has a vision to change America." We need change in America, but not the kind of change that wins kind words from Hamas, surrenders in Iraq and will hold unconditional talks with Iranian President Ahmadinejad. - McCain deputy campaign manager Christian Ferry
Flip flop scale - Freshly caught Chinook, especially because of the shameful attack on Obama.
13. McCain and Evanglicals
2000 - Senator John McCain, in a provocative and politically risky speech, sharply criticized leaders of the religious right on Monday as "agents of intolerance" allied to his rival, Governor George W. Bush, and denounced what he said were the tactics of "division and slander." - McCain, Speech on 2/28/2000
2008 - McCain "very honored" to receive endorsement of Rev. Hagee.
Flip-flop scale - A rare trip-flop, this one is a Swordfish on a 130# line with a side helping of 10 megapimps on the pandermonium.
That's it for part one, there's only so much I can take at one sitting. It's interesting, as I went through this it became very clear how McCain really has very few principles, and even those he doesn't really seem to understand that well. Reminiscent of the current failed Presidency in many ways, and more evidence that McCain really would be a third Bush term.
--
Forget the myths the media's created about the White House. The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand. - Deep Throat
--
I blame it all on the Internet
- HankP's blog
- Login or register to post comments
A pretty good account from TNR, the money quote?
Read the article, here.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
)(Which sounds like a super cool Gene Vincent song)....
Is Obama a flip/flopper? I don't care, it's a bogus metric, and I don't care.
But it looks like the Senator's Artful Repositioning -- my preferred term, btw -- is already reaping benefits. From the inestimable fivethirtyeight.com --
If the campaign continues in this direction, I'm going to be drunk from the first Tuesday in November until Christmas.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
)I'll be drunk more days than you between 11/4 - 12/25.
MScott can you officiate this one?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .but I'm not sure how we'd handle verification issues. I know I don't have the hi-tech extras some of you have, but I'm pretty sure that none of you have a breathlyzer hooked up to your computer, unless someone here has a rather colorful history with the criminal justice system that we don't know about.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Tossing empty cans of lager beer at passing pedestrians. Oh the horror, the horror.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )as conservative does.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )At first I thought that was one of those words like flammable/inflammable that mean pretty much the same thing with or without the prefix. But no... one refers to estimate, and the other to esteem. But I digress...
--More Wagster!
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )A quote I love:
"To try and fail is at least to learn; to fail to try is to suffer the inestimable loss of what might have been."
-- Chester Barnard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )only trains himself at asking questions."
Or maybe: "When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes with a balanced attack."
:)
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )He's dressed in flubber.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Just a general observation:
I've always said that partisans on both sides constantly accuse the other side of hypocrisy, and all are usually correct. Kinda funny to watch, although also frustrating, given that it usually doesn't really get down to what principles and standards are appropriate regardless of whose foot the shoe is on, and it all gets in the way of more useful, productive discourse.
- Login or register to post comments
)1. On reckless tax cuts
If the tax cuts in question had actually had been reckless, I suspect McCain would be against.
2.Windfall Oil Profits Tax
If the profits were a windfall, you actually might have a point.
3. Warrantless wiretapping
See Jimmy Carter on the FISA parameters, er what the law doesn't accomplish.
4. Privatizing Social Security
What FDR called for.
5. Changing the Republican platform to allow abortion in the case of rape, incest, or to preserve the life of the mother.
As compared to Obama's fathers have to be responsible whereas, well unsaid.
7. Indefinite detention of terrorism suspects
SCOTUS continues to change its mind on the subject.
8. "Litmus test" (committment to overturn Roe v. Wade) for all Supreme Court appointments
Putting an end to black robe legislation is always a sound objective.
9. Forcing telecoms to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity.
I missed the legislation which precludes Congress from pursuing the same.
10. Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository
Apparently someone introduced McCain to the "French Method". I'm puzzle and confused that you would be shocked by that.
11. Changing relations with Cuba
When a 50s style dictator who promised democracy exits, it is always time for a party.
12. On negotiating with Hamas
Doesn't Hamas support Obama's election? BTW the phrase "dealing with Hamas" generates multiple pathways.
13. McCain and Evanglicals
Compare and contrast "evanglicals" with 20 years of liberation theology and it isn't a fair contest.
When everyone else was cutting and running, McCain supported the "surge".
Now perform the simple ratio number of changes of position over the days McCain has served in the Congress (and not running for president) and Obamas changes divided by 143 day. I believe the ratio is pretty lopsided. Same ratio but this time use the number of days of Mccain's service to his country. This ratio(s) may explain why Obama is afraid to meet McCain in townhall debates.
--“Let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.”
John F. Kennedy
January 20, 1961
- Login or register to post comments
)not to realize all politicians flip flop, and McCain is no exception.
McCain's major problem though, is not his many flip flops or his lack of experience, something he shares with other pols. His major problem is his terrible judgment, and not just on Iraq.
--This place is my vacation.
- Login or register to post comments
)saved many lives.
--“Let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.”
John F. Kennedy
January 20, 1961
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )then Genghis Khan was a great humanitarian.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Well, maybe. If we don't count all the people it killed. Calculating net human life, you guys are still a million or so in the hole.
--Guard, protect and cherish your land, for there is no afterlife for a place that started out as Heaven.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )NYT:
Of course, because economic conditions have so improved since last February.
--More Wagster!
- Login or register to post comments
)But it's still full of crap.
I. On taxes, you've trod this ground before and you're still wrong. The underlying principle is that McCain is unwilling to let the tax cuts expire because doing so would be tantamount to a tax increase. This is called a principle, not a flip-flop.
You do have a point about McCain calling the cigarette tax a "user fee" instead of a tax increase, especially because McCain took Romney to task for his own slate of "user fee" increases. I should also point out that you're off topic in your own post because it's not a flip-flop, and I suspect that you inserted it for the sole purpose of getting a dig in on a candidate you don't like. Mission accomplished. Give yourself a pat on the back.
II. On windfall profits, McCain said he would "consider" them, which he did and then subsequently rejected. This would be under the category of potential flip-flop, like when Obama trial-ballooned his opting out of public financing during the primary season. The difference is that Obama subsequently acted on the flip-flop, McCain didn't. AP:
III. On warrantless wiretapping, there you go being Half-Story Hank again. The preceding sentence in your first link said this: "There are some areas where the statutes don’t apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications." Since one of the parties in the conversation is overseas, McCain is saying that FISA doesn't apply. Jake Tapper has a more coherent analysis than yours, and here's the conclusion:
Regarding overseas calls to domestic parties, I've heard McCain make similar comments in debates.
IV. On Social Security, the YouTube video is misleading, as Politifact points out, and the St. Petersburg Times is not McCain-friendly. McCain has always favored the taxpayers having the option of opting into personal accounts, either partially or supplementally. This is not a flip-flop, it's argument over which word to use. Pretty weak, Hank.
VI. On the estate tax, you have two cites showing that McCain is opposed to repealing the estate tax, and a third cite which shows that McCain is opposed to repealing the estate tax. When his website says he "supports raising the exemption from taxation on estates up to $10 million while cutting the tax rate to 15 percent," reasonable people should take that to mean that he wants to mend it, not end it. You crashed and burned on this one, Hank.
VII. On detainees and their detention, in December 2003 McCain supported the notion that detainees should be put before tribunals and judged as to their status, and if judged to be illegal enemy combatants, to be processed, all in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. In 2006, McCain sponsored the Detainee Treatment Act and Military Commissions Act, which set forth the very procedures for making that happen. In your 2008 quote, you mix apples and oranges because the issue in his latter quote pertained to habeas corpus, not the Geneva Conventions. Another crash and burn, Hank.
VIII. On litmus tests, the New Yorker trotted out false information. David Brody at CBN (which is also not McCain-friendly) followed up with Gary Bauer:
Still another crash and burn, Hank.
IX. On telecom immunity, there was definitely some dithering and mixed messages going on. I'll give you this one, Hank.
X. On Yucca Mountain, you're wrongly spinning a politically opportunistic proposal into a flip-flop. AP:
McCain said this in Reno, NV. Since McCain did not take back his support of Yucca Mountain, your line of argument crashes and burns.
XI. On Cuba, the flip would be "the policy of containment has worked", as McCain said in OTB. The flop would be "the policy of containment has not worked." So where's the flop? The link from the Florida Dems has a bunch of quotes saying that McCain would do X if Castro does Y. Once again, Hank, you're mixing apples with oranges. I also think it's pretty cheap and sleazy on your part to list those quotes from the Florida Dems without any accompanying links. As ThinkProgress has well shown, they all too frequently take quotes and excerpts out of context in order to peddle their untruths and half-stories. You can do better, Hank.
XII. On Hamas, you're trotting out another failed retread, already shot down multiple times over. When McCain said that we'll have to deal with Hamas one way or the other, the clear meaning was that if Hamas didn't renounce terrorism and didn't change their policy of seeking Israel's destruction, we should be deal with them one way, i.e., we wouldn't deal with them at all. If they did change their policy, then we'd deal with them another way, i.e., negotiate and work a deal.
The first quote you excerpted came in an interview between Jamie Rubin and John McCain in 2006, and Rubin dishonestly took the quote out of context. Ed Morrissey shows McCain's other contemporaneous comments, and Rubin cut out McCain's follow-up comments:
What's that phrase again? Oh yeah. Crash. And. Burn.
XIII. On Hagee, McCain acknowledged that he made a mistake in accepting Hagee's endorsement. Whether that falls under the category of mistake or flip-flop, then I guess it depends on whether you want your batting average to be over or under the Mendoza Line.
To recap, you have one potential flip-flop, one actual flip-flop and one mistake/flip-flop. The rest is garbage. Quite frankly, Hank, you larded this with so many out-of-context statements and apples and oranges comparisons, that I find your post to be misleading and dishonest on the whole. I hope you do a better job with Part II, but I'm not optimistic.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
)that I'm not willing to parse a statement to death over multiple diaries, building gossamer bridges of near logic and suppositions to arrive at the promised land, but I will stand behind these comparative statements.
In 2000, McCain attacks the Bush tax cuts as irresponsible and unfair to the middle class and the poor. He voted against them, a truly brave stand for a Republican (who have become rather insane on the topic of taxes). In 2008, he's flipped so far that he not only defends extending those same tax cuts but proposes even more irresponsible tax cuts on top of them. This is after a doubling of the already high debt Bush inherited. I led with this one because it really is the McCain 2008 campaign in a nutshell: jettison everything that made him unique in order to become a creature of the most ignorant and self destructive part of the Republican party. If you can't see this as a flip-flop, I can recommend a good Ophthalmologist.
On windfall profits, as with holding suspects for years without charges and warrantless wiretapping, McCain is against it but not enough to do anything about it, and happy to criticize anyone who does anything about it. He wants the best of both worlds, the ability to be a maverick and take on his own party (thus appealing to independents), but then the freedom to criticize specific solutions to the problems he complained about (thus holding on to a fractured and reality-challenged base). Catchy has done a good job pointing out where rhetoric and actions diverged, and how his noble sounding calls for adherence to the Constitution dissolved into simple partisan pandering.
On social security, you need to read what I wrote. I said his position on privatization hasn't changed, just his position on the English language and the meaning of privatization. To say that one is in favor of private accounts but against privatization is like saying one is in favor of random hookups every weekend but against promiscuity, it simply makes no sense. The flip flop here is on the meaning of words, not the policy. As someone once told me, words have meanings. Similarly, his rhetoric about estate taxes in the past was clearly meant to show that he was in favor of retaining it with minor modifications, his rhetoric now attempts to paint him as a fierce anti-tax Republican. To deny that is to deny reality.
I hadn't seen the follow-up Bauer quote, I'll give you that one.
On Yucca mountain, yes, a politically motivated proposal is a flip flop. Proposing a different repository that would allow the bypass of Yucca Mountain is pandering and flip flopping, pure and simple. If you tailor your position to the crowd you are speaking to, that's a flip flop. Or wasn't that the point of your multiple diaries about Obama?
On Cuba and Hamas, once again McCain went and got all mavericky and showed some independence from Republican talking points, then quickly reversed himself and pledged fealty to the party line. I get it, he can't win without the base, but saying there's been no change in his position is willful ignorance.
On evangelicals, it's also pretty clear. He was quite independent from them in 2000, came back on his knees for some desperately needed endorsements and then dropped them when it turned out that they were literally crazy. It would have been so much simpler if he had just left them labeled as agents of intolerance (which was correct), but I guess he had to learn that lesson all over again.
I'll leave the scoring to others (I have no idea who Mendoza is), but I do think it's important to point out that by the standards you yourself have established in multiple diaries every one of these is a flip flop. You can claim that's because McCain has served so long in the Senate, that's just the flip side of experience. It still doesn't have anything to do with judgment, in which McCain is, I'm sorry to say, sorely lacking.
Part 2 will cover Iraq and the misdirection and outright lies McCain and his campaign have made concerning his positions over the past five years. I'll try to send you some Maalox before I post it.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )On taxes, if you're a Senator who has opposed tax increases for a quarter century and has made the opposition of tax increases a central pillar of his career (with your one exception of a cigarette tax), please explain why voting in favor of increased tax rates (by letting the tax cuts expire) is not a flip-flop. By your taking this position, McCain loses either way. If he goes one way, he's a flip-flopper for favoring increased tax rates. If he goes another, he's a flip-flopper because he favors continuing a tax cut that he voted against. This is why I raised the issue of his longstanding principle of opposing tax increases. You seem so blinded by your ideology and partisanship that you're unwilling to even to consider that.
On windfall profits, you make no sense. McCain said he'd consider a windfall profits tax and then he rejected it. End of story. McCain made his choice against such a tax and Obama is still for it, so it's no surprise that McCain would differentiate himself on the issue. You might have had a point if McCain had actually said he was in favor of a windfall profits tax, but he didn't. Considering (or reconsidering) an issue shouldn't be a crime, particularly if the person is honest enough to say that he's considering (or reconsidering) the issue. The problem I have with Obama and his "refining" on Iraq is that he's reconsidering the issue (that the "pace of withdrawal" should be dictated on "maintaining stability") and then denying that he's reconsidering the issue.
On detainees, you similarly make no sense. McCain is practically the only Republican who actually did something on the matter, and you'd be hard-pressed to find a Democrat who actually accomplished as much as McCain on the treatment of detainees and their adjudication. His actions went against the wishes of the president and God knows how many other Republicans and conservatives, and he worked with Democrats to forge a passable and signable bill.
On Social Security, if there's no flip-flop, then why bring it up? Democrats used the phrase "privatization of Social Security" to scare voters, so you're criticizing McCain for using a different phrase because the initial phrase became stigmatized? Again, you make no sense.
Your definition of flip-flop is about as ridiculous as I've ever seen, and that's saying a lot. Do you really want to define a flip-flop as "...a politically motivated proposal"? Hank, every time a politician makes proposal, there are political motivations. For any politician, Dem or Repub, when said person opens his or her mouth, 99% of the words are politically motivated. You've just defined the term so broadly that every time a politician says something it's a flip flop. Do you really want to go there?
Obama is politically motivated to win the White House, so by your New-and-Not-Improved definition, you are telling us that it's OK for me to say that Obama flip flops at every campaign appearance. By the same token, McCain is politically motivated to win the White House, so again by your definition, you are saying that it's OK for you to say that McCain flip flops at every campaign appearance. Can you make any less sense?
Here's a suggestion. Why don't you use a definition that is reasonable and realistic, such as this: "a flip-flop is when a politician says or does one thing and then reverses himself." It's clean, simple and measurable.
On Cuba and Hamas, the only thing you've shown is lack of understanding of plain English. I wish I could help you with that, but I can't.
Oh, and Hagee is "literally crazy"? Are you his psychiatrist? There are agents of intolerance in evangelical community, that we agree on. I also suggest that there are agents of intolerance in the liberal community, and this post is representative of that intolerance.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )how voting for tax rates you know are set to expire in order to perform kabuki budget math is not cheating.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The issue Hank brought up was taxes, so your bringing up the budget is diversionary to the topic at hand.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I'll take that answer into consideration when evaluating your claims of the lack of truthfulness, accuracy and reasonableness in the comments of others.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Cheating on your taxes - the GOP approved method.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )as your increasingly shrill responses to me and others are proving.
Yes, telling different groups of people what they want to hear is flip flopping. Telling one group "I strongly support X" and telling another "there may be a way around X" certainly qualifies. The funny thing is that by the standards you've put forth in your multiple diaries McCain qualifies for the label to a much greater degree than Obama. Your standard seems to be that if a candidate discusses aspects of a position that he didn't discuss before, that's a flip flop. McCain has far exceeded that threshold.
Don't worry, I'll be on vacation for a week without internet access so you'll be spared my infuriating prose. When I get back I'll see if there are any more misleading waffle diaries before I resume (from you, that is, I've given up hope on even understanding half of what Timmy posts here. You at least write in complete sentences.)
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Remember when you conjured up your own definition of fascism? You cherry-picked some snippets here and some snippets there, conveniently leaving out that one of the main legs of fascism was anti-conservatism. Well, now you're doing the same thing, conjuring up your own definition of flip-flop. Might I suggest a commonly accepted definition, such as this one:
By this commonly accepted use of the term, your Yucca Mountain hooey is just that. McCain didn't change his policy on Yucca Mountain, he proposed a new repository option without taking the existing option off the table. Telling different groups of people what they want to hear is politics, not flip flopping. I suggest that pick the real dictionary definition of a word and then stick to it. It would be much better than redefining the term every time you're confronted with logic and facts in order to pretzel your way out of a weak argument.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"sudden real or apparent change of policy or opinion", because by that standard your posts cover flip flops but so do mine. The only argument is the subjective one over whether something is "apparent" or not, which actually explains a lot.
BTW, if you remember my definition of fascism was from primary sources, just not the dumbed down version in MS Encarta.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Agreed?
I do remember that you cherry-picked your definition of fascism from primary sources, because that's exactly what you did. It was misleading of you to cut out one of the three legs to the definitional stool, but I've come to expect misleading statements from you, so it's no surprise.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )because if you take out "apparent" then only 2 of my list are true flip flops but absolutely none of yours are. Thanks for playing.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )So except for the 2½ out of 13, your diary is based on your feelings and perceptions about McCain, not on actual facts. Thanks for clearing that up. It explains a lot about your sucky and pathetic diary writing methods.
And while we're on that topic, let me recap why I think your McCain diaries are so irresponsible. You twist and change definitions of words to suit your purposes. You fail to provide links to back up your assertions, or when you do provide links, they all too often fail to show the entire context. You twist the meanings of statements to mean something they don't, like you did with McCain on Hamas. You employ twisted and flawed logic, like you did with McCain on Cuba. When its all put together in a single diary, it speaks volumes about your credibility, which is zero. It was hanging by a thread after your last McCain pile-on, and you just shot it hell with this one. So tell me. On what basis should your upcoming polemic on McCain be believable at all? Going by your track record, it won't be.
BTW, Obama's flip flops on FISA and public financing are incontrovertible facts. On gun control, he tried the Perfect Straddle, but there's enough in his past to show that he favored the DC gun ban. On Iraq, he inserted a new principle on troop withdrawals (dictated by our "maintaining stability") and then denied that he changed his tune.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Seriously. Well, not seriously but you get the idea.
I mean - accusing Hank of polemics, a lack of credibility, twisting and shifting meanings, "sucky and pathetic diary writing methods"? Yikes. Can we call this projection yet?
--Over here on E Street, we're proud to support Obama for President. - Bruce Springsteen
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )a possible suspension ain't the right the right way to go heet. Pls. back off.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I just skimmed the other posts regarding the rule infraction but didn't pay much attention, sorry.
Frankly, I don't see the big deal with his post. I mean, I think it's funny but not ban-worthy. Good thing I'm not a mod, though!
--Over here on E Street, we're proud to support Obama for President. - Bruce Springsteen
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )And don't understand why several appeals haven't changed your posting patterns.
your sucky and pathetic diary writing methods
In isolation this would be pushing the posting rules and merit something like a warning. But we've already been handing out warnings.
Even w/out context, your credibility, which is zero is a posting rules violation.
I'm reluctant to hand such things out, have been enjoying discussing w. you on another thread, and appreciate your past retractions.
But I don't see what else to do at this pt. but confer with the other mods w. a recommendation of suspension.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )it was a criticism of the content and manner of Hank's diary. As for my opinion of Hank's credibility, that is also a criticism of the way Hank crafted his last two diaries on McCain, for the reasons stated. On other topics, I give Hank the benefit of the doubt. On McCain, it's zero. I didn't intend this to be a personal attack on Hank because my opinion is just on the words he's written alone. Believe it or not, I like the guy, even though our arguments get a little heated. If he invites me to a BBQ, I'd probably say "yes" and I hope he'd say "yes" if I invited him over to my place.
For me, the larger issue is this. Hank's diary would work just fine at places like dKos. He could be as intellectually lazy as he wants and crank out all kinds of word-redefining essays and poorly sourced and out-of-context links as he chooses, and all he'd get are a few huzzahs and attaboys. But when you're writing to a mixed crowd such as here, you better bring your "A" game, especially if the partisanship is cranked up to a 10. You better write something that is reasonably well supported, follows basic rules of logic and doesn't twist meanings of words and quotes. If he doesn't follow that, then neither you nor Hank should be surprised that someone will come along and confront that workmanship, even harshly. I'm not saying Hank shouldn't written this diary. He can do whatever he pleases, just as I reserve the right to pick the topic and tenor.
Anyway, to boil it down, I won't back down from this one, catchy, so if you and the others all conclude that this is a bannable offense, then so be it. But I think you're mistaken.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I took a break after reading your post, b/c a suspension my last few days as mod certainly ain't something I relish and I wanted to make sure it wasn't b/c I was getting cranky or anything.
But unfortunately you didn't qualify your original remarks re: Hank's credibility as being confined to a single issue, etc. The other remarks IMO also aren't w/in the spirit of the posting rules.
Really the mods shouldn't have to intervene 4 times to get you to clarify, retract, etc. That's simply unreasonable.
I understand you didn't think the diary was up to snuff but from my perspective that's not really what this is about. There's simply too much that can be taken as personal criticism in your posts.
Since the other mods appear to be onboard I'm reluctantly going to implement a 1 week suspension. I'm not happy about it and I'll be even unhappier if you're too miffed to return.
The good news is my term will be pretty much over when you return. Normally since this is your 2nd suspension, we'd have it go for 2 weeks, but seeing as how the elections start in a little over a week, I think it'd be best for the site if you participate fully.
Respectfully,
catchy.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )but you're not leaving us much choice. A 1 week cooling off period sounds about right.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )-
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )-nt-
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Why are you so cheesed off about this? You do realize that the candidate with the fewest flip-flops isn't going to be declared the winner?
McCain certainly is a flip-flopper. If you don't want to believe Hank then read this.
Also, please remember that reasonable people can disagree about the definition of a bullshit term like "flip-flop". Personally, I'd rather have the most flip-flopping flip-flopper in the history of flip-flops in the White House if it is the best thing for the country. Your mileage varies on that apparently.
--But she's a queen, and such are queens
that your laughter is sucked in their brains. -D. Bowie
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Sheesh, BD, you're not even being lighthearted or witty about it.
"...your sucky and pathetic diary writing methods."
"...it speaks volumes about your credibility, which is zero."
Where are the usual suspects who patrol for Posting Rules Violations?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )A Forvmite blows a whistle or waves a hand like you did here, and yr. huml. & obt. svts. appear, like catchy and jordan did here.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I always did have trouble with ideologues.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )And Hank and others are right. You're applying a completely different standard to Obama than to McCain. That basic inconsistency is bound to lead to frustration.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Hank is making up definitions of words to prop up his misleading post. What's your excuse?
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )C'mon, man. You've been angry and getting angrier by the day, and about a thoroughly unimportant subject best left to the cable news shows. I'm just not sure why your persist. To prove that you're right? To fight the good fight? I can't imagine how this particular conversation serves either goal.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )How would you feel if your candidate is smeared by dint of a diarist's being right only 2½ times out of 13? If it were such a small deal, why did you do a high-five with yourself with the "flip flop bounce" comment?
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )We're about to have moderator elections ferchrissakes. None of us wants to get slapped with a "soft on crime" canard, or really, any other migratory waterfowl. There's no reason to make this argument personal just because you guys are sick of tracking down all them oppo research sources. :)
Hank, for the record, calling someone's comments "increasingly shrill" might teeter just this side of the posting rules, but it ain't exactly conducive to friendly disputation.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Ideologue is as ideologue writes. I'll back down if there's a consensus from the judges.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )cool down and focus on the topic rather than each other's rhetorical jugular. We'll see if the other mods swing by.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I take the "ideologue" business back, too. Sorry to Hank and the triad.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The Mendoza Line. Its relevance to this discussion is left as an exercise for the class.
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I remember Brett's words well because it spoke volumes about how bad our team was.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent ). . .I thought Graig Nettles was the one who originated the term--I remembered it as him sitting and reading the sports page, explaining, "Just checking to see who's below the Mendoza line."
--- Login or register to post comments
| parent )by the fact that it's a baseball reference than anything else.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )When telling people that I'm an agnostic, I sometimes mention that years ago I believed in Jesus...
Jesus Alou. But then I thought, if this guy is supposed to have supernatural powers, why can't he hit .300 every year?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"Half-Story Hank" is out of line. You can dissect the diary without attacking the diarist.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I take that back. Sorry, Hank.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Okay, can we please start handing out warnings to the folks who've decided that the site rules don't even begin to apply to them?
--It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Maybe it's becuz I'm trying so hard to avoid them, but the various insults you employ tend to undercut your analysis. Also, it's probably fair to point out that you apply entirely different, and frequently convenient, definitions when it comes what constitutes a flip/flop and the two candidates.
Given that, why not move on to something more productive?
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I don't know whether to be shocked or awed that you've been hiding that Dr. Jekyll behind your Mr. Hyde for so long. How in the hee are you pulling this off? (Not that I'm tempting you to falter, of course, with posts like this - that would unfairly help MSE.)
Is transcendental calm the new black, or whatever that cool saying is? But the jury's still out on whether the audience likes the new you. Maybe Hank can set up a poll.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )My blood pressure is down to Bjorn Borg levels. So yeah, maybe calm is the new black.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )My definition of a flip-flop is when a candidate takes one position on an issue and then reverses himself. What's yours?
As for my "various insults", who's doing the real insulting here? The person who writes the misleading post or the person who points it out? And while you're at it, and since his batting average was so goddawful in Part I, perhaps you could tell Hank to move on to something more productive. It would save everybody a lot of time. Hank wouldn't have to spend time tracking down his half-stories, and I wouldn't have to spend time busting his ass.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I think your definition of a "flip-flop" is when a Democratic candidate takes one position on an issue and then reverses himself, no matter the context or duration between stands.
The reason I put this idea forward is that you've posted a half-dozen or so diaries on Obama's delicious Belgian nature, and you're unreasonably defending McCain's decision to say pretty much anything to secure the Republican nomination.
--It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )then why did I say that McCain's stance on windfall profits was a prospective flip-flop? And that Hank was right when it came to McCain's position on telecom immunity? And that Wagster had a point when it came to McCain's positions on deficit reduction? Why did I take McCain to task for crossing the line when he unfairly criticized Romney for wanting timetables? Why did I point out McCain's weaknesses and imperfections right in the middle of the primary season? How is that "unreasonably defending" McCain? I'm reminded of this phrase: trivially, provably false. Just to check your intellectual consistency, when have you criticized Obama for taking one position and then reversing himself?
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Not everybody cares about this stupidity. If you look at the FISA diary, you'll find me baffled and upset at Obama's change in position. More to the point, if you look at the McCain flip-flop diaries, you'll find me not participating! I don't care about the flip-flop meme; I find it to be a more or less deliberate attempt to move the campaign away from substantive discussions of character and policy toward trivial discussions of distinctions without differences. So I haven't been participating much, except to throw in an economic fact or two.
I don't view a half-dozen talking-point-filled diaries on one candidate and a few concessions on another diary as remotely equivalent. The posts are clearly partisan.
--It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The issue isn't whether the posts are partisan, it's whether they're truthful, accurate and reasonably well supported. Your trying to insert definitions into my mouth has no support, nor is your statement that I'm "unreasonably defending" McCain. The only unreasonable that I see comes from Hank.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )...you smeared me by falsely claiming that I engaged in a partisan approach to the issue?
--It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )false or otherwise. I asked about your intellectual consistency. I'm glad that you chimed in on Obama's flip flop on FISA.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )about this tu-quoque we all end up getting into, and I'm as guilty as anyone, but let's face facts here: they all do it. No sooner do they become the Anointed One than they all start in on the pandering and flip-flopping. I once said McCain's independence, his one real virtue, has been sacrificed on the altar of nomination. He's been forced to recant, but I don't see him muttering under his breath, like Galileo after he was forced to recant: "eppur si muove", it does move.
Galileo didn't get in trouble for his cosmology. He got in trouble because he began to cast doubt on Biblical interpretation. McCain was always in the doghouse with the GOP for doing the same, but now that he's the nominee, he's mysteriously stoppered up his Maverick schtick. What changed? Let me ask you this, in all seriousness, why did McCain change? What's your take on it? It seems to me something or someone got to him. Now he's droning along, hewing to the Party Line on everything of substance and much that isn't. Doesn't he see the old rhetoric has failed, and he's being given a chance to restate the stuff he's always stood for? I don't like his positions, but he's manifestly backed off too many of his old positions for this to be a matter of interpretation or even a change of heart.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )and then we'll have something to talk about. Out of all that chaff, Hank had 2 or 2½ depending on how you count them, and excluding his silly definition that a "politically motivated proposal is a flip flop."
McCain is still in the doghouse with gobs of GOPers and conservatives. Why do you think that is? I suggest it's because he hasn't changed his positions, or at least not enough to earn their support. Check out conservative talk radio. Except for Medved, they barely tolerate him. Limbaugh couldn't care less about McCain, Mark Levin is downright hostile, Hannity is holding his nose.
I know that politicians will flip flop and waffle and spin and skirt close to the edge of truthfulness. I know that McCain is no exception, and I haven't hesitated in acknowledging or pointing out the times when he's been guilty. Obama is no exception either. What I object to in this post is that Hank did it in a way that was misleading and dishonest, for the reasons stated.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That's a huge concession / flip-flop. Absolutely incontrovertible evidence he's kissing ass.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )He's always been pro-life and his voting record is for parental notification, against partial birth abortion and against government funding of abortions. According to this site, the one glaring defect was his comments in 1999/2000 concerning Roe v. Wade. Quote:
On federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, his position changed when the technology changed, rendering moot the need for embryonic stem cell lines.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )