Bush's flip flops

So Bush has a site somewhere that tracks Kerry's "flip-flops". Reader TK probably spent three seconds coming up with this list of Bush flip flops. It's not like they're hard to find:

Bush is against campaign finance reform; then he's for it.

Bush is against a Homeland Security Department; then he's for it.

Bush is against a 9/11 commission; then he's for it.

Bush is against an Iraq WMD investigation; then he's for it.

Bush is against nation building; then he's for it.

Bush is against deficits; then he's for them.

Bush is for free trade; then he's for tariffs on steel; then he's against them again.

Bush is against the U.S. taking a role in the Israeli Palestinian conflict; then he pushes for a "road map" and a Palestinian State.

Bush is for states right to decide on gay marriage, then he is for changing the constitution.

Bush first says he'll provide money for first responders (fire, police, emergency), then he doesn't.

Bush first says that 'help is on the way' to the military ... then he cuts benefits

Bush-"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. Bush-"I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care.

Bush claims to be in favor of the environment and then secretly starts drilling on Padre Island.

Bush talks about helping education and increases mandates while cutting funding.

Bush first says the U.S. won't negotiate with North Korea. Now he will

Bush goes to Bob Jones University. Then say's he shouldn't have.

Bush said he would demand a U.N. Security Council vote on whether to sanction military action against Iraq. Later Bush announced he would not call for a vote

Bush said the "mission accomplished" banner was put up by the sailors.  Bush later admits it was his advance team.

Bush was for fingerprinting and photographing Mexicans who enter the US. Bush after meeting with Pres. Fox, he's against it.

You guys want to add to the list?

•  Bush never met Ken Lay before 1994

  then it turns out he wrote lots of letters to him throughout the '90s............

  Maybe thats not a flip flop though, maybe thats just a lie.

  by dabize on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:42:30 PM PDT

  •  Well, now

    ...we're just getting into outright lies, not flip-flops. That's a different commercial.

    by Doug in SF on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:32:37 PM PDT

•  "Show us your cards!"

  You might wanna add Bush's quote when he called for the UN vote that he later reneged on: "Show us your cards!"

  by reef the dog on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:44:07 PM PDT

•  from Campaign 2000

  In the primary, Bush portrays everything McCain says as liberal crazy talk. In the general election, Bush adopts everything McCain had been saying from the beginning. After being elected, Bush goes right back to the right wing insanity

  by crayz on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:44:21 PM PDT

•  Bush is for stem cell research

  but only if the cell lines don't exist.

  by DemFromCT on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:45:33 PM PDT

•  AWOL records

  Bush told Pumpkinhead he would release all his National Guard records.  He has not, his final discharge paper (Form DD214) is missing.

  by reef the dog on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:46:53 PM PDT

  •  He hasn't released a thing

    There is a very good article over at Orcinus today about Bush's ANG records and how the press is "dealing with the issue."  Excellent reading, nothing everyone here likely hasn't figured out, but worthwhile anyway.

    by HollywierdLiberal on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:27:17 PM PDT

•  Talking with North Korea

  Disengage, then engage, then disengage.

  Um, I think they're still trying to work it out.

  by tameszu on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:47:12 PM PDT

•  Bush vs. Bush

  John Stewart did a thing on this a while ago. Its hillarious. Look for the clip with the same title as this post (third row, on the right)

  http://www.comedycentral.com/tv_shows/thedailyshowwithjonstewart/videos_corr.jhtml?startIndex=13& ;p=stewart

  by samiam on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:50:51 PM PDT

  •  Move On

    MoveOn should just pay for this bit and start running it as an ad.  Heck, there are so many opportunities here, it could be a series.

    We need to hang the big King of Flip Flops sign on Bush to defuse any attempts to do the same to Kerry.

    by Devilstower on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:08:57 PM PDT

    •  Which would you rather have for president

      A guy who changes his mind, based on new information, or a serial liar?

      This is one of the reasons I think MoveOn's MisLeader ads are so good. I really think Kerry's speechwriters should start working some of the language from the MoveOn ads into his speeches.

      Reinforcement. It's not just good for concrete anymore.

      by Bill Rehm on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 01:00:55 PM PDT

•  Bush was for CO2 limits during the campaign

  and then he was against it

  Afterward, he was against Arsenic limits in drinking water - but then he was for them after he got called on it.

  by dabize on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:51:32 PM PDT

  •  This was a big one

    He had specifically promised to lower CO2 concentrations in the campaign, and promptly and blatantly broke that promise upon coming into office, saying the "science had changed" (sure, George, sure).

    Check out the Wage Slave Journal's timeline of the Bush Administration.  It lists a lot of Bush's flip-flops.

    by Jonathan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:13:38 PM PDT

•  Bush said he...

  wasn't a moron.  Then, he was.

  by SW on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:54:14 PM PDT

  •  Nice

    That got me laughing out loud :)

    by ryan b on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 04:21:46 AM PDT

  •  That one doesn't count

    Bush saying he wasn't a moron is just further evidence that he is one.

    by Bill Rehm on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 01:01:59 PM PDT

  •  Bush

    said that he was not a Moran

    see ad to right

    hahaha

    by cbsturf on Tue Jun 08, 2004 at 04:39:59 PM PDT

•  So many to add...

  For NCLB, then completely underfunds it...

  For $10b in AIDS funding in Africa, then no $

  For his office's own rosy employment projections, then against "not a statistician"

  For inital lower projection of Medicare's costs, then against

  For not allowing the U.N. to be involved in Iraq, then after screwing it up, anxious to have the U.N. take over...

  For smaller government, now against...

  by Jsea on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:59:06 PM PDT

•  asdf

  Candidate Bush was against Nation Building.

  President Bush is for keeping troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Haiti until the governments are up and running.

  by Manhattan Dan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:59:20 PM PDT

•  A "liberal" columnist?

  Marjorie Williams is the absolute worst, one of the Kool Kids who did in Al Gore. She is no more liberal than Maureen Dowd. She says she's an ABB Democrat, then she turns around and writes this crap. She wrote a vicious piece on Howard Dean and how she hated Dean because he was a doctor. How's THAT for incisive political analysis?

  by Dan Perreten on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 06:59:56 PM PDT

  •  Marjorie Williams

    Same person

    by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:37:46 PM PDT

    •  Oops

      Someone already posted this. Sorry!

      by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:39:53 PM PDT

  •  Gamah pulls another one out

    Kos calls it "making shit up."  Congratulations for talking out of the wrong end of your ass again.

    by BCF on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:54:00 PM PDT

  •  Frank Capra?

    I'm a Preston Sturges Democrat.

    by kaleidescope on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:50:26 PM PDT

•  CO2

  Bush says he's in favor of adding carbon dioxide as a regulated greenhouse gas.  Then Bush said it would not be included.

  by GOTV on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:05:07 PM PDT

•  To be devastating...

  it really should be "true", as well.  This piece is a hit piece, and it reads like it.

  I wrote about this here (the Lying Socialist Weasels' new group blog).  For a much better (and far more thorough) overview, check out this story, also in today's Washington Post.

  The comparison between the two stories is stark, and I predict the latter's detail and even-handedness will more than cancel out Ms. Williams' drivel.

  by Jonathan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:08:19 PM PDT

  •  Channeling the RNC

    As I remarked in my own blog, it did seem like Williams was channeling for the Rethugs. Good to learn that she's got a history of that sort of thing.

    I did look at the other WaPo story (and I'm going to be updating my piece to include a reference to it). The potential problem there is that it's five times as long as Williams' op-ed, and you actually have to read it all to get the full impact. Williams makes bullet points that stick in the mind.

    While I think it's great that there's a serious candidate in the race for the White House, somebody that is willing to take the time to make sure he uses the right word in a policy speech (I'm sure I'm not the only one who winced when Bush described his embryonic "war on terrr" as a "crusade") that doesn't mean I want a white paper every time the RNC throws out a little oppo research. Even the quintessential wonk himself knew that you couldn't be all-wonk, all the time. When your opponents hit you with sound bytes, you have to give a response that fits the same format, even if you expand on it later or in other forums.

    by musing85 on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:29:32 PM PDT

    •  Bullet points

      I absolutely agree with you.  Fortunately, Kerry has impressed me lately with his ability to come out with simple, but effective, points of his own.

      I think Kerry will get an awful lot of mileage out of the simple notion that several of his votes in the Senate were the result of Bush misleading Congress, just like he misled most of America.  We have to remember that most Americans were in favor of the Iraq War, for example, yet are now having doubts.  They believed Bush, too, so Kerry can position himself as representing a majority.  He's actually in a strong position of guiding the nation from trusting to not trusting Bush.

      Combined with Bush's own blatantly political lying and flip-flopping, I think Kerry's in a pretty good spot.

      Although I was a Dean supporter, I was always a tad worried that his position, while powerful, could be too easily taken as an "I told you so".  Kerry won't have that problem, at least in this area.

      by Jonathan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:59:14 PM PDT

      •  Stop spreading this lie

        We have to remember that most Americans were in favor of the Iraq War

        Americans were NOT for the war.  Once the troops went in, suddenly they were for it.  Not a moment before (well, maybe when Colin Powell lied about it, right before the troops went in).  Now Americans are too stupid to remember they opposed the war until the troops were on the ground (and then they had to rally for the troops--what a crock!).  

        by Asak on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 03:16:39 AM PDT

        •  Unfortunately...

          According to polls, most Americans were, indeed, for the war.  Much of it was due to a "rally around the flag" effect once the war became inevitable, but the support was there, at least superficially.

          I'm not saying that most thought it was a great idea, especially without the UN.  But enough believed what Bush was saying, and believed they should give a show of support, that Kerry could use it to his advantage.

          by Jonathan on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 08:46:12 AM PDT

          •  Nope

            Polls prior to the war only show support for it if the UN approved and assisted.

            by Demise on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 10:58:57 AM PDT

          •  No Americans were against war 2-1

            We've been over this before.  Up until the very day we attacked, Americans were 66% against the war without a UN vote.  Remember, the vote where Bush said, "show us your cards!"?  That vote?  That was the vote that, if passed, the majority of Americans would then have favored the war. Americans wanted that UN vote.   Without it, they were against the war.  Bush called off that vote like the coward he is and went in on his own.

            by reef the dog on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 04:19:51 PM PDT

            •  that's one poll

              and the same one would show that 80% of Americans think the UN is a front for Satan.

              The country supported the war, although it was close, and it was only close because they were mislead.  

              Seriously, I remember reading all those polls.  It did come down to about a 2/3 majority in favor.  Heck, I even satired it, strangely enough.

              by wah on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 04:42:48 PM PDT

          •  another case of the big lie

            don't you remember when the biggest "focus groups" in history were protesting all over the world?

            by itchyredness on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 06:39:12 AM PDT

•  The Great Divider

  Bush repeated ad nauseum on the 2000 campaign trail, "I'm a uniter, not a divider." In truth, he's the most polarizing President in at least the history of sophisticated polling, probably in the history of the United States.

  by mattgunn on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:15:14 PM PDT

•  To read this piece

  is to see starkly how little effort Ms. Williams put into being truthful.  Even a little bit of time spent on Kerry's positions would have informed her that the alleged "contradictions" were hardly "impossible".

  There really wasn't much to the piece besides an attempt at mainstreaming GOP baloney.

  by Jonathan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:19:47 PM PDT

•  Not quite the right thread

  ... but I thought this should be posted.  

  I just received the following email:

  There's a poll on the lower right hand side of today's Fox News
  website that allows you to express your opinion on the Chimp's
  wretched exploitation of the victims of the WTC attack. Right now the
  results are favorable to Bush.  Let's turn it around and give Fox one
  less brick in their propaganda construction project.

  Let 'em know where YOU stand!

  http://www.foxnews.com
  

  by blank on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:23:07 PM PDT

  •  Yikes!!!

    74 frickin' percent think it's a good thing to use the commercial.

    Further proof there are too many "homo saps" and not enough "homo sapiens".

    by HollywierdLiberal on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:41:46 PM PDT

•  If everyone reading this

  took their favorite flip-flops and put them in a letter to the editor of their local paper, and to Newseek, Time and US News, etc., the Kerry flip-flop meme might get turned on its head-- or at least neutralized.  Let's get to work.

  by PrometheusSpeaks on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:24:22 PM PDT

  •  Done

    Just did a cut-and-paste job, sent it to the NY Times.

    by Patch in Bklyn on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:16:51 PM PDT

    •  Don't cut and paste

      I don't recommend a simple cut-and-paste, as most editorial pages stipulate that contributions, including letters, must be original works.  If they see a couple with the exact some copy, they'll probably throw them both out.

      by Jeffo on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 10:56:55 AM PDT

•  free trade and WMDs

  he is for free trade then slapped on steel tarriffs to help his election.

  and then of course the biggies in Iraq, like
  Iraq has WMDs to

  Iraq has WMD programs to

  Iraq was interested in a WMD program.

  by Mo on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:24:27 PM PDT

  •  What's the Difference

    Bush said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. When we couldn't find them, he said "what's the difference?"

    by gabbneb on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:31:49 PM PDT

    •  First

      First Iraq was about WMD and disarming Saddam

      Now it's about Iraqi liberashun and deposing Saddam, the evil doer.

      by emjaycue on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:25:49 PM PDT

•  and

  he took of the tarriffs when pressured by the EU

  by Mo on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:26:34 PM PDT

•  Williams is no Democrat

  Her December hack job on Howard Dean when he seemed the likely nominee should make that clear. She drops the occasional criticism of the Republicans, but saves her ire for the Democrats who are never pure enough.
  

  by tib on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:26:42 PM PDT

  •  Hmmm

    Wonder if she's voting for Nader then.

    by emjaycue on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:22:37 PM PDT

•  Bush was for drinking. Now, he's against it.

  Bush said he would appoint a czar to create manufacturing jobs. He never did it.

  Bush was against amnesty for illegal aliens. Now he's for it.

  Bush was against Presidents doing an end run around Congress to pack the courts. Then he did it.

  Bush gave million dollar Iraq contracts to Halliburton without making sure they wouldn't overcharge us. Now he's investigating them for overcharging.

  Bush told people global warming isn't a threat. Now his Defense Dept says it can end civilization in 25 years.

  Bush promised to end the tax cuts after a few years. Then he made them permanent.

  Bush said we shouldn't fight two wars at once. Then he sent troops to Haiti while Americans are dying in Iraq.

  Bush was for the rebels in Haiti trying to bring down Aristide. Now he's fighting the rebels.

  Bush was for pretzels/Segways/Spot. Now, he's against them.

  by gabbneb on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:29:00 PM PDT

  •  87 Billion

    Bush said the war would cost $3 billion. Then he asked for 87.

    (this one is big; right after this speech was when his numbers started dropping)

    by gabbneb on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:37:46 PM PDT

•  Assault weapons ban

  Bush says he is for extending the assault weapons ban, but he has not put any pressure on congress to extend the ban before it sunsets in September.

  by Box 13 on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:30:05 PM PDT

•  Bush flip-flop

  It is very important to hit him where he lives: the conservative Christian base, even if we don't agree:

  Bush was for the sanctity of life, then he allowed mad scientists to dismember helpless pre-born babies in his fetal stem cell research decision.

  Pick a side Mr. Bush; either you think fetal stem cell research is an abomination or you don't.

  by epistemology on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:32:08 PM PDT

  •  Not a flip-flop

    He merely said that he was for further abominating thems that were already abominated.

    by GOTV on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:35:53 PM PDT

    •  stem cell flip-flop

      No, that's not what he said, else we would have endless lines of new fetal stem cells to deal with. He said to continue experimenting on new lines was an abomination but that it was ok to do so to some pre-abominated lines. Still not very consistent.

      by epistemology on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:40:09 PM PDT

      •  What's an abomination?

        Okay, so let me see if I got this straight: when he ran for Congress in '78, Bush was not seeing any abominating going on with such things as human fetuses, and said that women should have the right to abominate them, or not, all they want.  

        Then he stopped drinking and found the Lord--er, Laura--and decided that messing with fetuses was an abomination, so he said, "I am the anti-abomination Gubner."

        Then he ran for President as a compassionate anti-abominator.  

        Then he found out that mad scientists were regularly abominating fetuses with odd experiments so that they can turn people into sheep, and while he figger'd there were already enough ways to do that, he believed that we already did enough abominating, so he said that these alchemists wanted gubamint monies they could only abominate pre-abominated fetuses.

        Is that the whole massacree?

        by GOTV on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:12:52 PM PDT

        •  abomination

          Yup, except he said that the mad scientists could only abominate some pre-abominated fetuses. Any non-preznit identified pre-abominated fetuses were off limits. Moral clarity is important when you are preznit. Now pass the turkee.

          by epistemology on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:17:00 PM PDT

•  flip flops

  Said in the South Carolina primaries that "the states can do what they want to" in terms of gay marriage. Then he proposes a constitutional amendment banning it.

  by pkremida on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:33:34 PM PDT

•  Used to hate flightsuits. Now loves flightsuits.

  Was crazy good-time cokehead uninterested in succeeding at anything. Is now personal agent of God himself, bringing righteousnous to evildoers everywhere.

  Used to have the goodwill of the world on his side. Now has 80% of world's population wanting to put foot in his ass.

  Used to be more of a bad joke. Now is more of a bad dream.

  by elzorrero on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:34:38 PM PDT

•  Medical Marijuana flipflop

  During the 2000 South Carolina Primary, Bush took a States Rights Position on Medical Marijuana. As President, he's had Patients' cooperatives in California raided.

  by ben masel on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:36:20 PM PDT

  •  Flip flop

    This is a good one. Like the fetal stem cell flip flop it shows he is not consistent on core cultural issues. He has no principles.

    I am currently licensed to practice medicine and surgery in this state

    by epistemology on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:42:29 PM PDT

•  Kos, you are cruel . . .

  Unka Karl is depending on the collective amnesia of American Voters to get his boy back in.

  Either that, or mass hypnosis: You are getting sleepy, very sleepy. George "Hero of 9/11" Bush has always been presnit -- you should make him preznit for life; or at least until Jebby is ready to take over.

  It's downright mean to remind voters of all this stuff that Karl wants them to forget.

  by Charles K on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:37:13 PM PDT

•  Flop flop.

  
  I think the issues where he doesn't change his position even when the facts change are more damning, frankly.  Perhaps these might be termed "flop flops"...

  Bush is in favor of tax cuts because the economy is strong, then he's in favor of tax cuts because the economy is weak.

  Bush is in favor of tax cuts because they'll help the economy recover, then he's in favor of tax cuts because they haven't helped the economy recover yet.

  Bush is in favor of invading Iraq because they have WMDs, then he's in favor of invading Iraq because they don't have WMDs (but Saddam is a bad person).

  by eyelessgame on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:37:19 PM PDT

•  Here's a clear one...

  carbon dioxide emissions limits for power plants. As a candidate, he was all for them. After all, it was a way to neutralize Al Gore on the environment. In office, in March 2001, Haley Barbour pointed out to Bush that this environmental concern prevented the GOP from providing its coal and power contributors with a proper rimjob. Buch yanked the rug out from under the EPA and flopped. Big time. Clear campaign promise breach. The United States would draw back from the pending CO2 regulations.

  We could go to free trade, too. I think that Commondreams has a whole list of these flops.

  by Brian CB on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:43:43 PM PDT

•  more flip flops

  1. I don't remember the exact numbers on this, but the proposed spending increase for AIDS relief in Africa was touted as an example of compassionate conservativism.  And then, after the publicity, most, if not all, of the increase was taken away.
  2. And for a flip-flop waiting to hit the press: how about Bush's (supposed) insistence on getting to the bottom of the CIA operative leak?

  by machopicasso on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:45:26 PM PDT

  •  AIDS $ to Africa

    My memory tells me that 1/3 of this money was earmarked for ABSTINENCE education--in AFRICA. It is difficult to think of a bigger waste of money than that, but I'm pretty skeptical anyway.

    I also remember reading that the whole deal revolved around each nation getting money also accepting GMF--genetically modified food, from Monsanto--which most Africans, superstitious or not, regard as POISON.

    The entire AIDS $ for Africa idea had so many unseen and unreported strings attached, there's no wonder most people still think of it as compassionate conservatism, when in reality it was forcing Monsanto products into markets that never wanted them in the first place, and Christian religious insanity.

    Later.

    by DaddyO on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:10:01 PM PDT

•  cc'd to Kerry Campaign?

  Make sure the Kerry folks see this.

  by BobNJ on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:49:37 PM PDT

•  Abortion

  Bush ran as a pro-choice candidate for congress in 1978 but now he says he is pro-life.

  by NJDem on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:50:34 PM PDT

  •  Bush and Eugenics

    That's interesting -- Prescott Bush got dragged down (in part) during his first Senate bid, because of his ties to the Eugenics Movement -- and / or Planned Parenthood.

    It's good to know that GWB has been so flexible on this issue -- but I guess he has to be, to tie himself in pretzel knots for the wing nut fundies.

    by Charles K on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:11:21 PM PDT

    •  I like that

      Instead of flip-flopping, bush ties himself in pretzel-knots and chokes himself.  he he.  

      Flip:
      guarantee future surpluses through simplifying tax code.  

      Flop:
      surplus?  deficit?  whassa difference?

      by skiddie on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:49:24 PM PDT

  •  bush and abortion

    How about something more recent?
    In the 2000 election, bush said that he was anti-choice but he that wouldn't use the federal government to inflict his views on the country("compassionate" conservatism.) In fact, on his first day in office he cut off funding for international groups that help women

    by myjlf on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:42:06 PM PDT

•  troll alert

  Folks,

  Gamah is here at Kos for one reason--to bury Kerry.  Don't take my word for it, check his/her other comments.  This is not constructive posting from someone who shares our agenda, so do yourselves a favor and stop responding to the spam.

  by erik in grayslake on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 07:55:13 PM PDT

  •  Good advice

    I was getting that impression, but wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt.  Thanks.

    by Jonathan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:00:32 PM PDT

  •  Sounds like GOP spin to me.

    So I quote an article by a liberal columnist for the Washington Post

    How many times have we heard the phrase "even liberal writter, website, newspaper or columnist says x?"

    Enjoy your short term fun. We will be laughing in your face come November.

    by Mike S on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:55:48 PM PDT

  •  no, you're a troll

    because:
    a) you're off topic
    b) all you've done at daily kos is attack kerry
    c) you don't know the difference between you're and your (ok, maybe that's just justification for me)
    d) you think that if a columnist sounds like she's from the bush campaign, she's "brutal" "devastating" and truthful.  
    e) you've posted essentially the same thing on this thread twice.  
    f) you agree with Williams that it's contradictory to oppose something at the federal level because you think it should be decided at the state level, and then support it at the state level.
    g) you're a poopy-head.  

    by skiddie on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:02:04 PM PDT

    •  I rated this comment a 2 to un-hide it

      The reason I did it is that, even though it is in my view too harsh on Kerry, it's a legitimate argument that offers facts to back it up.  It's not appropriate to rate such things as zero.
      

      by Joe Buck on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 08:43:06 PM PDT

•  Workin' in a coal mine.

  Perhaps not quite a flip-flop, but after praising the heroism and tenacity of the nine trapped coal miners in Pennslyvania, Our Hero turned right around and continued his systematic dismantling of mine safety infrastructure.

  Speech:
  http://www.post-gazette.com/localnews/20020806bushtextp9.asp

  Comments:
  http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/26/21/news3.shtml

  by Johnny on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:06:05 PM PDT

•  Bush on 9/11

  This is not a "flip-flop" per se, but it is one of the biggest vulnerabilities that Bush has: leadership, or more specifically, lack thereof.

  He needs to use images of the WTC in his campaign ads? Fine. But then somone needs to speak the truth about his "leadership" that day.

  The "leadership" he displayed that day was dispiriting to an entire nation. If Giuliani wanted to use images like that in a campaign ad, you'd almost have to let him. He was a true and inspiring leader. Bush was a frightened, incompetent coward. Exactly the opposite of what he seeks to portray himself as.

  This discussion has got me thinking that Nader may yet play a useful role in this race. He alone will be able to go after Bush full-throttle on issues like this that Kerry will only gingerly approach, if not avoid like the third rail.

  by thirdparty on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:09:24 PM PDT

•  More flip flops

  A couple months ago daily show ran a segment called president bush vs. presidential hopeful bush showing clips of contradictory things bush said in campaign versus state of the union ect ect. I say we do to bush what the deanies did to Kerry, send him a pair of flip flops.

  by thechosenone021 on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:20:43 PM PDT

  •  to add on to myself

    another flip flop
    I won't rest until everyone who wants a job has one. And every august, bush goes to texas. yet people don't have jobs............................ (periods from here to eternity)

    by thechosenone021 on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:51:20 PM PDT

    •  Every August??

      Every bloody weekend!  He's there right now, I just saw him on the news.  

      Bush has so far spent one third of his time as president on holiday - by last August he had taken more holiday time in three years than Clinton had in eight.

      by tyelperion on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:22:02 PM PDT

      •  Holiday

        He posponed the principals meeting in 2001 from August to September because of his vacation to Crawford. Who knew a world leader could take so many vacations?

        by sems740 on Tue Mar 30, 2004 at 02:33:19 PM PDT

•  Humilty

  Governor Bush said he would have a humble foreign policy, because we shouldn't be alienating allies.

  President Bush's practices an arrogant, stubborn foreign policy that can be summed up as:  "Full speed ahead, damn the facts."

  by emjaycue on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:28:05 PM PDT

•  A spoiled shirker

  In the first episode of K street James Carville advised Howard Dean to be what the other guy isn't and can't be. Apathetic voters can rationalize "they all do it" about flip flopping and taking money from lobbyists. What "distinguishes" Bush from other Presidents is that he never accepts responsibility for his failures and false promises and that this is a facet of his ideology that he and his cronies are above the law. People criticize him one instance at a time but aren't showing the pattern of:
  Promise -> Break Promise -> Blame Scapegoat

  A competent well meaning President can afford to accept blame sometimes because they have already proven themselves. Bush and his mouthpieces know he is a house of cards and have to intimidate critics or risk collapse. We need to frame this as the moral weakness of a spoiled shirker.

  The big picture is an ideology that he and his cronies truly believe they are the natural aristocracy and deserve to be above the law. I would go to prison if I gave you mercury poisoning, his cronies get tax breaks.  The tax breaks, pollution loop holes, worker safety waivers, consumer fraud are crimes for one America but for the other America,  crime pays.

  We need a list of:
  Go to prison if I do it vs. Rewarded when Bush crony does it.

  by Maynard G Krebs on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:28:07 PM PDT

•  Mars?

  We're still going to Mars (I guess), but it sure doesn't seem like he's interested anymore.

  by CSTAR on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:40:44 PM PDT

•  this just in

  Kerry Says Bush 'Stonewalling' 9/11 Probe    
  1 hour, 26 minutes ago  

  By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer

  JACKSON, Miss. - John Kerry (news - web sites) on Sunday accused President Bush (news - web sites) of "stonewalling" separate inquiries into the events leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorists attacks, as well as into the intelligence that suggested Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was hiding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (news - web sites).

  Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, parried complaints by members of a federal commission investigating the attacks that Bush was resisting their efforts to get documents and question witnesses.

  "Why is this administration stonewalling and resisting the investigation into what happened and why we had the greatest security failure in the history of our country?" Kerry said at a hastily arranged news conference.

  "The American people deserve an answer now," Kerry said. "The immediate instinct of the Republicans and this administration was to shut it down."

  Telephone calls for comment from the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign were not immediately returned.

  Bush has made clear that he will use his leadership after the attacks in arguing his case for a second term. He began running campaign commercials last week that include images of the destruction at the World Trade Center.

  Kerry, who is moving to challenge Bush on that front, said the public deserves an answer as soon as possible about what went wrong leading up to the attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

  "Nothing could be more important to the American people at this moment," he said. "They need to know why we had such a failure of intelligence."

  He also argued that Bush has pushed a report on potential intelligence failures back until 2005, "which just happens coincidentally to not be an election year."

  Last month, Bush named a commission to "figure out why" inspectors haven't found the weapons that intelligence experts said Saddam was hiding in Iraq. He told the panel to report back by the end of March 2005.

  By blocking access to information needed for one investigation and delaying the results of another, Kerry said Bush was trying to cover for political purposes any potential failures by his administration.

  "They want to get it out of the way as fast as they can so the memory of Americans might be shorter," said Kerry.

  At the news conference, Kerry also said he had spoken and planned to meet with vanquished presidential rivals John Edwards (news - web sites) and Howard Dean (news - web sites). Aides said they anticipated arranging a session with Dean this week, likely in Washington.

  "I look forward to meeting with him," Kerry said. "We're going to discuss winning the presidency of the United States."

  The meeting is potentially important because the former Vermont governor built a large fund-raising network on the Internet, and his list of potential donors could be very valuable as Kerry seeks to match Bush's fund-raising prowess.

  In addition, Kerry said he will ask advisers and allies to travel to Iraq to prepare an independent assessment of the situation there. Kerry said he hadn't ruled out going himself, but "that's not on the front burner."

  "I don't want any sense of politicization in that regard," said Kerry.

  Kerry spoke during a four-day campaign swing through the South, and compared his campaign struggles to those of the civil rights movement on an important anniversary.

  At a predominantly black church, he told supporters to brace for a wave of criticism from Bush's well-funded re-election campaign, much as civil rights marchers fought against entrenched opposition.

  Kerry spoke on the 39th anniversary of the "Bloody Sunday" clash in Selma, Ala., when state troopers used tear gas and billy clubs against activists marching over the Edmund Pettus Bridge. Scenes from that episode galvanized the civil rights movement and within five months the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed.
  

  by leif on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 08:52:57 PM PDT

  •  Damn

    Do we have the ear of the media, or what?

    Under these conditions, Bush's vast campaign war chest won't add up to squat in terms of impact...

    by Jonathan on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:03:00 PM PDT

•  Does it really make sense...

  to fight the 'flip-flop' claims being thrown at Kerry by saying that the other guy flip-flops more?  

  Bush is a liar.  He doesn't flip-flop.  He lies.  This should be the rebuttal to the Kerry flip-flop claims.  

  by jeffh on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:01:56 PM PDT

  •  Have to agree

    and when it comes to lying through his teeth, Bush is steadfast and true.

    by BCF on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:04:02 PM PDT

  •  Some good can come of it

    First, if we can propagate the meme that Bush is a two-faced liar/flipflopper, that'll make him look bad. It won't make Kerry look better, but that's politics.

    Second, present this list to anybody claiming Kerry is a flipflopper. I don't doubt they'll respond to at least one of the points (probably more) by saying, "Well, sure he switched positions, but he had good reasons for doing so: blah, blah, and blah." Then you can look at them pointedly and say, "Oh, really?" This does indeed work to discredit the "flipflop" criticism, which is, in general, asinine.

    by YT on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 12:30:30 AM PDT

•  You need to try a different perspective.

  Scratch a Republican and -- irony of ironies if you like etymology -- you will find a monarchist.

  Only a monarchist would buy the argument laid out 25 years ago by Nixon in his conversation with David Frost:

  NIXON: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.
  
  FROST: By definition.
  
  NIXON: Exactly. Exactly. ...

  Well, that's Republican, or Monarchical, ethics in a nutshell.

  The same principle holds for epistemology as well.

  While the Monarch can be misinformed by corrupt, incompetent or venal ministers, and the King-as-man, acting in his Own Person, can make mistakes, the King-in-His-Majesty can do no wrong.

  If the King-in-His-Majesty says something that is contradicted by the facts, either the contradiction is only an apparent one, or the facts are in error.

  In this view of the world, the President cannot contradict himself -- he changes the reality each time he speaks. And so, when he answers the questions of the 9/11 commission, what he says happens becomes what happened, rather than what actually occurred.

  This is why it is irrelevant whether he is under oath when he answers questions put to him by the Kean commission.

  A King cannot commit perjury.

  It is an easy step from accepting an epistemology based on "The Bible Said It -- I Believe It -- That Settles It" to one based on "The King Said It -- I Believe It -- That Settles It".

  One instrument for the revelation of the Divine Will is easily subsitituted for another.

  Karl Rove may talk Mark Hanna, but he plays Bossuet.

  by Otis Noman on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:03:45 PM PDT

  •  Bossuet?

    So L'Etat C'est Bush?

    LOLOL!

    And Gay Marriage is his revocation of the Edict of Nantes.......

    by dabize on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:20:38 PM PDT

    •  The more Bossuet one reads....

      ...the more familiar it sounds:

      the person of the king is sacred, and that to attack him in any way is sacrilege

      ---

      The royal power is absolute. With the aim of making this truth hateful and insufferable, many writers have tried to confound absolute government with arbitrary government.

      ---

      The prince, as prince, is not regarded as a private person: he is a public personage, all the state is in him; the will of all the people is included in his. As all perfection and all strength are united in God, so all the power of individuals is united in the person of the prince. What grandeur that a single man should embody so much!

      by Otis Noman on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 01:16:56 AM PDT

•  Bush told Polish telivision after Iraq

  invasion that we had found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when in fact we had found nothing but a couple of old trailers.

  In the most recent State of the Union, Bush said we had found "weapons of mass destruction program related activities."

  by katieforeman on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:28:53 PM PDT

•  activist judges

  not a pure flip flop but...
  -won election through judiciary
  -but uses them as scapegoat to fire up political base
  

  by coomaraswamee on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:42:18 PM PDT

  •  This is a flip-flop

    For an independent judiciary adopting an aggressive equal-protection doctrine when he likes the result (2000, Bush v Gore)

    Against an independent judiciary adopting an aggressive equal-protection doctrine when he doesn't like the result (2003, Goodridge v. Mass. Dept. of Public Health)

    by C S McCrum on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:03:32 PM PDT

    •  2003, Goodridge v. Mass. Dept. of Public Health

      could you please elaborate both on this case and on the equal-protection doctrine, generally?

      by machopicasso on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 12:34:12 AM PDT

      •  Goodridge and equal protection

        The federal constitution says that government cannot treat people in similar situations differently without a good enough reason.  There is a body of federal law that covers what counts as a good enough reason.  In shorthand, this body of law is called  "federal equal protection."  It's federal anti-discrimination law --- racial, gender, etc. --- that applies both to the federal government and to the states.

        In addition to federal equal protection, the individual states have their own constitutions.  In general, states can establish stronger protections than those required under the federal constitution, but they can't set weaker standards.

        In Goodridge, the Massachusetts state supreme court decided (Nov. 2003) that the Massachusetts constitution required that same-sex couples be given the same opportunity as opposite-sex couples to avail themselves of the benefits of civil marriage.   In a later advisory opinion, a majority of the same court made it clear that actual marriage, and not civil unions, had to be made available to same-sex couples who wanted it.

        Goodridge is a straight state-law decision.  It is ironic that Bush complained about "activist judges" in this context, because, under our federal system, neither Bush nor the federal courts have anything to say about Massachusetts state law that does not conflict with the federal constitution.  And one has claimed that the Goodridge opinion conflicts with federal law.  

        Bush was trampling all over states' rights and indulging in unwarranted "executive activism" when he butted in with his opinion about this Massachusetts matter.

        Bush's comments about "judicial activism" are also ironic because Bush benefitted so directly from judicial intervention.  Bush v Gore was a US Supreme Court case that invented a whole new branch of federal equal-protection law, and new constitutional law in other areas, in order to "justify" the selection of Bush as president.  

        by C S McCrum on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 05:02:32 AM PDT

        •  correction

          ...And no one has claimed that the Goodridge opinion conflicts with federal law.  

          by C S McCrum on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 05:06:50 AM PDT

  •  those wild activist judges!

    I think I saw on DU somewhere that 5 of the 7 judges in Massachusetts in that gay marriage case had been appointed by Republicans!

    by newjeffct on Thu Mar 18, 2004 at 04:48:38 PM PDT

•  More flipflops

  He's against sending weapon inspectors into Iraq, then he's for it, then he's against it.

  He gives a tax cut, because there's a surplus and it's "our money," then the tax cut is necessary for economic stimulus.

  Also, during the 2000 campaign, he claimed as governor of Texas he passed a Patient's Bill of Rights.  It passed, over Bush's veto!

  by Unstable Isotope on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 09:55:33 PM PDT

•  Oh yeah!

  When Bush first took office in January 2001, he said the economy was so good we could give huge tax cuts to Americans; now, Bush claims we were in a recession in 2000.

  by reef the dog on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:06:41 PM PDT

  •  Attention!

    PLACE MEGAPHONE HERE PLEASE!

    Haven't heard anyone call bullshit like this on the recent - "we inherited a recession" rhetoric.

    Very nicely done. Sing it from the rooftops people!

    by Yermum on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 11:25:41 AM PDT

    •  Absolutely

      Mary Matalin on MEET THE PRESS yesterday was talking about how the deficit is at a normal level in percentage terms for "recessionary times" - then, out of the other side of her mouth, talked about how great the economy is going, all the growth there is, etc.  You can't have it both ways - but neither Russert and Carville called her on this.

      by greebs on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 04:25:11 PM PDT

      •  Matalin (and Carville)

        I'm getting very tired of our #1 political Cute Couple ...

        by Jon Meltzer on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 12:21:18 PM PDT

•  Democracy

  For sending Americans to die in their hundreds in the speculative hope of someday establishing something that can be called "democracy" in Iraq.  

  Against sending Americans to hinder a gang of convicted murderers from overthrowing the elected government in Haiti.

  For sending Americans to physically remove the elected president from Haiti in favor of convicted murderers.  

  For the removal of the elected president of Venezuela.

  by C S McCrum on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:17:27 PM PDT

•  For and Against Democracy

  He supports anti-democratic leaders, in, let's see, Pakistan and, oh, Saudi Arabia.

  But he's against democratically elected leaders of Haiti and Venezuela.

  WTF?

  by jelyon on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:25:29 PM PDT

•  One more...

  Bush was for snorting fine Columbian Blue Flake until his nose bled; Then he wasn't!

  by Dissento on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:41:24 PM PDT

•  My favorite...

  Early 2002: Bush is initally against the Department of Homeland Security; and then after 8 months of fighting, he's for it.

  "If the King's English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for the children of Texas." ~ Ma Ferguson, 1924.

  by JimTXDem on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 10:53:15 PM PDT

•  master the moment

  unemployment rate at inauguration 4.2%
  unemployment rate month before 1st tax cut 4.3%
  unemployment rate month before 2nd tax cut 5.7%
  unemployment rate month before 3rd tax cut 6.0%
  lying out your ass to sell your domestic agenda -
  priceless

  data - seasonally adjusted unemployment
  http://data.bls.gov/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3  

  by leif on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:11:36 PM PDT

•  No child left behind

  Perhaps the biggest policy proposal of "compassionate conservativism" was no child left behind. Then he decided not to fund it.

  by jonwillits on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:17:14 PM PDT

  •  Took the words out of my comment...

    ...I added this to the above list:
    Bush touts a much talked-about education law called No Child Left Behind; he then fails to fund it leaving many children behind.

    by MichaelPH on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:30:31 PM PDT

•  Send this list to Kerry

  Just in case Kerry doesn't have staff people patrolling the blogosphere, you should send this to them.

  Where? I don't know. Maybe [e-mail]
  Make sure you send it somewhere where an actual person has to read it.

  by Haus on Sun Mar 07, 2004 at 11:22:14 PM PDT

•  One Two Three

  So far, I've noticed a three-pronged offensive from Commander Codpiece:
  
  1. Kerry's a flip-flopper without principle.
  
  2. Kerry wants to raise your taxes.
  
  3. I was there protecting Murka after The Most Ominous Day Of Our Lives.
  
  All three can be challenged, and I'd be very disappointed if Kerry's people aren't smart enough to do this ASAP, and often. Point out Bush's hypocrisy, duplicity and incomptence at every turn...and keep playing the "War Stud vs. AWOL Wimp" card.

  by Tom Slick on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 01:31:06 AM PDT

•  My favorite flip-flops

  http://www.havaianas.com/

  Sorry, couldn't resist, they're cheap and really comfortable (just got back from vacation in Rio).  Carry on.
  

  by Bobo62 on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 02:01:19 AM PDT

•  Adjusting the argument, countering the smear

  It's an impressive list, but it rather contradicts the argument made by Josh Marshall, Publius and Will Saletan (among others) that Bush's problem is that he's not flexible enough to change his mind when conditions change and it's necessary to do so -- except when you look at the underlying factor in all these "flip-flops" and that is that they are all politically motivated.

  So the adjusted argument about Bush is that he's disastrously unable to change his mind, unless Karl Rove tells him that it's politically beneficial for him to do so.

  In any case, as I argue here, I don't think you counter the idea that Kerry is a "flip-flopper" by pointing at Bush at saying "Him too."  Instead you say something like "Bush can't be trusted," which carries the same underlying idea but doesn't look like a reaction and avoids reminded people of the charge made against Kerry.

  by Ed Fitzgerald on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 02:27:37 AM PDT

•  Election 2000

  The Election of 2000:

  Bush for filing lawsuits over the election (his own)

  Bush against filing lawsuits over the election (Gore's)

  by GDoyle on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 02:58:42 AM PDT

•  Carbon Dioxide! Carbon Dioxide!

  Sorry, I don't have time to read the entire thread so I don't know if this has been mentioned, but you forgot his campaign promise to regulate Carbon Dioxide emissions! That was his very first flip flop once in office.

  by Marshall on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 06:13:17 AM PDT

•  Excellent

  Great list, TK.  Too tired to come up with anything now, but I emailed your list to a few wingnuts in my family.

  by Subterranean on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 07:57:41 AM PDT

•  Oh man, Kos

  I love this thread! Very good for my sanity as well as my activism.

  The republicans are so used to hearing an Amen chorus from the Congress & the media, they're not going to know what hit them.

  by Tulip on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 09:56:59 AM PDT

•  all right:

  i don't like the column any more than anyone else.  This is pretty much on par with the trash that peggy noonan posted up on OpinionJournal

  we should be happy that our side is paying attention and is bringing this to our notice.  This is an opportunity to respond back and nip this shit in the bud.

  but why shoot the messenger by troll rating the post?

  by cynic on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 10:52:26 AM PDT

•  Yucca Mountain

  Al Gore would be in the WH if Bush hadn't lied to Nevada and said he wanted more research before choosing Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository.  He changed that stance just a few months after the election... just about as blatant as CO2.

  by RosieNac on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 11:56:00 AM PDT

•  honor and dignity

  bush says he's for restoring honor and dignity to the white house, then...

  also, is for committing us to rebuilding afghanistan then doesn't budget any money for anything relating to it in the budget last year.  a similar thing happened this year - i thought to iraq, but it might have been something else.

  by delphis on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 12:26:36 PM PDT

•  Somebody make this a flyer

  Seriously. This needs to be put into a PDF that can easily be printed and passed out at Bush campaign stops.

  by TheTalentShow on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 03:02:27 PM PDT

  •  How to Use This List

    Making this into a flyer is a good idea.  I think we should also make a version that can be easily posted to message boards.  I think it would be useful if we can do the following:

    1. ) Get links or sources for all of the claims.  This would increase the list's credibility and reduce the chance that some right-winger will dismiss it out of hand as "liberal lies."
    2. ) If there are quotations from Bush that can be easily excerpted, they should be included.
    3. ) Limit the list to the strongest examples of flip-flops.  We don't want any weak or questionable claims in there, because it would hurt the credibility of the whole list.  It should be long enough to get the point across (the many examples of Bush's dishonesty), but short enough to be readable.  

    by dtj on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 09:25:58 PM PDT

•  Marjorie Williams - a sad case

  It's rather sad what has happened to the Post since the halcyon days when Martha Graham was in charge and Ben Bradlee was managing editor. Hiring Marjorie Williams makes sense only as a random act of kindness or the same kind of willful distortion of meaning that allows Faux-TV to call the second half of HANNITY AND colms a liberal.  

  Lacking the intellect to do otherwise, Williams merely 'feels' her way through every column about politicians and political people without regard to facts or critical reasoning. Neither liberal nor conservative, her political leanings can only be described as egocentric. If there were a Narcissists Party, she'd be a founding member.

  Does this look like a genuine liberal to you?

  by larrycoates on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 03:03:55 PM PDT

  •  Nit to pick

    Katherine Graham... Martha Graham's the dancer.

    by A Texan in Maryland on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 06:14:45 PM PDT

•  more on this topic

  here.

  the most sacred duty civilians have to their armed forces is to ensure they are never called to sacrifice their lives unless this nation faces a real threat

  by veracious on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 03:33:47 PM PDT

•  Oil prices

  Bush went around the country in 2000 saying that if he were president he would talk to the oil producers and get them to reduce prices. He felt that they would agree to his request because they 'owed' the US due to the Iraq war in 1991. Now, with gas prices well in excess to what they were in 2000, he says not a word. This is because the Saudis and the rest of OPEC would laugh at him if he did request them to increase supply (to reduce prices.)

  Jonathan
  Rant du Jour

  by myjlf on Mon Mar 08, 2004 at 05:17:09 PM PDT

•  your shit is weak

  and your writing sounds canned. are you a bot?

  by itchyredness on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 06:52:24 AM PDT

•  Yes

  Which was Dean's point from the beginning and why I supported him back in August 2003.

  by David in Burbank on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 12:46:15 PM PDT

•  Hypocracy

  Bush is against "leaks" that hurt his credibility, but for "leaks" that hurt the credibility of his critics.

  by David in Burbank on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 12:54:35 PM PDT

•  Catching Fire

  I posted an excerpt from TK's list on my blog and it's generating unusually high traffic on my site (naturally, it's linked back to here and I've properly credited the source).  For some reason, if you search for one of the flip flop quotes (i.e. "Bush is against campaign finance reform; then he's for it.
  ") Google is making me the top link.  Anyway, the list of flip flops is popping up in discussion forums all over the web, and I expect this will get passed around via e-mail.

  Well done, TK, Kos, and gang.

  by Dissento on Tue Mar 09, 2004 at 01:20:21 PM PDT

•  What a great commmercial

  Do the Bush flip/flop list one at a time, getting faster and faster until it is almost a blur........

  by russ9 on Wed Mar 10, 2004 at 12:35:54 AM PDT

•  Bush's flip flops

  I had to wait to go through the registration process in order to post, but my favorite flip flop came very early in the administration.  At a photo op, he praised AmeriCorps and the work it was doing while he severely cut its budget.  That raise birth to the notion that Bush praise was like the Don's kiss of death.

  In a similar vein, while sending off the troops in a pre-war photo op, he was cutting the extra education funding for the school districts that had to educate the children of those servicepeople.

  by stumpy on Wed Mar 10, 2004 at 09:09:23 AM PDT

•  others

  http://www.buzzflash.com/perspectives/bush_harken.html
  First he's for insider trading...then he's against it.

  then he says he's fully complied with national guard records release, but he hasn't.
  and he keeps flipflopping on 9/11 commission still...UNPRECEDENTED ACCESS...damn that doublespeak.

  now only if i could that other list of flipflops..
  http://www.house.gov/appropriations_democrats/caughtonfilm.htm

  by jerech on Thu Mar 11, 2004 at 02:48:57 AM PDT

•  Another one.

  "I came to this office to solve problems and not pass them on to future presidents and future generations."

  Yet: running some of the largest budgetary deficits (thanks to the tax cuts) ever.

  by bupkis on Thu Mar 11, 2004 at 07:25:49 AM PDT

•  Does it depend on the climate?

  Bush was against single-payer "socialized" health care (here), and is now for it (for Iraq).

  by downstate on Fri Mar 12, 2004 at 04:14:52 AM PDT

•  Thought this might go here...

  
  
  From:
  
  http://home.comcast.net/~cowicide/bush/index.htm
  
  
  
  Bush  is an Ironic Guy...
  
  
  
  SOURCE :  President  Bush's speech to United Nations, November 10, 2001
  
  
  
  SPEECH : "...Every  nation has a stake in this cause.  As we meet, the terrorists  are planning more murder, perhaps in my country or perhaps in  yours.  They kill because they aspire to dominate.  They  seek to overthrow governments and destabilize entire regions.  Last week, anticipating this meeting of the General Assembly,  they denounced the United Nations..."
  
  
  IRONY :  First of all, the Bush administration constantly denounces the  UN.  They overthrow governments and destabilizes entire  regions.  They kill because they aspire to dominate... the  Bush administration corporations are cashing in on a strategy  that killed more people than necessary and pushed out the U.N.  to dominate the entire money making scheme.  (Evidence abounds,  look it up anywhere or in my previous posts/threads)
  
  
  
  SPEECH : "The  terrorists call their cause holy, yet they fund it with drug  dealing."
  
  
  IRONY : "In  my 30-year history in the Drug Enforcement Administration and  related agencies, the major targets of my investigations almost  invariably turned out to be working for the CIA." - Dennis  Dayle, chief of DEA enforcement unit.
  
  
  "...to  sacrifice some portion of the American population in the form of  deliberately exposing them to drugs, that is a terrible decision  that should never be made in secret ." - Jack Blum (Chief  Counsel, Subcommittee on Narcotics and Terrorism), speaking before  the Senate Select Intelligence Committee on CIA drug trafficking.
  
  
  
  SPEECH : "Few  countries meet their exacting standards...  Every other  country is a potential target...  These same terrorists  are searching for weapons of mass destruction..."
  
  
  IRONY :  That's  just plain ironic...
  
  
  
  SPEECH : "In  this war of terror, each of us must answer for what we have done  or what we have left undone..."
  
  
  IRONY :  To  this day, The Bush administration is blocking investigations  into their failure to protect us from terrorist attacks, including  9/11.
  
  
  
  SPEECH :  "We  choose lawful change and civil disagreement over coercion, subversion  and chaos."
  
  
  IRONY :  There  is now more chaos than ever in the Middle East. The scientists  who gathered the information for the Homeland Security website  have said that the Bush administration distorted their own findings.  U.S.  Security Insiders all over the United States say Iraq intel was  deliberately skewed by the Bush administration.  This same  administration shelved that 44-trillion-dollar deficit report  ahead of the vote on tax cuts.
  
  
  Not  done yet here... The Bush administration directed major changes  and deletions to emphasize corporate Bush policy, according to  internal EPA documents. EPA staff said the revisions were so extensive  that they would embarrass the agency because the section "no  longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change."
  
  
  Cheney  did millions of dollars of business with Iraq between 1998 and  2000 as CEO of Halliburton. When he denied Halliburton did any  business at all with Iraq in the 1990's, he lied. The Washington  Post and even the right wing publication NewsMax exposed the facts  proving Cheney supported Saddam's Iraq and deceived us about it.
  
  
  [  Look, I'll stop here... the list of all the coercion, subversion  and chaos from the Bush administration is too long to include here..]
  
  
  
  SPEECH :  "The  Afghan people do not deserve their present rulers..."
  
  
  IRONY :   Nor  do the American people deserve theirs.
  
  
  
  SPEECH : "When &nb