I'm sick of it

I would like to see all politicians who use the word flipflop drawn and quartered. It implies - no, it outright contends - that changing your mind to adapt to changing conditions is a bad thing. It sounds like something a not-too-bright 10-year-old might say.
Hasn't eight years of having a man who seems incapable of adapting to change piloting the ship of state been enough?
Anyone with the ability to tie their own shoes can say, "This is the way I feel and nothing can change my mind." That doesn't make him a wise man.
When you announce that the dam won't break, but then find yourself neck deep in water, isn't changing your mind and seeking higher ground a good idea?
If you plan a picnic and then find it has been raining since daybreak wouldn't cancelling be a wise move? No, scream the politicians, you're a flipflopper if you do.
It's ridiculous to hear one of them announce that an opponent said something or voted for something in 2002 and now has changed his mind - flipflopped. If conditions have changed since 2002, doesn't an intelligent man adjust his thinking to accommodate those changes?
The captain of the Titanic could never be accused of flipflopping. He wanted to break the speed record for crossing the Atlantic so the hell with reports of icebergs ahead.
I don't want some stubborn fool incapable of changing his mind at the helm. Most sensible people feel the same way. We don't yearn for another voyage on the Titanic, we've already had eight years of it, so let's once and for all sink any politician who uses the word flipflop.

And here I thought it was what Jimmy Buffet wears to the beach.

Thanks Dick, well said.
I'm still waiting for Georgie-Boy to do a flip-flop and confess to making a mistake. He obviously doesn't believe in those three words, "I was wrong - I make a mistake, I am sorry." His vocabulary may be too limited.

After the fiasco of the Bay of Pigs in 1961 in a try to take over from Castro, Kennedy apologized and took the responsibility for the whole thing. His ratings with the public went over 80%.

After missiles were discovered in Cuba in 1962, Kennedy and his experts met and decided on an attack on the missiles following by an almost certain invasion. If they had done that, the working missiles would have been headed for Miami and other US cities.

After hours and hours of discussion, debate, argument, and major, major flipfloping, they decided on a ship embargo, and even to all their surprise the world was saved.

Carol

The flip-flop is only part of the current political poll-driven political fiasco. We have campaigns being waged on speech glitches and spouse behavior, rather than issues. It makes people gunshy.

A major antidote would be for candidates not to duck into camouflage over questions. Think how it would play out if Clinton had said:
"My sex life is none of your business. Next question."

What if Obama had replied to McCain's comments on his not having been to the mid east by saying,
"Those little junkets don't really teach much about political realities. And besides, it doesn't matter. As soon as I'm president we're out of there, so there is not point in visiting." ?

If ANYBODY would put spine over spin they'd reap some benefits from it. Just nobody is doing it.

I agree.

The one thing politics reminds me of is a swarm of biting insects. Most politicians seem to be out for their own self-interest first and foremost. They seem to be more concerned with their campaigns than actually making a differnce for our country. They bend over backwards for the special interests to insure the campaign money keeps flowing rather than supporting the interests of the people. Unfortunately, I think there is too much corruption in the political system.

There was an old axiom, that many here are too young to relate to because trains that once were the way for politicos to spread their message to the people have given way to electronics, that said in effect, "Political platforms are like train platforms--used only to get in on, not to ride on."

A hearty "AMEN!" to all of the above.

Don,
Does this mean I must tear up my Christmas letter to Dear Santa? Are you saying that Santa Claus lies? Does he wear that beard to hide his true identity?

You're right. Fantasy land is the political platform of both parties. A wish list that will win votes.

The political leaders whom we support make intelligent decisions as they redirect their opinions based on new and current information, while those we oppose simply flip-flop.

Jim Woods
www.ultrasw.com/jwoods

Hold on a second! I DO believe in Santa Claus, but I don't believe in political promises; I know where to draw the line.

Thank goodness for this thread. I've been waiting for months to use that smilie.

Exactly, JIm

My guy is tough on social disorder, your guy's a fascist
My guy is compassionate, yours is a commie
My guy is flexible, yours is spineless
Mine is a courageous dark horse, yours is a loser

Having seen that face from Pam, I'm going back to Santa Claus.

Is it possible to be completely impartial when voting? Do our past affiliations, Democratic or Republican (and I have been both) influence our thinking?

I don't think anyone is 100% objective in voting. Past experiences, affiliations, upbringings, and many other factors influnce how people vote.

I do not believe that any one party has the right ideas for everything. I guess you could say I flipflop across party lines. I may vote for more than one, two or even three parties if I feel the individual has some answers the others do not. There is good and bad in each party from what I can see. So I try to make the best choice on what is offered. The main problem is often that one must vote for the lesser of the two (or three) evils.

Quite often, Zada.

The people who are our leaders are human. They come from different places and have different points of view and skills, and we elect them hopefully because of these things. They have a huge responsibility, but our country is also set up that we are not dependent upon our President to keep this country great. That is the beauty of a democracy over a monarchy. We have had some Presidents who were real scoundrels, and had some strange ideas and our country has survived.

And they take risks. They make difficult decisions not knowing how they will turn out, not knowing how others will react. There are so many risks out there and the only thing we can do is hope and pray. I think what unites us is we all hope. There is an unknown that to which no one has the answers.

Carol

They also must have trust in the advisors they have chosen, who are also human.

Zada,

And they need to select those advisors carefully. I believe there are some good people available to serve our government, but somehow they are not always the ones selected.

Carol

So very true, Carol. I could not agree more.

I found an organization I like a lot:

http://www.usip.org/aboutus/index.html

They send me weekly information and I am thinking of taking an online course. I like this organization, The US Institute of Peace, because they seem to be active in looking at what is working for peace.

Another organization that had good information for my Cuba book is the National Security Archive.

THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.

Carol