IS OBAMA A FLIP-FLOPPER TOO???

[ClericJohnPreston]

Better get used to hearing that, especially if Obama actually makes it through the whole nomination process, which is still nothing more than, unaccomplished.

But, lets say Obama can win the eventual nomination. Thus, this is a hypothetical question. Won't Obama be labeled immediately as a FLIP-FLOPPER, ala Kerry?

Unfortunately, the Republican Party will be a lot more determined and tougher on Candidate Obama than his partisans in this forum. Though they are willing to dismiss reality, in preference to a rhetorical "story", I can assure you it won't be that easy when the cynical M$M and Rethugs get going.

Obama likes to say that he has ALWAYS BEEN AGAINST THE WAR. He has an advantage here, because even though people like me, absolutely believe he would have voted for the IWR, he gets a pass on that singular issue, because he wasn't in the Senate yet.

Even if you "buy" into that storyline, then you have a REAL DILEMMA, currently ignored by Dems in general, Obama supporters, specifically. That problem is that Obama has never met a FUNDING BILL he has never embraced. He has voted to fund this War at every opportunity in the Senate. He has done nothing in his Senate votes to declare opposition to this War.

So, even though Obama supporters rely so heavily on "words", actions here doom Obama to the FLIP-FLOPPER charge.

Some may say, but wait, JRE voted for the IWR and now campaigns against it. Thats right, he did vote for the IWR, as Hillary did as wll. Fortunately, Edwards has already dealt with his PAST vote, on record that it was a mistake and campaigning as the most ANTI-WAR candidate, with a plan that is far less subject to interpretation then Obama's or Hillary's, which is *conditional*.

There you would have a stark contrast to Mccain, in Edwards, if he was the WAR candidate of the Republican Party and Corporate America.

So, how is Obama NOT a FLIP-FLOPPER on the war if he votes to fund it? Better to answer it here, than in a campaign as our Party's nominee.

[Seen the light]

1. A John Edwards supporter accusing another candidate of flip-flopping

Hmmmmm.....

[Bright Eyes]

2. They will call Edwards a flip-flopper, too.

As well as Clinton. It's unavoidable. It's what Republicans do.

[ClericJohnPreston]

8. Doesn't answer the question.

You may get away with it here, in this forum, but you are NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION.....unless you think nominee Obama can blurt out that Edwards and Hillary voted for it too.

Is that what you are saying?

[Bright Eyes]

16. I'm merely pointing out that Republicans are going to do that no matter what

They'll call flip-flopper to anyone, even if it doesn't make any sense (Republican voters don't think).

Edwards is my man too, but I'll play devil's advocate;

"Obama hasn't flip-flopped on his position. He's been against the war from day one. He's continued to vote for funding because not doing so will leave the troops high and dry."

[ozone_man]

51. Edwards' vote was in part based on the trumped up WMD claims.

I don't care for that argument, but it is the one that Kerry and Clinton used. Edwards at least has apologized for making that vote, that it was a mistake. I haven't heard an apology from Kerry or Clinton. Kerry crucified Dean over his antiwar stance. Dean said that SH should be tried in court. Kerry was a cheer leader for war. Clinton seems to support a war with Iran.

Obama wasn't in the Senate for the IWR vote, but was there to vote for continued funding of it. That is a flip flop. He was against the war before he was for it. Kerry was for the war before he was against it. Both sides of every issue, that is Kerry. Perhaps why he endorses Obama? He recognizes some flip flop potential? :)

[Bright Eyes]

56. I don't think the GOP will care about ANY excuse, in regards to Iraq

If we ran Jesus Christ himself, Repubs would call him a flip-flopper and weak on national security.

They'll use that tactic no matter who our nom is.

We just have to get used to Republicans talking points, I guess. And hell knows we'll be hearing a lot of that from now til November.

[sunonmars]

3. amongst other things

[VolcanoJen]

4. That's why you gotta feel the Mitt-mentum!!

Look, the GOP will call any of our three candidates a "flip-flopper." It's their favorite hit record, and they'll play it over and over again if they think it would work.

But if Mitt Romney is the nominee... well, how is that going to work, exactly? Does Mitt hold a single position today that he held four years ago? Two years ago? Since breakfast?

[balantz]

5. Good question.

[Tulkas]

6. Against Romney or McCain ??

GIMME A BREAK !!


There are already flip flop adds up about Romney, and McCain is screwed on the Bush Tax Cuts flip flop (among others).

Bring It On !!!!!!!!

[MethuenProgressive]

7. We are not allowed to discuss how the GOP might campaign against Obama.

Didn't you get the memo?
:eyes:

[ClericJohnPreston]

11. I must have missed

that memo as well as the one that tells me I should accept links, in substitution of Obama's supporters being able to ever give me SPECIFICS as to any plank of their candidate.

[chascarrillo]

72. You are. But we know that you're doing the GOP's work for them.

Not a side I'd wish to be on, but whatever floats your swiftboat.

[MADem]

9. That WINDSURFING ad starring Kerry? It's resurfaced with MITT ROMNEY as the star.

Nothing to stop them from putting Obama's head on that thing, too...whichever way the wind blows....

It won't be a flip-flop job, though. It will be a fairly straightforward "He's a big fat liar" job.

"He says one thing...but he DOES another." And then "Don't believe Obama--he'll tell you what you want to hear....vote McCain-Lieberman for UNITY...what you see is what you get."

Cue patriotic music, show flags, children, puppies, in soft focus...

[thunder rising]

10. A new psychological disorder, "26% syndrome" or fear of the tiniest minority.

[ClericJohnPreston]

15. How about Obama's supporters

"WHISTLING PAST THE GRAVEYARD" SYNDROME. You think that percentage of 26% will be the same when Bush leaves office? The 26% is against BUSH, a repudiation of BUSH.

Those soccer moms and Nascar dads are just waiting to line up with their candidate. To believe otherwise, is to foollishly be unprepared for the battle to come.

[tekisui]

12. If he had voted to cut funding he'd be a "Troop Hater".

All the candidates from each party can be accused of "flip-flopping".

Troop hating is bad. And, he has been against the war from the beginning. I wish he'd voted to cut funding, but that does not fly in middle America.

[ClericJohnPreston]

22. Can't do that to McCain,

which was my supposition.

Also, the two aren't as mutually exclusive as you posit.

The funding was there, even without a supplemental, as they are always for FUTURE funding. It would be hard to make it a case as being anti-troop. In fact, there were those who voted against more funding. They have not suffered any backlash for that vote.

Unfortunately, though given disproportionate substance by his suporters in this forum, Obama's alleged anti-war position, is not backed by his Senate performance.

[H2O Man]

13. Oh, dear!

[ClericJohnPreston]

17. Your responses

are always as short as your chemical composition, H 2 O :)

[cali]

14. they won't attack him that way- not even remotely

they'll attack him as being weak on defence and inexperienced. they'll subtly suggest that he's on the side of those evil Muslim terrorists.

Furthermore, Obama has voted for every single scrap of legislation mandating that the U.S. withdraw from Iraq and end the war. His record on Iraq over the past 3 years is precisely the same as Kennedy's and only slightly different from Leahy's.

[H2O Man]

20. Maybe we should

just forget about running a democratic candidate this year, cali! Good golly gosh -- what WILL the republicans say? EEEEK!!!!

[ClericJohnPreston]

24. Do you always get away

with making fallacious arguments as extraordinary as the one you just did?

If I am not with Obama, I'm saying to just give up. You are as bad OR WORSE than BUSH, then.

If so, they NEVER came against me. I'll force you away from these absurd statements and make you deal with REALITY, not belittling attacks to impugn my credibility.

All you do is prove I'm uncomfortably close to exposing your cognitive dissonance over the real record of Obama versus the idealist PROJECTION, his supporters embrace.

[H2O Man]

34. No. I don't!

Neither do you!

[ClericJohnPreston]

47. Three words

H 2 0 :)

I can always count on your haiku brevity....and momentous inaccuracy.

[cali]

49. yeah, that's the ticket, attack one of the most respected posters

on the board with utter crap about how he's just like bush and always wrong about everything. Brilliant, Pater, just brilliant.

[ClericJohnPreston]

59. What Cali...

no cupcakes??? :rofl: But, thanks for not dissapointing. You can hardly skate on the coattails of someone else, can you? I should just distinguish your noxious posts as being exemplary of the worst of DU, right?

[cali]

60. There are idiots and then there

are particularly jaw dropping idiots.

[ClericJohnPreston]

62. are you looking in the mirror

Cali?

[H2O Man]

55. 13

[lapfog_1]

21. Kennedy and Leahy are flip floppers TOO!

It's much better to nominate a candidate that was ALWAYS in favor of the war, and has been consistent in their support of every funding bill AND every authorization bill.

Because that candidate will NOT be accused of being a "flip-flopper"!!!

Yeah, that's the ticket! Because the Democrats are such a pro-war party!

Oh wait...


:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[H2O Man]

23. We must draft Lieberman!

Strom Thurman, our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

[ClericJohnPreston]

25. FALLACIOUS ARGUMENT

STRAW MAN....again.

Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension):
attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position.

[Occam Bandage]

31. CAPITAL LETTERS

Followed by invocation of fallacy anyone who's graduated 9th grade is aware of.

[ClericJohnPreston]

36. FALLACIOUS ARGUMENT.....AGAIN

Needling:
simply attempting to make the other person angry, without trying to address the argument at hand. Sometimes this is a delaying tactic.
Needling is also Ad Hominem if you insult your opponent. You may instead insult something the other person believes in ("Argumentum Ad YourMomium"), interrupt, clown to show disrespect, be noisy, fail to pass over the microphone, and numerous other tricks. All of these work better if you are running things - for example, if it is your radio show, and you can cut off microphones. A compliant host or moderator is almost as good.

A favorite of Obamites:

Argument By Emotive Language (Appeal To The People):
using emotionally loaded words to sway the audience's sentiments instead of their minds. Many emotions can be useful: anger, spite, condescension, and so on.
For example, argument by condescension: "Support the ERA? Sure, when the women start paying for the drinks! Hah! Hah!"

Argument From False Authority
Bad Analogy
Complex Question (Tying)
Argument By Selective Observation
Non Sequitur

This is a debater's nightmare, wading through false argument.
So very......Obamian. :)

[Occam Bandage]

40. No, actually. I'm not arguing with you, because I'm not defending a case.

I'm simply mocking you, because you're a clown with a shift-key and a list of basic fallacies. Abuse isn't a fallacy.

[ClericJohnPreston]

48. Occam, Occam, Occam

Nice try. I'll argue with you over the inclusion of abuse, which is a form of fallacious reasoning. This forum is stacked with it.

I would rather deal with your own name, which by inference means that yopu look to find the rationale which is the most complex and layered, therefore wrong. Occam's Razor is about SIMPLICITY.

If you are the bandage, to the razor, I guess you are the spin on simplicity.

[Occam Bandage]

50. Abuse is not a fallacious argument, because it is not an argument.

You have it confused with ad hominem abusive, in which it is argued that a person's point must be dismissed because of some unflattering personal quality they possess. Abuse is just abuse.

You have come very close to deciphering my name. Closer than most who try to use it in a "discussion." However, you have just engaged in a false dichotomy, and I prefer to leave sanctimonious hypocrites guessing what they missed.

[ClericJohnPreston]

54. Two points for me

in coming closer than anyone here to deciphering your name.

Of course I just left out 2,000 other possible connotations of your name. I don't have the luxury of playing guessing games . What I do have is the chance that you would unwittingly let "us" in on your thoughts, as this name is purely SUBJECTIVE, and thus, not entirely prone to logical deduction.

Since we are both creatures of logic, perhaps we can exclusively engage in argument here. At least I don't think I'd have to worry that you your argument would be muddled with mere fallacy over fact.

Oh, you did engage in an ad hominen ABUSIVE attack to the character.... :)

[Occam Bandage]

57. Fair point. Name:

I read a few irritating arguments here in my pre-registration lurk, in which people referred to "Occam's Razor" incorrectly. They proved their points by omitting crucial data, and then constructed a simple frame and declared that Occam's Razor declared them the victor. They didn't bother looking at all the data. They handled Occam's Razor a bit too carelessly. Had I been registered, I would have posted, "Occam's razor? Perhaps you should try reaching for Occam's bandage, because you just cut yourself."

Since the phrase was on my mind, I registered with it. Also, apostrophes are forbidden, so I'm Occam Bandage instead of Occam's Bandage.

[lapfog_1]

43. Actually, I was just poking fun at you

because it's such a silly thing to say.

Yes, Obama was against the war. Hillary and Edwards both voted for the IWR.

Yes, Obama has voted to continue funding resolutions for the military. So has Hillary and nearly every other democrat.

So what.

Does it make Obama a "flip-flopper"? I don't think so. But maybe for you it does.

What is the real issue? Are we a party that is for the war or against it. Should our candidate for President be completely "pure" in their opposition to the war? Ok... which of the top three is that? If we wanted that the be the only criteria, we had a candidate who, I think, fits the bill... Dennis Kucinich (DK supporters jump in here to correct me... did Dennis EVER vote for anything that either authorized or funded the war in Iraq?).

But DK is gone, along with Biden and Dodd and Richardson.

So, out of the remaining three, which one has "flip flopped" the hardest? I would say Edwards. Not only did he vote in favor of the IWR, but he was a co-sponsor. And now he has apologized and said that it was a huge mistake. I accept his apology. Will he get called a flip-flopper by the Republicans if he is our nominee? Yes he will. But I think it won't stick. What about Hillary? She has sort of flip-flopped. By her votes, I don't think so. Has voted for the IWR and the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, has voted for every funding bill. But she realizes that those votes are out of step with the Democratic party base (and the country, for that matter) and has offered some anti-war rhetoric. But she has NOT apologized or even admitted that the IWR vote was a mistake. How about Obama? Has been against the war from the beginning, but we will never know if he would have voted for the IWR or not... has voted for war funding bills (but those are also tagged "support the troops" bills) so has he "flip flopped"... I don't think so, but you are welcome to think so.

So I don't know what you want. Whatever it is, you won't find it in our top three.

[jackson_dem]

70. This is rich given the Obamite "flip flop" meme used to swiftboat Edwards for ayear

[jackson_dem]

69. Cali continues to repeat that lie

Obama voted against Kerry-Feingold. Kennedy and Leahy voted for it.

It is very ironic to see an Obamite cite Kennedy and Leahy's votes as justifying Obama's vote. This after they swiftboated Edwards for a year by distorting his votes on things that passed 98-1 and 91-8 (47-2 among Democrats).

[ErnestoG]

18. Getting sick of the whole "You're a flip flopper!" thing....

Since when is changing ones mind and views, based on newer and better information, a bad thing? I always thought that it was the sign of a superior intellect and character.

Would you prefer a candidate who stuck to their positions whether they were right or wrong? Like Bush and his group?

[ClericJohnPreston]

26. GOOD GRIEF

A lesson on Fallacious arguments here. I guess you guys don't argue for a living in the courtroom, do you?

Argument From Adverse Consequences (Appeal To Fear, Scare Tactics):
saying an opponent must be wrong, because if he is right, then bad things would ensue. For example: God must exist, because a godless society would be lawless and dangerous. Or: the defendant in a murder trial must be found guilty, because otherwise husbands will be encouraged to murder their wives.
Wishful thinking is closely related. "My home in Florida is six inches above sea level. Therefore I am certain that global warming will not make the oceans rise by one foot." Of course, wishful thinking can also be about positive consequences, such as winning the lottery, or eliminating poverty and crime.

Special Pleading (Stacking The Deck):
using the arguments that support your position, but ignoring or somehow disallowing the arguments against.

Uri Geller used special pleading when he claimed that the presence of unbelievers (such as stage magicians) made him unable to demonstrate his psychic powers

[Occam Bandage]

30. I appreciate how you showed us each of those in the OP. It was a full-spectrum lesson.

[ErnestoG]

67. Owning your mistake, and correcting your views, is a virtue.

No matter how many of the madding crowd point and scream "Flip flopper!"

[jackson_dem]

71. Has Obama ever admitted he was wrong on an issue in the past?

[robbedvoter]

19. "I wasn't aware I voted no! let the record show I meant to vote yes"

[ClericJohnPreston]

28. YOU MEAN

Obama wasn't just "PRESENT"! :wow:

[Vinca]

27. I heard Obama has toe jams. Have you heard that? Nasty, old

toe jams just like Ronald Reagan used to have. I hear he doesn't wash his feet out of respect for Reagan. No . . . wait . . . maybe he does wash his feet, but he still has the toe jams. What a bad seed, flip flopping opportunist. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, GIVE IT A REST!:banghead: Hillary flip flopped in the first debate on live television. You think that wouldn't be used in the campaign?

[ClericJohnPreston]

32. Again

I know no one usually holds you posters accountable in a thread, but what has this to do with HILLARY?

In the battle for President, the highest office in the land, is Obama going to defend himself by saying:

"WELL, HILLARY DID IT TOO"!!

Do you see how juvenile these responses are? Do you even get it?

[Vinca]

35. Well, Hill and Bill never miss a chance to mention Obama's votes

for war funding, implying he's just as bad as she is even if he opposed the war when it counted. You're living in a dream world if you think Obama is the most vulnerable candidate to go against the Republicans. Mittens is already making snide remarks about Bill's extracurricular activities.

[balantz]

38. Oh dear!

:thumbsup:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

29. A flip-flopper?

:scared:




















:eyes:

[tammywammy]

33. Oh, dear God not, FLIP FLOPPER!

He might as well drop out. And Edwards to.

[ClericJohnPreston]

41. What a surprise

a veritable potpourri of fallacious arguments.

Changing The Subject (Digression, Red Herring, Misdirection, False Emphasis)
Argument By Scenario
Argument By Laziness
Reductio Ad Absurdum
Appeal to the masses

Fascinating insight into the ability to argue a stand. That insight? So far, NONE!

[AtomicKitten]

37. Soon you'll be claiming he farts in bed and pulls the covers over Michelle's head.

[ClericJohnPreston]

42. Thank you for the chance

to again point out the absurdity of your responses here.

Obamites, thy name is FALLCIOUS ARGUMENTS!

Reductio Ad Absurdum:
showing that your opponent's argument leads to some absurd conclusion.

Sound familiar, Atomic???? Hmmm?

[Occam Bandage]

45. Actually, that isn't reductio ad absurdum at all. Second, reductio ad absurdum isn't a fallacy.

You're a clown*.

*That is not ad hominem. That is abuse.

[AtomicKitten]

52. You'll have to forgive us who find your preposterous Obama attacks de jour amusing.

But I do love how huffy you get defending the tripe you post. That's what I call entertainment.

[Occam Bandage]

53. He googles "logical fallacies," and then tries to pick out ones to ascribe to people's posts.

It's pretty obvious that's what he's doing, because half of his characterizations are just flat wrong.

[ClericJohnPreston]

58. Not really Occam....

I did the debate thing in High School. I gave that part up long ago and moved into the major leagues with RULES OF EVIDENCE, in a Courtroom setting.

Actually, that arena is far more telling as cross-examination really threshes out the weakness of someone's credibility. Unfortunately, the tools of logic are about the only tool of verbal and cerebral warfare applicable in this setting.

I say it is unfortunate, because if a person's point of view is so absolutely convoluted by outside influence, they are INCAPABLE of seeing the weakness of their position. We don't have a jury here to pass judgment on who is more correct in their stance.

If someone is suffering from cognitive dissonance, Demosthenes himself, the golden-tongued orator, could not dissuade them from their point of view, as the discomfort of repudiating their beliefs would be too overwhelming.

Thus, I do what I can for the amusement of those who can see the absurdity of calling someone a Republican , for merely being a tough questioner.

Amusing..yes..SAD, really....

[ClericJohnPreston]

61. Now Occam

if you were really intellectually honest, you certainly wouldn't nitpick the inclusion of a sub-category ad hominen attack, for a separate false reasoning.

Rather, you would immediately jump on the fact that a full 90% of the responses by Obamites here, engaged in FALSE REASONING. But, obviously, we can't count on your intellectual honesty here, only partisanship.

I wouldn't pick you for any jury. You are not able to overcome your bias.:thumbsdown:

[mtnsnake]

39. That not only makes Obama a flip flopper, but a hypocrite, too. That means he's a Flippocrite

"I was against the war in 2002, but a couple years later I was all for Bush's war plans, and now I'm against it again, but I think I'll vote to prolong it because I'm a flippocrite, donchya know".

[ClericJohnPreston]

44. Hey mtnsnake!

How goes it? :)

[mtnsnake]

46. Hey CJP, wassup chum

Things are going alright :)

[Seabiscuit]

66. LOL! Obama in a nutshell: "flippocrite". Love it!

[saracat]

63. Obama is certainly going to be jumped as a Flip Flopper for his

statements saying he never took lobbyist money. He tried a weasel argument in the last Debate differentiating between lobbyist and those who work for them but that wasn't the point. In all his state senate races and his Ill.Senate race he was largely funded by both PACS AND lobbyists. And his votes in Illinois reflect that.All part of bipartisanship to him.He made a calculated political decision NOT to take obvious PAC or Lobbyist money in this race.Big whoop. This time he is going to have to answer about organized crime and BTW, he has NOT given a good answer yet!

[Gloria]

64. Shelby Steele, Obama biographer, on what happens if Barack ever actually

decided to really took off the mask....he used the word in his talk, although I didn't get it into my almost verbatim report...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2774551&mesg_id=2774551

[cgrindley]

65. Only asshats use the term "flip flopper" (nt)

[ClericJohnPreston]

68. Now, with argument like that cgrindley

troll extraordinaire that you are, it is hard to distinguish you from FREE REPUBLIC or just a crazy cultist.

Whatever it is, you have freed me to let you know you are a CRETIN.

Got it?

[cgrindley]

73. Flip Flopper is a RW term

they own it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with people changing their viewpoints following a change in priorities, more information, the march of history and so on. To obsessively hold the same opinions and same ideas all of your life is to be inflexible, pig headed and stupid. But really, only an asshole uses the term flip flopper. It's a stupid term. And it is owned wholly by the right wing who have used it against us for years.