AP: Both candidates change positions often

[Cocoa]

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/politics/9642102.htm

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/politics/9642102.htm

<snip>

If he is a flip-flopper, Kerry has company.

• In 2000, Bush argued against new military entanglements and nation building. He's done both in Iraq.
  
• He opposed a Homeland Security Department, then embraced it.
  
• He opposed creation of an independent Sept. 11 commission, then supported it. He first refused to speak to its members, then agreed only if Vice President Dick Cheney came with him.
  
• Bush argued for free trade, then imposed three-year tariffs on steel imports in 2002, only to withdraw them after 21 months.
  
• Last month, he said he doubted the war on terror could be won, then reversed himself to say it could and would.
  
• A week after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bush said he wanted Osama bin Laden "dead or alive." But he told reporters six months later, "I truly am not that concerned about him." He did not mention bin Laden in his hour-long convention acceptance speech.
  

more...

[Catfight]

1. Finally starting to see the tide turn toward the truth? I hope it's not

too late for some ardent Bush flockers to open their eyes to their false prophet.

A vote for Bush is a vote that endorses more Saudi influence in America politics.

[Julien Sorel]

2. This is straight out of Kerry's stump speech.

Almost word for word.

But remember, Kerry is "not fighting back." He's "taking the high road."

Why is it that Kerry has to "fight back?" Hasn't he been attacking Bush for a year? Has he ever stopped attacking Bush? Yet the morons here keep whining about "fighting back," as if Kerry was walking along minding his own business when he got mugged for his pocket protector by a bunch of Republican bullies. The more I see the language that they use, the more I see how raw and completely they've swallowed the Republican spin, the more contemptuous I become towards about 1/3 of the morons who post here.