When is a flip-flop not a flip-flop?

The fact that I'm even talking about this is a testament to how disappointed I am as to how low, devious and divisive the McCain campaign has become since the senator hired one of Carl Rove's students of deception as his campaign guru.

The "flip-flop" term they use just about every day for one reason or another became popular during the 2004 presidential campaign when the Bush campaign decided to attack any meaningful thought processes that included changing one's mind when the facts warranted it.

A very cunning and devious way to turn a positive into a negative.

That was in complete contrast to George W. Bush, who is well known for making decisions based on whatever he bases them on and never, ever deviating from that decision, regardless of the accuracy of his information and the consequences such narrow-mindedness can create.

Apparently, the conservatives have decided that continuously evaluating one's decisions is a bad thing and a sign of weakness unbecoming a president.

So, I guess that flip-flopping to the McCain campaign is when Obama changes his mind about something because new facts and new information may require new considerations, new conclusions and changes when necessary.

Since we have already had nearly eight years of bad decisions with no thought that any of them may have been unwise or dead wrong, I wonder why anyone would vote for a candidate who ridicules the correct way to manage a branch of government by making decisions and always leaving the door open for corrections as they are warranted.

By the way, had McCain been the candidate in 2000, I may have voted for him. Had he been the candidate in 2004, I would have voted for him.

But in 2008, from his surrender of the legitimacy of his campaign to his incredible lack of understanding of where we are as a people and as a country, not a chance.

Len Brauer

Palatine