I Hate Political Chameleons

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." – Sen. John Kerry

John Kerry made the above comment on March 16, 2004, during a campaign appearance at Marshall University in Huntington, West Virginia. In response to a question about his vote against an $87 billion supplemental appropriation for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kerry tried to explain that he had voted for an earlier version of the bill before opposing its final passage.

Unfortunately for Kerry, his comment came out sounding not just discombobulated, but also like a world-class flip-flop, which is exactly how the Bush-Cheney campaign portrayed it in one attack ad after another.

Trying to put out the fire, Kerry inadvertently poured gasoline on the flames instead.

"It just was a very inarticulate way of saying something,” he said during an interview on ABC’s Good Morning America, “and I had one of those inarticulate moments late in the evening when I was dead tired in the primaries and I didn't say something very clearly.”

Unfortunately (again) for Kerry, CNN covered his campaign appearance in Huntington and videotapes show that he made the comment about 1:20 PM. Not exactly “late in the evening,” Senator.

Once again, the Bush-Cheney campaign seized on the gaffe with an email to the media that was titled, "Perhaps His Watch Was On Paris Time?" The inference was that Kerry, who had married Teresa Heinz, the heir to the vast Heinz family fortune, may have been “on holiday” in Europe along with the rest of the “jet set”.

Regardless of his verbal faux pas, Kerry was indeed guilty of this: voting against paying for military operations after previously voting for a congressional resolution authorizing President Bush to take military action in Iraq. I mean, how can you possibly vote to send our boys into battle and then vote against arming them properly once they are there?

Not surprisingly, Sen. Kerry went down to defeat that November, in part because he was perceived to be wishy-washy.

Ironically, that major character flaw didn’t seem to hurt Barack Obama, perhaps because the media ran interference for him throughout his two terms in office (as well as before and after). If you don’t believe me, all you have to do is watch videos of Obama as a presidential candidate in 2008 – and as a newly elected president in 2009 – telling the American people that illegal aliens have no business entering our country illegally and should be deported forthwith.

And Obama backed up his words with his actions, sending more than 3 million illegals packing during his eight years in office, a deportation record that still stands. Hillary Clinton ran on the same “get tough on illegals” platform in 2016 and yet, both she and Obama have performed a political pirouette since Donald Trump took office, criticizing his deportation plan every chance they get.

After all, we mustn’t upset our affluent friends in Chappaqua and Martha’s Vineyard, right? And that goes double for the Hollywood elite that we just adore rubbing elbows with.

Barack and Hillary have also spoken out against Trump’s border wall after advocating for one themselves when they were running for president. In other words, to take a page out of John Kerry’s tattered book, they were for it before they were against it.

So, for that matter, was Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who used to be tough-as-nails on illegal immigration. I guess these political chameleons don’t realize that videos live on the internet forever.

And that, my friend, is one of the biggest problems with politicians in general and the U.S. Congress, specifically. It seems very few officeholders maintain the same positions and the same core values once they’re elected as they did when they were on the campaign trail. In fact, they appear to change their views more frequently than J-Lo changes lovers.

It’s one thing to evolve on an issue. It’s another thing to sell one’s soul for votes or to climb the party ladder.

Just ask California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was for biological males competing in women’s sports until he was against it. Or should I say, until he decided to run for president and read the polls that showed that the vast majority of Americans oppose men beating up on women, breaking their records, and stealing their scholarships.

After all, the voters are always right, isn’t that so, Gavin?