I’ve told you before, many times, but you “forgot”. Let me just refer to all the other occasions at which you have been explicitly called out for this very same thing:

September 12th, 2012 | 2:50 pm: You didn’t ask who *said* that he wanted to criminalize doctors, you asked for who *wanted* to do it.
September 12th, 2012 | 4:43 pm: Since you repeated yourself, let me repeat myself: I didn’t say that this is what they have *said*, but that this is what they *want*.
September 18th, 2012 | 7:21 pm: Moving the goalposts again? I said he wanted to prosecute women and doctors, and I proved as much, not that he has said it in so many words.

In fact, your very post in which you first raised this matter talked about people wanting to arrest doctors, not what you started to demand when you discovered that this was rather easy to prove: “Who are these “people” who want to arrest Doctors?” (September 9th, 2012 | 9:21 pm)

Publius: ““Romney, who has flip-flopped on nearly every conceivable issue, including himself.” What does this mean? It’s not at all clear what flipping on “himself” means”

Again, something that was explained to you before: “It refers to the fact that he described himself as a moderate and a progressive, after which he magically turned into a “severe conservative”.”

I am still waiting for evidence that Obama flip-flopped on himself. (And before you ask what “flip-flopping on himself” means… for the third time, it’s explained in the paragraph right before this one.)

“I’ve told you multiple times that this is what they *want*, not what they have *said*, and I’ve demonstrated as much.” OK, so no such quotes exist. Glad we’ve finally established that. You were just reading their minds.

“Romney, who has flip-flopped on nearly every conceivable issue, including himself.” What does this mean? It’s not at all clear what flipping on “himself” means, unless you mean that like Obama, he changes his mind on issues.

You “can’t think of anyone” who has been as dishonest as Romney. OK, no answer to the fact that perhaps Nixon, Johnson, and Clinton fit the bill. Partisanship really does distort perception. . . .

And here’s the problem. Don’t complain about me pointing out that you keep moving the goalposts, when you keep doing it. I’ve told you multiple times that this is what they *want*, not what they have *said*, and I’ve demonstrated as much.

Publius: Really, no Richard Nixon, no Lyndon Johnson, no Bill Clinton

Not even Alcibiades.

Publius: Romney is a flip flopper, that’s clear. But so is your candidate

I presume you mean Obama. I’ve already told you that he has flip-flopped on several issues, though you overstate your case severely. That doesn’t make him as bad a flip-flopper as Romney, who has flip-flopped on nearly every conceivable issue, including himself. Show me where he has flip-flopped on who he is, turning from a “moderate” and a “conservative” to a “severe liberal” over the course of ten years; and that he ran to the right of Jesse Helms in 1994 and to the left of Dennis Kucinich in 2012, and I’ll grant you that Obama is as bad a flip-flopper and Romney.

You “can’t think of anyone who has been this dishonest.” Really, no Richard Nixon, no Lyndon Johnson, no Bill Clinton (“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky”)? Reading history can sometimes give you a broader perspective on current events, free from ideological cant…

Romney is a flip flopper, that’s clear. But so is your candidate, who reversed himself on Guantanamo, on the Bush tax cuts, on Rendition, on taking Super PAC money, on FISA, on the Patriot Act, on signing statements, on Catholic institutions paying for abortion coverage, on deficit reduction — according to “Politifact,” a neutral media observer of campaign claims, Obama has broken 84 promises from his 2008 campaign.

Come on now, it’s not that hard to admit that Obama is a flip flopper. Just try it and see how you feel…..

A strange interpretation, as I said that two of your flip-flop criticisms were valid. And you can be sure that there are more than two, just not in your list. The point is that every politician flip-flops, but not all flip-flop like Romney. In fact, no one flip-flops like Romney. I can’t think of anyone who has been this dishonest.

Publius: instead invoking some straw man about Helms and Kucinich. (Romney has flip flopped on himself is an unclear statement that requires some clarification — what the heck does that mean?)

It refers to the fact that he described himself as a moderate and a progressive, after which he magically turned into a “severe conservative”. He has flip-flopped on who he is, which Obama has never done.

Publius: Still waiting for your evidence that Romney and Ryan want to “criminalize” abortion and prosecute “doctors” and “women.”

I’ve shown it to you many times. The fact that you refuse to see the evidence, does not mean that it’s not there. But it has taught me not to attempt to prove anything to you.

Publius: Your refusal to accept the fact the the Democrats are the pro-abortion party and the Republicans pro-life party is remarkable.

Straw man. I never denied that the Democratic Party is pro-choice, and that the GOP is anti-choice. Rather, I commented on the double standard that you have.

Publius: Also, can you retire the “goalpost” cliche and come up with something wittier?

Was I wrong… to point it out? Doing it three times in a single debate is rather remarkable, don’t you think?

Romney is a flip flopper, no doubt. Unfortunately, you refuse to acknowledge the remarkable number of flip flops from your candidate, instead invoking some straw man about Helms and Kucinich. (Romney has flip flopped on himself is an unclear statement that requires some clarification — what the heck does that mean?)

Still waiting for your evidence that Romney and Ryan want to “criminalize” abortion and prosecute “doctors” and “women.” Since they have never said such a thing you won’t find it.

Your refusal to accept the fact the the Democrats are the pro-abortion party and the Republicans pro-life party is remarkable. It is a very simple and indisputable point. And we are still waiting for evidence that Jimmy Carter has done anything to change his party’s position on abortion, other than signing a letter. Also, can you retire the “goalpost” cliche and come up with something wittier?

Need I recount this sordid history… again? Apparently, yes. A while ago, you claimed that no person opposed to abortion had ever given a speech at the DNC since Roe. When I called you out on it, you quickly moved the goalposts to someone who has given an anti-abortion speech. This is a rather absurd proposition, and wanting to show you that it is, I asked you what Republicans have given a pro-choice speech at the RNC. At which point you moved the goalposts yet again, ignoring the plain wording of my question, and cited a few pro-choice Republicans who had not given any a pro-choice speech. But in the very same comment, you moved the goalposts yet again, and repeated your demand for people who had given anti-abortion speeches at the DNC. This is not only hyperpartisan, it’s also not particularly honest.

Publius: To the contrary, your allegiance to Obama is the issue

How can it be the issue, when I didn’t even mention Obama, let alone my supposed allegiance to him? I merely mentioned the indisputable (so you get no credit for acknowledging it) fact that Romney is an extreme flip-flopper.

Publius: and your inability to contest the fact that he has flipped on a number of issues

Any politician flip-flops on a number of issues, but that does not make them Romneys, who has flip-flopped on nearly every issue, including himself. Again, show me Obama running to the right of Jesse Helms in 1994 and to the left of Kucinich in 2012, if you want to establish equivalence. Show me Obama calling himself a “moderate and conservative” in one year and a “severe progressive” in another.

Just to take one example of Obama’s “flip-flops,” how profound was the change from not supporting same-sex marriage to supporting it? Was anyone surprised when Obama announced support for same-sex marriage? A “flip-flop” seems to me to be a reversal of a position, like Romney changing from pro-choice to pro-life.

Obama is and always has been a liberal Democrat. His so-called “flip-flops” are not ideological reversals. They are pragmatic shifts on specific policies. But Romney has basically remade himself from a moderate-to-liberal Republican to someone quite far to the right. Now, of course, people do change ideologies (look at Fr. Neuhaus or Ronald Reagan). But I think it’s the consensus even among many conservative commentators is that Romney is trying to be something he is not. (George Will says “conservatism is a second language” for Romney.)

How have I been very partisan? I didn’t contest your statement that Romney has flipped on various issues. To the contrary, your allegiance to Obama is the issue, and your inability to contest the fact that he has flipped on a number of issues that I mentioned in my comment. Apparently you feel it is best to attack the commenter than to address the substance of the comment. I’ll just repeat: sometimes it is best to avoid the excesses of partisanship when commenting on candidates.

Interesting, coming from someone who has been consistently very partisan. Only two of what you mentioned are genuine flip-flops. Romney has flip-flopped on almost every issue under the Sun, to the point that he has flip-flopped on who he is.

2002:
“The R stands not so much for Republican as it does for Reform.”
“People recognize that I am not a partisan Republican, that I’m someone who is moderate, and that my views are progressive.”

2012:
“I was a severely conservative Republican governor.”

Show that Obama has flip-flopped on almost every issue, and that he went from being “moderate” and “conservative” ten years ago, to being “severely liberal” today. Show me that Obama ran to the right of Jesse Helms in 1994, while being more liberal than Dennis Kucinich today.