The Washington Post writers who wrote this story are morons and here’s why.

They don’t actually understand what a flip flop really is. Here’s their definition:

While flip-flopping — or, more delicately put, a change in position — has always been a part of political campaigns, President Bush turned it into a deadly political weapon in 2004.

No dummies. It’s not a change in position. A change in position when new information is presented is called prudent, intelligent, and smart. A flip flop has another component.

I feel like a broken record sometimes, so I’ll just quote myself here:

Flip flopping is the act of changing your opinion and never acknowledging the fact that you had the other opinion in the first place. It’s not about changing your mind in the midst of new evidence or information, it’s about changing your mind and making a point of telling the world that you strongly hold the belief and it’s the way you’ve always felt.

That’s what a flip flop is, so unless these people in the debate never acknowledged their former positions, they didn’t flip-flop on anything. I wouldn’t expect the WaPo to understand that, though. They admit that it worked well for Bush in 2004, so they’re now trying to submarine the current crop of Republican hucksters with the same technique.

Just so you all understand, here’s the most recent textbook example of a flip flop:

I know the WaPo would love to use the technique they hated so much in 2004 as long as it hurt a Republican, but they should at least learn what the term means first.