What is the flip-flop issue really about? Is it about Kerry's indecisiveness or the fact that he has changed his views?

There is a lot to be said about the flip-flopping on both sides.

But one thing is clear to me — there is a better way to characterize Kerry's supposed "flip-flopping." Namely, that it's not flip-flopping at all. It's changing one's view based on changing evidence and changing circumstances.

I suppose a Republican could say that this is a matter of semantics. I just want to change the nomenclature. That whatever you call it, it amounts to the same thing.

I don't agree. To me there is a simple point to be made, and it's a point about Bush's character.

I, myself, am tired of the standard attacks on Bush.

It's not that Bush is stupid. Or craven. Or a tool of big-oil. Or in bed with the Saudis. It's that he is a prisoner of his own ideology. He is incapable of changing his views.

There are times in history where it may make some sense to be inflexible — but this isn't one of them.

Kerry fought in Vietnam. And then he fought against the war when he and many of his fellow veterans saw that the war was achieving no real objective, that soldiers and civilians were dying for no good reason.

That's not flip-flopping; it's changing one's views based on changing circumstances. And it is having the courage to express those views.

I believe that the war in Iraq is similar in this regard. Whatever the original objectives of this war, it is now clear that those objectives are not being achieved.

George Bush is locked into his belief that "freedom is on the march," but there is ample evidence to suggest otherwise. Just listen to the opinions expressed in my posted ads.

We need someone in the White House who is capable of seeing that the war is not achieving the objective of making America safer nor of creating a democracy in Iraq.

We need a President who is capable of seeing that and is capable of change.