Every time an election rolls around, voters are subjected to seemingly endless rhetoric by politicians about what they believe in, what they will do if elected and how that will benefit us. They use buzzwords to try to appeal to us on every level. What they say may or may not have anything to do with what they will do, but they had better stick to what they say lest risk being called indecisive.

The majority of the readers of this publication are students. As students, we study to gain knowledge and become more informed. We will leave school with some of our core beliefs intact, while some ideas we have held dear most of our lives will change. That we remain brave enough to challenge our own ideals is important. This is a training ground for the rest of our lives and the risks we take here will follow us to the future.

When any Joe Schmo citizen changes his or her views on issues, it may or may not have a great deal of affect on anyone else. Perhaps to the person's family or friends, someone changing their view on the death penalty or the intelligent design debate may seem strange, out of character and possibly jarring. But when a candidate shifts his views, people all over assume the worst: they are pandering to the voters, they are liars and cheats.

Certainly this is often the case.

Mitt Romney, whose face over the past month has graced the cover of Harper’s and Newsweek, and who has been the subject of articles in the New Yorker and countless papers across the country is the newest addition to the politicians who can’t make up their minds. While running for governor in Massachusetts, Romney ran on a pro-choice platform. Now he ignores those feelings and is pro-life.

In an interview with Chris Matthews of the T.V. program Hardball and before an audience of Iowa State University students, Senator John McCain said in the first five minutes, "Gay marriage should be allowed, if there's a ceremony kind of thing." Then, after some thought and a commercial break he said, "I do not believe that gay marriages should be legal."

Okay.

John Kerry is the flip-flopping king. Well, according to George W. Bush, anyway. Kerry decided in the end to vote against funding the war, although he did initially vote for it. And because he thought better of it later, he was called out as a “flip flopper” and a phony. Was he pandering for votes? Probably, in a way, but to insist that a politician can't change his views for reasons beyond pandering is ignorant.

Wouldn't an ideal president be one who could grow with the times? A president who changes his mind all the time would not be very effective, but a president who could admit their errors would be an invaluable breath of fresh air.

The evolution of thought, of our theory of life, is something that should continue through our lives. Whoever we are and whatever we do, we should be able to grow our beliefs without accusation.

If politicians could cut out the pandering a little, we would have a much better shot at electing someone with integrity.