Forrester's stem cell flip-flop

Sorry for the lazy linkin' post, but I see no need to elaborate when the Tom Moran of the Newark Star-Ledger did such a good job of pinning this one for us:

Forrester's stand on stem cells: Flip, flop

For the record, Doug Forrester opposes public funding for embryonic stem cell research and Jon Corzine favors it.
It's a clear difference, but one that was lost in the mist during their televised debate this week.
Forrester was asked directly: Do you favor public funding for embryonic stem cell research?
Not much wiggle room there.
Here is the answer he gave: "There are few things that are more exciting than stem cell research."
He then told how his daughter, Briana, suffered a serious brain injury and developed Hodgkins disease. Stem cell research, he said, could wind up helping her.
"We need to do it vigorously," he said. "We need to do it now."
So what gives?
The next day, Forrester was in full defensive crouch, refusing to answer questions.
But his spokeswoman confirmed that he opposes any public funding for this research, no matter how much he gushed during the debate.
All politicians spin during a debate. But this one was over the top.
The honest answer to the question would have been "no."
And he sure seemed to say "yes."
...
To lure conservatives, he has signaled opposition, saying he opposed "using human beings as guinea pigs." And to lure moderates and liberals, he's struck a supportive note, as he did during the debate.
The danger for politicians who shift ground like this is that they end up pleasing no one.
Marie Tasy, of New Jersey Right to Life, said that Forrester wobbled in the same way over abortion before settling on a position in favor of abortion rights.
"He told people face-to-face that he was pro-life," she says. "He walks a tightrope. He's trying to pander to his pro-abortion supporters while not alienating Republican pro-life voters. It's a conundrum for a candidate who thinks he can have it both ways."