You can't distance yourselves from Bush

[Skull Pilot]

DeLay was elected House Majority Leader after the 2002 midterm elections, and compelled House Republicans to unite to an unprecedented degree, especially in support of President George W. Bush's agenda.

Tom DeLay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To all of you Republicans that have distance yourselves from GW Bush, please try to remember the 6 long years you all went along with him on 100% of the time. If you didn't, who were we arguing with all these years?

And tell us, who were the good republicans from 2000-2006?

So you say McCain only voted with Bush 90% of the time? Does that make him a maverick? No, and here's why:

Employing a method known as "catch and release," DeLay allowed centrist or moderately conservative Republicans to take turns voting against controversial bills. If a representative said that a bill was unpopular in his district, then DeLay would ask him to vote for it only if his vote were necessary for passage; if his vote were not needed, then the representative would be able to vote against the party without reprisal.[citation needed]

So Republicans, please don't try to distance yourselves from Bush. If you leave George Bush, you must leave the entire party. Otherwise, start naming the Republicans from 2000-2006 that did a good job.

What you don't seem to understand, BooBoo, is that i have no need to distance myself from GW. I never voted for him and i have never been a repudlican.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Ok, one last time.

We can only hope!

I'm saying

I'm glad you know because it eludes everyone else.

if you study what happened between 2000-2006 and remember what happened, you can't put all the blame on Bush or the Dems.

Rarely is it ever solely the fault of one party or the other.

If you really study the truth about what happened, The GOP had control of all three branches of government

Here's where you start to run off the road. The GOP had the Presidency. They had a narrow majority in the house and even narrower in the Senate. It's like saying it's the Dems fault for not getting out of Iraq the last 2 years. When you only hold 51 seats, you ain't doing jack shit if the other side doesn't want you to. Samey-same GOP. They had marginal control of the Congress. The GOP would argue that the left still controls the Sct. regardless of who appointed whom.

and they were in complete collusion with each other during that time.

and now you just lost it!!!!! I'll just ignore this part and pretend your sane.

So Bush didn't spend too much,

He proposed the budget. He didn't veto the spending bills, ergo he spent too much.

the GOP spent too much.

I assume you mean Congressional GOPers since the Sct has nothing to do with spending. Yes, they failed to reduce spending and I saw not real efforts to block the socialist president from doing so. I wouldn't say they colluded so much as entered into a codependent relationship. Luckily most of them have been voted out of office now.

Bush didn't lie us into war

I believe he told what he thought to be the truth. I do not believe he told us the real reason the administration thought attacking Iraq was a good thing to do and that ultimately was a mistake he paid for then and will continue to pay for.

and double the debt,

As if anyone cares about that now. Sounds trivial. I do think that at least in the first 3 years, it was not time to worry about the debt. Bush had essentially what Obama has now. Between 9/11 and the Clinton corporate scandals and tech bubble bursting, Bush was hardly in a position to balance a budget.

the GOP did.

Same answer.

You Republicans know better than anyone that the President doesn't have that much to do with it. Aren't those your words?

The president proposes, the Congress disposes. But with narrow majorities, the Congress is somewhat hamstrung.

The President doesn't have that much to do with the economy. He just signs/veto's what congress sends him. Well Bush signed just about everything Delay sent him and Bush veto'ed just about everything Pelosi/Reed have sent him so far.

That is a completely inadequate rendition of the facts.

So I was right. You aren't a GOP but you are far more anti Democratic than you are anti GOP.

Definitely more Anti-dem. The GOP is on the right side of some issue and some people in the GOP are on the right side of a lot of issues. Some dems are on the right side of some issues, but the dem party is wrong on practically everything.

To me that makes you one step above a schmuck. Congrats.

Considering the source, that's a compliment.

And when I say you, I mean cock suckers like you. I mean the politicians in Washington who represent you. Or the conservatives that win because idiots like you vote for Bob Barr.[/QUOTE]

 

[sealybobo]

DeLay was elected House Majority Leader after the 2002 midterm elections, and compelled House Republicans to unite to an unprecedented degree, especially in support of President George W. Bush's agenda.

Tom DeLay - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Employing a method known as "catch and release," DeLay allowed centrist or moderately conservative Republicans to take turns voting against controversial bills. If a representative said that a bill was unpopular in his district, then DeLay would ask him to vote for it only if his vote were necessary for passage; if his vote were not needed, then the representative would be able to vote against the party without reprisal.

And if you were a Democrat and didn't go along, you were mailed Anthrax.

Who were the two Senators that were stopping the Patriot Act?

Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Patrick Leahy of Vermont.

Who got Anthraxed?

Tom Daschle of South Dakota and Patrick Leahy of Vermont