Democrats SURRENDER....

cawacko said:
While usually a Republican mainstay I don't recall him running on smaller government. NCLB was a big campaign issue of his and one of the first legislation he passed and that was not a smaller government program.

As far as budget deficits he got reemed by fiscal conservatives for his outragous spending. So I'm not sure how that makes your claim to be "bi-partisan". Fiscal conservatives may have also screamed at Democrats but with Bush and a Republican Congress it was in their hands to control and they failed.
Click to expand...

Did not the Republicans in congress surrender their fiscal conservative stance to support Bush? Reamed? Hardly. Well maybe in the last year or so of his presidency after they realized he was dragging them down in elections.
 
Whomever said:
Did not the Republicans in congress surrender their fiscal conservative stance to support Bush? Reamed? Hardly. Well maybe in the last year or so of his presidency after they realized he was dragging them down in elections.
Click to expand...

Yes they did give it up, which is what I just said. Hardly reamed? Did you see the results of the 2006 Congressional election? Did you see the 2008 Presidential election? Have you seen the current state of the Republican Party? If your goal is to have the Republican Party be non-existent its going to take a little more work. But if you think the Republican Party is somehow not in trouble then we haven't been watching the same politics my friend.

So again I'm still not sure about the point you were attempting to make which was when Bush and Republicans do something its 'bi-partisan' and when Obama and the Democrats don't fund Gitmo (and see can see from this thread there are Democrats or liberals unhappy with the Dem Congressional position on this) its a 'surrendor'. (sp)
 
cawacko said:
Yes they did give it up, which is what I just said. Hardly reamed? Did you see the results of the 2006 Congressional election? Did you see the 2008 Presidential election? Have you seen the current state of the Republican Party? If your goal is to have the Republican Party be non-existent its going to take a little more work. But if you think the Republican Party is somehow not in trouble then we haven't been watching the same politics my friend.

So again I'm still not sure about the point you were attempting to make which was when Bush and Republicans do something its 'bi-partisan' and when Obama and the Democrats don't fund Gitmo (and see can see from this thread there are Democrats or liberals unhappy with the Dem Congressional position on this) its a 'surrendor'. (sp)
Click to expand...

Well it was a quiet reaming. I did not hear any loud reaming until from a very few in the last few months of the Bush admin. After things really fell apart. Prior to that they just quit saying his name.
 
Whomever said:
Would it be against immigration laws to bring them here?

esp since they are not prisionors of war. But enemy combatants.
Click to expand...

Suspects already have been moved into and out of the US. The naval brig in Charleston SC held a few enemy combatants during the bush administration.

Surely the critics don't think the accused at Gitmo will be held in the US indefinitely without going to trial?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top