[Fledermaus]

Uh, we aren't the "purists".

All we are asking is SOME principle. Especially when you win the arguments.

Again, Bush won the tax rate cut argument. Good for him. But what good is it when it's short term and expires in 2011. And don't give me the optimistic look into the future about "oh, the GOP will fix that later".

Like the Supreme Court was "guaranteed" to strike down the "ridculous attacks on free speech" in McCain-Feingold I was told WOULD HAPPEN by many here? I was told back then I was a "purist" for saying Bush was WRONG to sign the bill for political reasons.

Actions have consequences and nobody knows the future.

[nopardons]

Those tax cuts, on an incrimental stage and fadeout, was all that he was going to get, at that time, or is your short term memory not what it should be ?

And yes, you really are more " PURIST " than not. Would you rather have had algore, instead of W, a massive tax increase, rather than a tax cut ( and some ARE not going to be phased out/come to an end)at all, etc. ? Enquiring minds want to know why 1/2 a loaf isn't good enough.