Posted on 03/16/2006 11:56:08 PM PST by EternalVigilance
President Bush's troubles with congressional Republicans, which erupted during the backlash to the Dubai seaport deal, are rooted in policy frustrations and personal resentments that GOP lawmakers say stretch back to the opening days of the administration.
For years, the Bush White House and its allies on Capitol Hill seemed like one of the most unified teams Washington had ever seen, passing most of Bush's agenda with little dissent. Privately, however, many lawmakers felt underappreciated, ignored and sometimes bullied by what they regarded as a White House intent on running government with little input from them.
Often it was to pass items -- an expanded federal role in education under the No Child Left Behind law and an expensive prescription drug benefit under Medicare -- that left conservatives deeply uneasy. What Bush is facing now, beyond just election-year jitters by legislators eyeing his depressed approval ratings, is a rebellion that has been brewing since the days when he looked invincible, say many lawmakers and strategists.
Newly unleashed grievances could signal even bigger problems for Bush's last two years in office, as he would be forced to abandon a governing strategy that until recently counted on solid support from congressional Republicans.
*snip*
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Excellent, but he knows that game --- he's a master.
Most of the piece was intended to convince this WH to hire on more liberal Republicans.
Finally? There are people on this thread who have been against Bush since 1999. Some things never change.
I don't know.
But Bush's remarks weren't in 2005.
Duh on you, huh?
I agee that Roberts and Alito look wonderful...and those seats are what I most wanted from this administration. Still, it is hard for me to use these appointments to offset his other bad personnel decisions in my mind because these were not his first choices. If there hadn't been a huge groundswell of pressure from the base, we would have had Gonzales, IMO, along with Miers. Sheeeesh.
I don't hate Bush. I just don't understand him sometimes.
And I especially don't understand the posters that are SHOCKED that he dare, DARE receive criticism on a conservative site even though everyone and their ninety-nine year old great aunt knows he's not a conservative but a moderate.
When are you gonna shorten that to BushCo and finally * like they do on DU?
Sure they do.
For instance, Dubya has turned out to be a whole lot worse than I ever could have imagined back then.
Totally agree.
But evidently even at that time, people weren't quite as obtuse as you were about what was being said:
And, President Bush, I wanted to ask you about your opinion about those people who are hunting migrant people along the border.
PRESIDENT BUSH: I'm against vigilantes in the United States of America. I'm for enforcing law in a rational way. That's why you got a Border Patrol, and they ought to be in charge of enforcing the border.
No mention of the "The Minuteman Project" project in the Q&A, yet the reporter invents a story linking the two.
I'm just aghast that the Washington Times would be so sloppy/sarcasm.
Relevance? I ain't anywhere close to being el Presidente de Venezuela but that won't stop me from criticizing office holder.
Of course, Condi looks impressive. But I need also to credit W. with Bolton. That was huge and he had to hang tough to make it happen. Gotta give the credit that is due.
Yep. John Bolton is awesome!
But alas. You done me wrong.
Leaving aside the fact that that is utter rubbish and you're drunk the swill from the MSM and the liberals, are you saying that you would have prefered Gore or Kerry?
Please; there are "politicos" among us; everybody knows that; and they are trying to lay the groundwork for the next (losing) candidate.
And they're doing it by trashing a good man.
"Oh Pat! Pat please Save us!Pat, we are counting on you!...Pat if only you could have been President !...Pat that mean old Bush is awful..."
One thing that FR has done for me is expose the ugly side of politics.
I've always known it was there, but this really exposes the people who make a living of it.
Are you referring to me?
Are you suggesting that my posts on FR are worthless and should be ignored?
So much for arguing with facts. No, just institute a complete mass character assassination upon those who, while posting on a conservative site, dare voice any disagreement with or criticizism of what is clearly a moderate presidency.
How very sad for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.