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 ...
The trashing of principled conservative leaders by you and your crowd continues apace.
This is the thing I don't understand about those claiming to represent the base...they claim a supernatural power when it comes to victories, and utter helplessness when it comes to defeats.
Forgive me. I have a hard time groking the targets of these collective insults thrown about this thread like parade beads.
I assumed that those who criticize the Bush administration were the target.
Why would anyone feel guilty for that?
I'm saving your post!
How can you know what is veto-proof when you never use the veto?
An impassioned, but substantively empty response fixing on a rhetorical nuance. Apparently you don't disagree with the substance of my reaction to the quote.
I'm afraid I'm quite serious.
At least with another 6 years of Klinton, there wouldn't have been any unknown surprises.
I'd MUCH rather be sitting here bashing him than some double-talking swindler who's supposedly "conservative".
Well, there is that little thing called a 'legacy'.
Is his to be $30,000 in public debt per man, woman and child, and 10%+ of the population consisting of illegal aliens?
So it would seem.
And whatever happened to tax and SS reform?
Oh, I get it now; if you're for them, we're trashing, but if it's you doing the trashing, it's principled.
I've got it now.
Simple mathematics, Dude.
When a bill is approved by an overwhelming majority, it's pretty obvious that any attempt to veto it will more than likely be overturned.
The Constitution does say something about Checks and Balances, remember? So now GW is to be tarred because he simply looked at the vote numbers and decided not to fight a losing battle?
Lame argument.
The President said in his speech as you posted immigrants. NOT illegals, as YOU posted EV.
Immigrants. My g-grandfather was one. I suspect that you may have had an immigrant or two in your family history.
No wonder you rely on the Washington Post to air your point of view.
Then how about I just said it's an out and out lie, something you made up?
At least with another 6 years of Klinton, there wouldn't have been any unknown surprises.
Bet me!
That man was nothing but surprises.
It would be, except for the fact that he hasn't vetoed a single spending bill. Not one.
You can't tell me that every bill was veto-proof. That's a nonsensical claim.
Your trashing of everyone except your scant few purtians continues. You persuade nobody.
I think you must be a closet Dem! Your rhetorical style is so ~nuanced~, not to mention charming! :-)
Well, we can all see that you're prepared to say literally anything to destroy George W. Bush to make points with the "real, true" conservatives, hoping to convince them to vote for whoever you're going to be working for.
And whatever happened to tax and SS reform?
Ask Congress about that.
"And whatever happened to tax and SS reform?"
Hmm, if I recall correctly:
Tax reform never made it onto the Congressional agenda (thank you Bill Frist and Tom DeLay), and as for Social Security reform: I seem to remember Bush proposing a privatization system, the democrats (small 'd' intentional) screaming bloody murder over it, and the republican congress cowering in fear as if the thing was radioactive, or did you forget the brouhaha over the "Nuclear Option" and the "Gang of 14" already?
Or are we not supposed to criticize John McManiac now, the orchestrator of the whole debacle?
I'm flattered :)
I posted his exact quote, in fact.
Twenty minutes ago your side was arguing in favor of 'exact quotes'.
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.