Posted on 09/14/2010 9:43:38 AM PDT by WaterBoard
Rush Limbaugh today stated on his radio show that Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE) voted in favor of House Resolution 1258 on June 11, 2008.
What was "On Motion to Refer: H RES 1258 The Kucinich Privilege Resolution"?
Answer: "Impeaching George W. Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors"
24 Republicans voted with the Democrat majority and that did include Rep. Mike Castle (R-DE).
Vote Record: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-401
Bill Information: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr110-1258
(Excerpt) Read more at govtrack.us ...
I live in Delaware, and your post is a load of horse manure.
We are not dark blue, when 35% of Delaware voted FOR O’Donnell againsy Biden in 2008.
Castle is NOT a deficit hawk, when he voted for bailouts and for Cap and Trade.
Crossover appeal? Forget it. Why would Dems vote for a Dem with an “R” after his name when you can vote for the real thing in Coons?
The “many” that want Castle on the top of the ticket are Democrats—because they will cream him in November, after all, how will he be different from Coons?
You are building a conservative majority in DE—on what? Sand?
Conservative is the LAST label Castle wants.There is nothing about him that is conservative.
Go ahead and vote for the RINO—and may your chains rest lightly upon you.
Right /s
What part of "Pete King voted aye on this too" don't you understand? It was a procedural vote.
If Castle is the king of your "conservative majority", precisely because he has "enormous" corssover appeal with democrats and other liberals, perhaps you should look up the definition of "conservative" again.
As for any of the rest of us 'shutting up', kiss my a$$. When we spoke out against McCain as the nominee in '08, we were warned to shut up and take it, because McCain was "electable".
Castle's minions, including you, are no longer in a position to say that we conservatives must forsake our principles because of your moderate's "electability".
We are just too damn obtuse to see how Mike Castle is all circumspect, wise and way more clever than some 170 other House Republicans.
As they continue to pee upon our feet and tell us it’s raining.
I did. You apparently aren't bright enough to get it, sport.
"You can’t, you are supporting a man who votes with Democrats"
I'm not "supporting" anyone. I'm calling "BS" on the ridiculously absurd posting of yours.
Castle scores 43% from CFG for 2009, (since his announced Senate bid)
In 07 and 08 he earned a 35% and 26% respectively.
So in 2008, when Arlen Specter scored a 44%, Mike Castle scored a 26%.
ick
I was never "under it". Of course, that doesn't make the claim any less absurd than it is.
And the 166 other Repubs who voted against this are dumb?
I could care less about King. He’s not my Representative.
Castle is my Representative and I don’t approve of that vote no matter what stupid contortions you go through to try and prove Castle as all wise and all knowing.
Silly me, I know when someone’s peeing upon my feet and calling it rain.
...is EXACTLY what you would expect someone to say who doesn't have the political insight to understand parliamentary maneuvers. In this regard, you don't disappoint.
What part of “Pete King voted aye on this too” don’t you understand? It was a procedural vote.
So did Maxine Waters, Charlie Rangle, Henry Waxman, etc, what part of he voted with the Democrats against the Republicans don’t you understand.
The argument of last resort...”you are just too dumb to get it.”
Heh.
Demanded this week that the GOP add support for embryonic stem cell research to their platform.
Last, first whatever - it plainly applies in this instance.
You are mistaken. Coons will never sell downstate, and he has raised taxes year after year. Castle will win handily.
It amazes me how myopic some conservatives are.
Ask Colin Bonini who he wants at the top of the ticket in November to improve his chances of being elected State Treasurer. The answer is Mike Castle.
I figured as much.
I present facts, you present attacks.
When I challenge you to explain why 166 House Republicans voted against this bill and Rep Castle decided to vote with the Democrats, you refuse.
If it was a just a procedural motion to kill the bill, then why did all the other Republican’s vote against it. Surely they understand how Congress works.
Perhaps, these Republicans who voted against the bill can explain why it was not a good idea?
No AL-4 Aderholt, Robert [R]
No MO-2 Akin, W. [R]
No LA-5 Alexander, Rodney [R]
No MN-6 Bachmann, Michele [R]
No AL-6 Bachus, Spencer [R]
No SC-3 Barrett, James [R]
No MD-6 Bartlett, Roscoe [R]
No TX-6 Barton, Joe [R]
No IL-13 Biggert, Judy [R]
No CA-50 Bilbray, Brian [R]
No FL-9 Bilirakis, Gus [R]
No UT-1 Bishop, Rob [R]
No TN-7 Blackburn, Marsha [R]
No MO-7 Blunt, Roy [R]
No OH-8 Boehner, John [R]
No AL-1 Bonner, Jo [R]
No CA-45 Bono Mack, Mary [R]
No AR-3 Boozman, John [R]
No LA-7 Boustany, Charles [R]
No GA-10 Broun, Paul [R]
No SC-1 Brown, Henry [R]
No FL-5 Brown-Waite, Virginia [R]
No FL-13 Buchanan, Vern [R]
No TX-26 Burgess, Michael [R]
No IN-5 Burton, Dan [R]
No IN-4 Buyer, Stephen [R]
No CA-44 Calvert, Ken [R]
No MI-4 Camp, David [R]
No CA-48 Campbell, John [R]
No UT-3 Cannon, Christopher [R]
No VA-7 Cantor, Eric [R]
No WV-2 Capito, Shelley [R]
No TX-31 Carter, John [R]
No OH-1 Chabot, Steven [R]
No NC-6 Coble, Howard [R]
No OK-4 Cole, Tom [R]
No TX-11 Conaway, K. [R]
No FL-4 Crenshaw, Ander [R]
No WY-0 Cubin, Barbara [R]
No TX-7 Culberson, John [R]
No TN-1 Davis, David [R]
No KY-4 Davis, Geoff [R]
No VA-11 Davis, Thomas [R]
No GA-9 Deal, Nathan [R]
No PA-15 Dent, Charles [R]
No CA-4 Doolittle, John [R]
No VA-2 Drake, Thelma [R]
No TN-2 Duncan, John [R]
No MI-3 Ehlers, Vernon [R]
No MO-8 Emerson, Jo Ann [R]
No PA-3 English, Philip [R]
No AL-2 Everett, Terry [R]
No OK-5 Fallin, Mary [R]
No FL-24 Feeney, Tom [R]
No NJ-7 Ferguson, Michael [R]
No VA-4 Forbes, J. [R]
No NE-1 Fortenberry, Jeffrey [R]
No NC-5 Foxx, Virginia [R]
No AZ-2 Franks, Trent [R]
No CA-24 Gallegly, Elton [R]
No NJ-5 Garrett, Scott [R]
No PA-6 Gerlach, Jim [R]
No GA-11 Gingrey, John [R]
No TX-1 Gohmert, Louis [R]
No VA-5 Goode, Virgil [R]
No TX-12 Granger, Kay [R]
No MO-6 Graves, Samuel [R]
No WA-4 Hastings, Doc [R]
No NC-8 Hayes, Robin [R]
No NV-2 Heller, Dean [R]
No TX-5 Hensarling, Jeb [R]
No CA-2 Herger, Walter [R]
No OH-7 Hobson, David [R]
No MI-2 Hoekstra, Peter [R]
No CA-52 Hunter, Duncan [R]
No SC-4 Inglis, Bob [R]
No CA-49 Issa, Darrell [R]
No TX-3 Johnson, Samuel [R]
No OH-4 Jordan, Jim [R]
No FL-8 Keller, Ric [R]
No GA-1 Kingston, Jack [R]
No IL-10 Kirk, Mark [R]
No MN-2 Kline, John [R]
No MI-9 Knollenberg, Joseph [R]
No NY-29 Kuhl, John [R]
No IL-18 LaHood, Ray [R]
No CO-5 Lamborn, Doug [R]
No OH-5 Latta, Robert [R]
No CA-41 Lewis, Jerry [R]
No KY-2 Lewis, Ron [R]
No GA-7 Linder, John [R]
No OK-3 Lucas, Frank [R]
No CA-3 Lungren, Daniel [R]
No FL-14 Mack, Connie [R]
No TX-24 Marchant, Kenny [R]
No CA-22 McCarthy, Kevin [R]
No TX-10 McCaul, Michael [R]
No MI-11 McCotter, Thaddeus [R]
No NC-10 McHenry, Patrick [R]
No NY-23 McHugh, John [R]
No CA-25 McKeon, Howard [R]
No WA-5 McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [R]
No FL-7 Mica, John [R]
No MI-10 Miller, Candice [R]
No CA-42 Miller, Gary [R]
No FL-1 Miller, Jeff [R]
No KS-1 Moran, Jerry [R]
No CO-4 Musgrave, Marilyn [R]
No NC-9 Myrick, Sue [R]
No CA-21 Nunes, Devin [R]
No NM-2 Pearce, Steven [R]
No IN-6 Pence, Mike [R]
No PA-5 Peterson, John [R]
No WI-6 Petri, Thomas [R]
No MS-3 Pickering, Charles [R]
No PA-16 Pitts, Joseph [R]
No PA-19 Platts, Todd [R]
No TX-2 Poe, Ted [R]
No NV-3 Porter, Jon [R]
No GA-6 Price, Tom [R]
No OH-15 Pryce, Deborah [R]
No FL-12 Putnam, Adam [R]
No CA-19 Radanovich, George [R]
No OH-16 Regula, Ralph [R]
No MT-0 Rehberg, Dennis [R]
No AZ-1 Renzi, Rick [R]
No NY-26 Reynolds, Thomas [R]
No KY-5 Rogers, Harold [R]
No AL-3 Rogers, Michael [R]
No MI-8 Rogers, Michael [R]
No CA-46 Rohrabacher, Dana [R]
No IL-6 Roskam, Peter [R]
No FL-18 Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R]
No CA-40 Royce, Edward [R]
No WI-1 Ryan, Paul [R]
No ID-1 Sali, Bill [R]
No NJ-3 Saxton, H. [R]
No LA-1 Scalise, Steve [R]
No OH-2 Schmidt, Jean [R]
No WI-5 Sensenbrenner, F. [R]
No AZ-3 Shadegg, John [R]
No PA-9 Shuster, William [R]
No ID-2 Simpson, Michael [R]
No NE-3 Smith, Adrian [R]
No NJ-4 Smith, Christopher [R]
No TX-21 Smith, Lamar [R]
No IN-3 Souder, Mark [R]
No FL-6 Stearns, Clifford [R]
No OK-1 Sullivan, John [R]
No NE-2 Terry, Lee [R]
No TX-13 Thornberry, William [R]
No KS-4 Tiahrt, Todd [R]
No OH-12 Tiberi, Patrick [R]
No MI-6 Upton, Frederick [R]
No MI-7 Walberg, Timothy [R]
No OR-2 Walden, Greg [R]
No NY-25 Walsh, James [R]
No TN-3 Wamp, Zach [R]
No FL-15 Weldon, David [R]
No IL-11 Weller, Gerald [R]
No GA-3 Westmoreland, Lynn [R]
No KY-1 Whitfield, Edward [R]
No SC-2 Wilson, Addison [R]
No VA-1 Wittman, Rob [R]
No FL-10 Young, C. W. [R]
No AK-0 Young, Donald [R]
Whatever you say....you’re not winning this silly argument but hey...you get the last word since you want it so bad.
Three times during the legislative process surrounding the Obamacare mess, Harry Reid voted with the Republicans. Does this mean Harry Reid was against Obamacare - clearly not. He did for parliamentary concerns.
Sometimes you have to vote for bills to kill them, and other times you might have to vote against bills to save them to save them or force them into a parliamentary death.
This really isn't that complicated. In fact, it's kind of elementary. It's telling you fail to comprehend it, just saying.
HE voted FOR:
Sanctuary cities.
Defunding missile defense.
Drivers licenses for illegals.
No-confidence vote against the surge.
Can't wait for Castle's presser with Obama, endorsing him for 4 more years!
You're right. I'm not winning it, I've won it.
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.