Sure, if you want to say that the argument you’ve been making for the last 2 hours was a lie, but the truth also helps your cause, so it’s all good.
I could care less if you argue truthfully against Castle, in fact MOST freepers who are being castigated as “RINO-lovers” are really just wanting people to tell the truth and stop lying.
I have no doubt that if Castle is elected, there will be way too many times when he won’t go along with the leadership. I presume that O’Donnell will, so long as the leadership is doing what she wants. I also assume that if the leadership tries something conservatives don’t like, they will expect O’Donnell to OPPOSE the leadership, and NOT to vote with her party.
But knowing Castle isn’t conservative, and isn’t going to play with the team, doesn’t mean we should support lying about him. He didn’t support impeachment, he voted to STOP the impeachment bill.
Frankly, I think it was the right thing to do, because I don’t think playing politics with impeachment is a good thing; but it doesn’t matter, because his vote was meaningless, it was being killed by the democrats anyway.
But if he had voted YES to bring the bill to the floor, I have NO DOUBT that his opponents would be citing that vote to insist that he supported impeachment, and telling us that the other 166 republicans were just doing what they were told, but Castle wanted to impeach Bush and that’s why he voted to bring the bill to the floor.
And if he had skipped the vote like Tom Tancredo, his opponents would be saying he ducked the vote because he supported impeachment and didn’t want to go on-record about it.
My argument has always been that building a senate majority based on Castle’s vote is an exercise in futility. He cannot be counted on to vote with us when the chips are down.
And he vote on this matter only reinforces that point.
I never said he was “for impeachment” per se, you can go search my posting history if you like. He is however, frequently for whatever the Democrats’ agenda happens to be.