Quote:
Originally posted by dd74
In re. to Bush's bi-partisan triumphs in Texas: so what?
In re. to "results" - I have no idea what you're talking about.
In re. to "you dems" - no idea who "you dems" are unless you're going after the "with us or against us" train of thought where if one disagrees with policy, that means they are a foe.
As you recall, many moderates and Republicans voiced opposition to Bush's actions. I don't think those moderates and Republicans are, necessarily, "dems." Maybe the diehard and obstinate neocons now do, but many others beyond that small minority of Americans do not.
|
I was simply pointing out that Bush has a good track record of producing "results" rather than stagnation when the opposing party is in power. Whether those results are good or bad is open to interpretation.
If you don't care....well great I guess, I got nothing for you.
I have no idea where you're going with that second paragraph unless you don't want to be called a Dem? Actually I understand that and apologize for such a vicious insult
