Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (469817)	4/8/2009 2:48:57 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577179

Z, > How many Democrats voted for Bush's 2001 tax cuts? How many Democrats voted for the Iraq War? How many Dems voted to keep that war going? You see that as proof that the Democrats rolled over for bush. All I see are Democrats who were for tax cuts and the Iraq War before they were against them. Not only that, but I also see Democrats who blame Bush for stuff that they themselves voted for. That's not proof of bipartisanship by the Democrats. That's proof of hypocrisy. Even as Democrats voted to keep the war going, they kept blaming Bush for the problems in Iraq and pushing for a "cut-n-run" strategy. By the way, Democrats were successful in obstructing Bush's judicial appointees. It took the "Gang of 14" to come up with a compromise, but the Democrats still retained the power of filibuster because they didn't like judges that didn't share their activist views. Like I said, you're just repeating the same slogans the left-wing bloggers are saying. Democrats are just as guilty of obstructionism as the Republicans are now. The whole "filibuster-proof" requirement was necessitated by Democrat obstructionism, particularly judicial appointees. You cannot ignore that fact. Tenchusatsu