fastyxx said:
I don't buy your argument on the compromise bit. When you're quoting Karl Rove's take on the events (and you are), I'm always skeptical. |
A) No, I actually wasn't quoting Karl Rove.
I was quoting John Boehner's take on the events, which, I don't see why that should be taken with the same level of scruitny as "White house sources" which are the equivlent of the Democratic Karl Rove. (White house sources were controlled by Rove during bush, and by democratic campaign guys now.)
B) The article suggests nothing of the sort. Your just viewing it that way through your bias. They quote democrats worried about elections but in no way talk about the GOP convincing their constiutints that all government spending/stimulus is bad. They are saying a number of thier constiutients think that way though because... that's basically how independents have always thought.
I mean your arguement seems to be that we should be passing unpopular laws of dubious value most americans don't want just because the president wants it done?
C) Even if the republicans DID convince voters that, republicans are at fault for argueing their points too effectivly?
D) Your post ignores the very real fact that it's not the republicans holding back this stuff. It's just perceived that way.
I'd note after this, Reid wasted time reintorducing the bill even AFTER he was sure he didn't have enough votes.