Republicans Distancing Themselves from Bush?

As I was reading the news on-line, I came across this piece of interesting news. Do you think that Bush's machinations are hurting him in the November 2006 elections? Let's see:

Despite their revolt over the Dubai ports deal, Republicans say they remain loyal to President George W. Bush. But there are signs many may distance themselves from him as the 2006 congressional elections near.

"I'm sure some members already have, and I imagine there will be others," said a Republican senator who asked not to be named.

"Republicans are determined that they aren't going to lose these elections because they're seen as too close to Bush," said a former Republican leadership aide. "In the past six years, Congress has taken its cues from the White House. I think you will see that change."

story continues here

What do you guys think about this? I tend to think that the "rats" are leaving the sinking ship before it goes underwater.

P.S. After having trouble with the link, I decided to post the entire article. However, if you would like to check the source, please go to www.reuters.com.... Or, if you try the link, please click on "Excite Money" to get more information.


[edit on 11-3-2006 by ceci2006]

[edit on 11-3-2006 by ceci2006]
Mod Edit: Posting work written by others. – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 12-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by ceci2006
Do you think that Bush's machinations are hurting him in the November 2006 elections?

They're not hurting him as regards the 2006 elections, but anyone with a brain who wants to get elected in November will distance themselves from him like he's diseased. If they're smart, they'll jump ship like the rats they are.

And I do think Bush's (un)popularity is the reason.

The problem is, they are only jumping from a sinking ship. They aren't actually trying to change things. Everything will remain status quo, and they - along with the Democraps - will continue to screw us over in favor of special interests and the almighty "$".

I agree with both of you. When I read the article, I wondered, "Now where is all that 'lock-step' loyalty that the Republicans supposed to have toward their leader?" I honestly think that the wool has been pulled from the Republicans' eyes. They are actually seeing how self-serving and disastrous Bush is. It doesn't suprise me that some might even recognize that everyday Americans are disgusted the way the country is going.

The Republicans are trying to get themselves away as fast as they can. When does the deprogramming start?

But, now is the time for Democrats to get a real platform together clearly and strike while the iron is hot.

But, I hope that the almighty dollar doesn't seduce them even further.

the people that did 911 need a fall guy as the truth is coming out so they got to pin it on the white house. It is simple take down bush and everybody will think that everything is okay in the world ... NOT!

Good scam and we got a lot of people just dying to fall for it too.

Wonder if they will put Hellery in the White House?? You think GWB is bad now, you ain't seen nothing man.

Denythestatusquo, I'm sorry that you feel that this entire thing is a conspiracy. But, as I looked at the news again today, I found two other articles that further solidify the Republicans parting ways with Bush to save their own necks.

Why don't you look at this first:


Or, if you still feel that it's a conspiracy, Take a look at this:



So, it is not a scam. And when a "newspaper of record" and the Associated Press reports dissention within the GOP, certainly the "people who are dying to fall for it" are other Republicans.

As for "Hellery" (preferably, I think our former First Lady's name is Hillary)--this has nothing to do with her. And I tend to think that what this story means is that the race is wide open to replace GWB. And that the Nov. 2006 elections are very important in getting a taste of what the public is thinking.

But I am certainly suprised that conservatives think and behave differently than what their "party leader" tells them to do.

Originally posted by ceci2006
But, now is the time for Democrats to get a real platform together clearly and strike while the iron is hot.

You got that right. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how corrupt the Democrats are, either. I know most high-ranking Republicans are criminals, but I'm not sure how many Demcrats are. I mean at one point, many of us trusted most Republicans to a certain extent... Certainly we trusted them to not be completely corrupt as we've come to discover they are...

I'm looking at Jo Biden as a Democratic hopeful. Hillary is hated by many on both sides. I'm afraid she would not be elected, simply because many Democrats don't like her at all. I certainly hope not. She may not be as corrupt as Delay or Frist, but she's no firm, strong, honorable leader, either.

Actually, if I had my choice, I'd dump both parties and get a Libertarian in there,

I think the political problem is Cheney. He will not run for president, so there is no clear successor, so everyone is fighting to be the front runner, and they have the freedom to distance themselves from Bush. If Bush's VP was able to run as president next time, I don't think that there would be such a public display of mutiny. They would have to support the successor, and the successor would be bound to support Bush.

If Bush's handlers want to replace Cheney and create a successor, by citing Cheney's failing health, it would take the senate to approve the replacement. They better be quick, because right now the it's looking kind of iffy on whether the Republicans can keep it.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm looking at Jo Biden as a Democratic hopeful. Hillary is hated by many on both sides. I'm afraid she would not be elected, simply because many Democrats don't like her at all. I certainly hope not. She may not be as corrupt as Delay or Frist, but she's no firm, strong, honorable leader, either.

Actually, if I had my choice, I'd dump both parties and get a Libertarian in there,

I agree with you here as well. But, Sen. Joseph Biden (D.-Delaware) is a little bit too "Republican-Lite" for me. However, that doesn't mean that I am not adverse to a "centrist" or "moderate" Democrat that can apply to my specific issues. It also does not mean that Democrats are immune from criminal action. What it comes down to is who serves the best interests of the country? And who can applicably run the country in a fair and judicious manner without trying to use his/her office as a platform to expand their bank account?

That is why I am still trying to research possible candidates at this point.

As for Hillary, I do not hate her. I think she's a strong, capable woman. But, my problems with her lie with the fact that she hasn't presented an adequate amount of information on domestic issues, let alone foreign policy. She has remained very quiet during the six years of the Bush Administration. She is also "wooden" in her speaking and manner. But then again, it could only mean that her public persona is very hard to maintain because she is conquering her nervousness. But who knows?

Originally posted by curme
If Bush's handlers want to replace Cheney and create a successor, by citing Cheney's failing health, it would take the senate to approve the replacement. They better be quick, because right now the it's looking kind of iffy on whether the Republicans can keep it.

There are rumors that Cheney might step down after the Nov. 2006 elections. Sen. Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.) has been also talked about as a possible successor--as long as he plays nice with GWB.

And if any naysayers think that this is also a "liberal" conspiracy (and you know who you are), take a look at this:



And here is a piece from former Reagan speech writer, Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal: