How smart do you have to be in order to be Bush's brain?
2006-11-14 20:59:04 · 5 answers · asked by In Honor of Moja 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Hmmm, maybe this will clarify matters. After the 2004 election a bunch of Republicans started getting 'uppity,' they defied Bush denouncing him as a lame-duck President out of touch with the Republican Party. Bush butted heads with many of them and proclaimed a 'stay the course' policy loudly yelping that Rumsfield would stay on to the end of Bush's second term. 'Angry' voters turned against the Republicans, many of them the very same ones who had challenged Bush's power. The 'Democrats' seized power. But here is the amusing part. The Democrats are not unified, many have their eyes on winning the Presidency in 2008, which truly scrambles ones loyalty. Guess who these leaderless Democrats will have to turn to? Yep, Geo W...... I loathe the smarmy rat and his evil puppet master Karl Rove but they are true political geniuses. And do note, Rumsfield left on schedule, After the Election, after his presence scuttled several Republican's chances to win. And who was one of the winners, newly independent Bush buddy Joe Lieberman....
Bush scored big on November 7th and slowly it will dawn on political pundits. (Actually Dan Rather has already figured it out )
Peace...
2006-11-14 21:22:54 · answer #1 · answered by JVHawai'i 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rove rode second seat to avoid blame for an expected poor showing.
2006-11-14 23:41:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
if rove was a political genius, it was an evil genius. he is a master of smear tactics and framing the opposition. he is the ultimate "good of the party" goon.
2006-11-15 01:33:39 · answer #3 · answered by grumpy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WE kept telling you that, you don't have to be a genius to out smart a lib
2006-11-14 22:08:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
How much evidencedid you require? This was obvious from 2000.
2006-11-14 21:25:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋