True, depending on your definition of a Bush Detractor.-Redress is a GWB detractor.
Based on what you've done in this thread, which is equate that since Redress has been a detractor of Bush on some issues then they must be a detractor of Bush on ALL issues, that would mean that:
and numerous others on this board must be "bush detractors" and must have specifically talked down the economy from 2001 to 2009 having NEVER said it was booming or giving any indication there for, because every one of those listed have made statements detracting against Bush and since you seem to be equating a standard to Redress that ANY detraction means they agree with ALL the detractions then to be consistant I guess you must apply that to everyone, yes?
So, tell us, how much do you hate the evil Bush Detractors that talk down the government and hate our troops like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and fellow posters here like Reverend Hellhound?
Yeah, I was.You really think I cannot? You were paying attention from 2001 to 2009, right?
MANY people who did not like Bush did present the economy as if it was not good throughout all of those years.
Others that disliked him primarily depicted it like that save for when it as advantageous.
While others still acknowledged that it was legitimate.
While still others didn't really speak much on the economy at all.
And while still there were people who WEREN'T detractors of Bush that ALSO felt the economy was bad all 8 years as well.
Unlike you, whose suggesting all Bush detractors never indicated in any way that the Economy was "booming" or going very well during any of his time in office.
No, its attack on your argument in this thread, which is rabidly hyper partisan in your broad and dishonest genrealization of Redress.Hmm.
Given the comments -I- have received, this qualifies as trolling and flaming and baiting.
Its certainly an attack on me, personally.