To: what's up
"Politico not being specific about which votes were at issue?"
Are you saying Schweikert may have peed on Boehner's shoes and that was the reason for the ouster? Rep. Schweikert seems to be a loose cannon with the pragmatics, so his convictions need to be stripped.
This should clue you in:
Should it become apparent that you are choosing sides on behalf of Rep. Quayle, the Club for Growth PAC will consider it necessary to intervene on behalf of Rep. Schweikert," Chocola writes. "As is our practice, if the Club's PAC entered this primary, it is highly likely that our 75,000 members would donate considerably more funds to Rep. Schweikert's campaign than the Republican House leadership would contribute to Rep. Quayle's campaign.
It is our preference to remain on the sidelines of the Arizona race, as both candidates have fine records. However, we will not sit back and allow House Republican leaders to invest resources with impunity against an incumbent fiscal conservative like Rep. David Schweikert. Rep. Schweikert stands for the principles of economic freedom even when members of his own party pressure him to do otherwise. If those same Republican leaders attempt to defeat him, the Club for Growth PAC will vigorously come to his defense.
Your boy Boehner, who you routinely defend, is just showing his true "moderate" colors and sad his pony lost, would rather him just cry it out than take it out on Schweikert's position).
posted on 12/03/2012 5:58:03 PM PST
by rollo tomasi
(Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
To: rollo tomasi
Are you saying Schweikert may have peed on Boehner's shoes and that was the reason for the ouster?
No, I'm not saying that.
/rolling eyes upward.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson