The word not kept, broken promises. Things fall apart.

You might want to give us some concrete examples of Bush's terrible crimes against the American public before you pose all those withering questions.

Also, regime, despite its negative connotations really refers to a type of government that is prevailing. As in, representative democracy is the type of regime present in the United States. The problem is that most people like to use it with words like 'dictatorial', but regime in itself doesn't mean anything much.

9/11. It ruined his presidency. If you remember back in 2000 Bush said he wanted to stay out of foreign matters and just worry about domestic issues. Didn't happen, part his fault and part 9/11. Also, if you remember, the big thing was that he could unify congress, just like he did in Texas as Governor. I would say he failed on that too. I think he would have been an ok president without 9/11. But 9/11 ruined his presidency and caused him to go in another direction all together. Of course thats also assuming you believe terrorist were responsible for 9/11.

skinny runner dude wrote:

Of course thats also assuming you believe terrorist were responsible for 9/11.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I believe that Al Qaeda knocked down the towers.

When Bush took another route after 9/11, e.g. invading Iraq, what was his thinking?

I ask this because I believe that Iraq in my view is the genesis of all his mess.

what i find shocking is that you were not educated enough to know what bush was all about. how long have you been alive? 12 years? its common sense that you do not listen to what people say, you watch what they do. there was nothing surprising about bush, and there still isnt.

Frailty, thy name is Woman wrote:

You might want to give us some concrete examples of Bush's terrible crimes against the American public before you pose all those withering questions.

Lying about WMD's in Iraq

NativeSon wrote:

skinny runner dude wrote:

Of course thats also assuming you believe terrorist were responsible for 9/11.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I believe that Al Qaeda knocked down the towers.

When Bush took another route after 9/11, e.g. invading Iraq, what was his thinking?

I ask this because I believe that Iraq in my view is the genesis of all his mess.

What was Congress thinking, Congress intiated and ratified the bill give the executive branch the right to go into Iraq, Congress signed the blank check, Bush consistently ratified 90%+ of the bills Congress put on his desk at the time... Congress sent us to Iraq not, the Bush, get your facts straight on the reservations. Just because you've got all that Casino money, it doesnt seem to have gotten you past the 3rd grade American government...

Actually I recall the Clinton administration also insisting that Iraq had them. Saddam was known to be a problem long befor Bush.

http://www.gendercide.org/case_anfal.html

It is, but the reason he went to Iraq is he felt threatened by Iraq. He thought there was WMD's there. He was wrong. Thats life. Unfortunately his mistake is causing Americans to die for no good reason. It's not like its gonna get better when anybody else comes in.

You must have a second grade concept of our American Gov't.

The Executive Branch intiaties 90% of all Bills that go to Congress.

The Legislative Branch will debate these bills initiated by the Executive Branch, But they DO START IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Well wrote:

You must have a second grade concept of our American Gov't.

The Executive Branch intiaties 90% of all Bills that go to Congress.

The Legislative Branch will debate these bills initiated by the Executive Branch, But they DO START IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

You are completely WRONG. IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

skinny runner dude wrote:

It is, but the reason he went to Iraq is he felt threatened by Iraq. He thought there was WMD's there. He was wrong. Thats life. Unfortunately his mistake is causing Americans to die for no good reason. It's not like its gonna get better when anybody else comes in.

There is mounds of evidence pointing to the fact that the evidence of WMDs was poor at best. Downing Street Memo, etc.

What do you think the EOP does? Despite your simplistic look at the gov't, why do you think the pres. needs a majority in Congress? Who do you really think sets the agenda in DC?

Congress debates the bills and may change the bill to some degree, but the ideas come from the White House.

Are you mentally retarded? All bills are initated by Congressmen, for example the McCain-FinGold(sp?) Bill, it's not the Bush-Cheney Bill. The executive branch has absolutely no power in Congress, except in ties, which Iraq wasnt even close to a tie. Someone could have fillibustered in the Senate but there would have been a movement for Closure which would have passed. (That might be fourth grade knowledge for you, I apologize if you havent made it there yet.) It was Congress that sent your boys, my friends, to Iraq not President Bush... The executive cannot sent us to war. (The only type of action the executive branch can take without Congress is start a strike and wait up to 48 hours to notify Congress, but must have just cause if this action is taken or it is grounds for impeachment.) Go cry a river to your Congressman for their rash action, but give credit/blame where it is due instead of using Bush as your sacrifical lamb for your own stupid action of trusting your Congressman... They stole your land and then you dont ask questions as they take the nation to war... Shame On YOU

Well wrote:

You must have a second grade concept of our American Gov't.

The Executive Branch intiaties 90% of all Bills that go to Congress.

The Legislative Branch will debate these bills initiated by the Executive Branch, But they DO START IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

Well,

Well said.

I need to ask him about the number of bills Congress sent to the White House during the period 1993-2001 asking President Clinton to invade Iraq.

As from 1994, the House was controlled by the Republicans. How many Iraq invasion bills did they send to President Clinton's desk regarding the invasion of Iraq.

GAtor,

You say that Bills emanate from the House, fair enough.

Question!

How many bills (Iraq invasion) did Dick Armey and/or Tom Delay send to President Clinton? I am talking about bills authorising the invasion of Iraq.

The house and senate was dominated by republicans. both houses approved 100% of he white house agenda and the white house did not issue one veto....the bush administration oversaw the biggest increase in the federal budget, increase in the deficit ever recorded, and led us into this boondogle in iraq...get a clue man....blaming congress is bullshit...are you going to donate to the iraq veterans for iraqi war (much like swiftboat veterans) and get them to blame the democrat led house and senate for this problem in 2008.....INSTEAD OF BUSH AND REPUBLICANS...

Someone could have fillibustered in the Senate but there would have been a movement for Closure which would have passed. (That might be fourth grade knowledge for you, I apologize if you havent made it there yet.) It was Congress that sent your boys, my friends, to Iraq

It is CLOTURE, you ass.

Also, there has been no declaration of war from Congress, that was our Pres who sent the troops. I believe your to stupid to realize that war has only been declared 5 times by Congress, the rest, including this one, is a police action. You really don't know gov't, do you????

So what exactly were you expecting out of Bush?

The man who was a goof-off, male cheerleader, and C student during college?

The man who shirked his duty in the air national guard, partying his way through it and being found not fit for duty?

The man who kicked the empty beer cans under his seat when the cops pulled him over, then used his influence to get out of a DWI?

The man who founded Arbusto energy only to have it propped up by his father's rich friends, then merged into Spetrum 7 to avoid total collapse?

The man who then took Spectrum 7 to a net loss of $1.5 million the next year, and was bought in 1986 for $2.2 million by Harken Energy?

The man who sold most of his shares in Harken to a Los Angeles broker named Ralph D. Smith..one week later Harken announced an overall loss of $23.2 million triggering an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission into the sale?

I could keep going here, but with such a pattern of FAILURE throughout an entire life, why would you expect SUCCESS from George Bush?

NativeSon wrote:

Watching the unfolding political dispensation in this country for the last 5 years or so,

"dispensation"???