If you hate Bush so much, why not the congress?

Hi all,

I'm posting this because it needs to be said. Many people already know, but far to many don't. It has to do with the blame placed on the Bush administration for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I don't want to come across from a Bush-lover, because i'm not. At all. In my eyes he perpetuated and increased government control in my day to day life, and many American's have died in two wars that have be "ill managed" to say the least.

That being said.... He was one dude, representing one branch of the government. Yet he recieves the blame for actions the United States could only take with the support of the representitive branch, and in some cases even the judicial.

The congress is SUPPOSED to be a check on the executive branch. If they are just going buy Colin Powell's power point when deciding to go to war, i'm afraid we have bigger problems.

Why not blame John Kerry? He was on the intelligence commitee when the war drums were being beat. If everything was such a lie, why didn't he stand up? (Until election season that is). The reason is totally political and you know it.

The fact that the executive branch could run the country into the ground really shows how pathetic the representative branch has gotten. If our country is to survive we must recognize that all branches of our government are failing, and that her people are failing. There is plenty of responsibility to go around.

We are still at war, we are still in debt, and the leader of the majority party (the prez) still uses the congress as a mouthpeice to promote its own agenda.

The people in congress represent support or resistance to the President. They are supposed to represent the people and the states.

reply to post by ManWithGrace89


because man no democrat can ever do any wrong..

Well, to make it short and simple, it's easier to just blame one guy, then to use the brain and think about what's really going on in that den of crooks and liars we call congress. Their power to do the right things are undermined by their own corruption and, well, i don't see that changing anytime soon. At least i won't hold my breath for any significant change, the masses are mostly asleep dreaming about sports, tea parties, gay marriages, etc.

reply to post by neo96


Actually, at the time the war in Afghanistan was declared, congress was pretty evenly split, so you can't blame the Democrats or the Republicans for that.

en.wikipedia.org...

The war in Afghanistan was a direct result of 9/11, the war in Iraq was the direct result of Bush's inability to read.



[edit on 8/13/2010 by whatukno]

It was a democratic congress.

U.S. Communist Party Sees Democrat Victory as Its Own

“The right-wing stranglehold on Congress has been broken,” declared Joelle Fishman, chair of the Communist Party USA’s (CPUSA) political action commission. “Electing the Democrats to control congress is a victory for communism.”

(Sorry! Just had to throw that in!)


www.azconservative.org...

reply to post by ManWithGrace89


I agree with you on some of those points. People tend to align the war in Iraq with Bush yet both Republican and Democratic politicians supported it at that time. Even Kerry and Hillary Clinton as I recalled voted for to push for war against Iraq and whether they claimed they were pressured or not they simply did not make a stand at that time. Even Kerry continued to stand by his decision in support of the war by 2004. So you are right in arguing that the blame for the Iraq war is not shared enough.

That being said, the push for the war in Iraq was lead by Republicans, and in particular Bush. Bush and Cheney marketed the war, they lead the Republicans and many Democrats followed on. Out of the 23 senators who made the stand against this war, 21 could account for being Democrat, one could be accounted for as Republican Chaffee (Rhode Island) and one independent. Out of the 133 congressmen and women, 6 could only be accounted for as Republican. So while you have a point in saying that there is this ignorance only Republicans supported this war, the bulk of the blame and the bulk of this war lies on the Republicans and Bush.

That being said.... He was one dude, representing one branch of the government.

Now this is where I stop with you. By your account Bush was 'one guy' representing 'one branch government' yet this other comment of yours conflicts with that statement:

We are still at war, we are still in debt, and the leader of the majority party (the prez) still uses the congress as a mouthpeice to promote its own agenda.

Hold on here. You discount Bush as having majority Republicans in congress at the time of the voting for the Iraq war and yet now under Obama you make note of this. Is that not deceptive on your side?

Yet he recieves the blame for actions the United States could only take with the support of the representitive branch, and in some cases even the judicial.

Bush marketed the war at first, he held the power to block any support, he motivated and pushed for the war along with the Republicans behind him. So while there were Democratic voters Bush held sufficient power to prevent the war from happening.

Why not blame John Kerry? He was on the intelligence commitee when the war drums were being beat.

John Kerry supported the war so he takes part blame as mentioned above but as for him holding the power to stop the war? Thats alittle naive on your side. Considering that the CIA and othe intellegence agencies made false claims to support the war to Iraq I highly doubt that point could be made in court.

If everything was such a lie, why didn't he stand up?

There were a number of politicians that stood up and called the war a lie at that time. What did that do? Did that change anything?

The people in congress represent support or resistance to the President. They are supposed to represent the people and the states.

At that time the majority of Americans supported the war in Iraq and the politicans followed suit thanks to the nationalist patriotic BS that was spouted in the media at that time. So the blame comes right back on the bulk of America. 62% according to CBS at that time.


[edit on 13-8-2010 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by ManWithGrace89


IMO, you can blame Bush for two reasons,

1) The buck stops with the Pres.

2) Congress were lied to...

theres a flaw in that arguement boys....

remember the party of no? you know the label on the current republican members of congress right now being obstructionists....

you know those people who just wont those good little democrats have their way..........right now.

then back during the vote for the iraq war they could have stopped it if they wanted to...

those poor little congressmen getting lied to awww how many times do they lie in a day to us

so that dog dont hunt in my opinion.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by neo96]

reply to post by neo96


I'm not sure what you mean? I have never voted for a Republican. I wasn't even old enough to vote for Bush. All I'm trying to say is that congress can blame Bush all they want, but if there was never a point where they could have stopped it.

I really don't care who is in control as long as they are competent. Sorry but the fools that let us get into this mess are as damaging to our country as the ones who lead us there.

reply to post by ManWithGrace89


can't the democrats and republicans just get along.... (without going too far) .....