....then he could preside over the nation for the remaining two years of his son's term?
2006-12-27 15:36:51 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No. He didn't win the war he started in Iraq either, (Republicans just don't know how to fight to win) and the economy was nearly as bad as the one we have now. Oh, and also the gigantic deficit he left behind, and he also has ties to the same Corporations that handle his Son. Really there isn't all that much difference, he only had 4 years to screw up America, let's keep it that way.
2006-12-27 15:43:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
It wouldn't make much difference. He's in Crawford most of the time anyway. Besides, he's a lame duck.
2006-12-27 23:55:10 · answer #2 · answered by ROBERT L O 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's not how it would work. George P Bush is next in line.
2006-12-28 00:47:15 · answer #3 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Maybe, he would let are boys loose to kick some butt with worries of being brought up on charges.
2006-12-27 23:40:57 · answer #4 · answered by Fly Boy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
G W is finished
2006-12-27 23:51:39 · answer #5 · answered by gone 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It seriously would genuinely be better for this Country to impeach G.W. Bush!!!
2006-12-27 23:38:36 · answer #6 · answered by FOX NEWS WATCHER 1 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Uhhh..no. I think it would be better to investigate Bill Clinton's ties to communist China.
2006-12-27 23:46:38 · answer #7 · answered by EmperoroftheEarth 1 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Why not? but W'd never go for that.
2006-12-27 23:38:47 · answer #8 · answered by The Big Box 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Oh the immaturity of liberals!!!!
2006-12-27 23:40:31 · answer #9 · answered by Mercadies2000 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
no, your sunset sunk sam.
2006-12-27 23:44:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋