When he was Governor of Texas he signed more death warrents than any other governor in US history.Add to that over 3000 killed because of his orders in Iraq.I guess GWB comes out on top
2007-02-03 07:25:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by rosbif 6
·
1⤊
5⤋
This is a stupid question and has little relevance to reality. Charles Manson is a convicted felon, while George W. has yet to be convicted of anything more dangerous than drunken driving. While the results of decisions made by George W, have had serious long term considerations, along with numerous deaths, it is unlikely that George W. will be charged with the deaths as Manson was.
2007-02-03 07:24:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sailinlove 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
Well, Bush has for sure (or had people killed -- as did Manson) just counting when he was governor of Texas. I'm no fan of Bush but it's hardly a fair question. I mean Phillip Morris has killed WAY more than either Bush or Manson, if you want to just talk about who's killed more Americans.
2007-02-03 07:39:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by SDTerp 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
properly, thinking the shown reality that a wartime president can not be held responsible for deaths brought about via conflict, the answer should be Charles Manson. conflict motives lack of life. in case you've been to flow alongside that line, then FDR grow to be worse than Manson, so were LBJ, JFK, and Teddy Roosevelt, and Eisenhower, and George Washington (all those unfavorable British he helped kill!), and what about Abraham Lincoln? and properly, purely about another president we've had throughout the time of conflict.
2016-12-03 10:01:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a tie. Neither George Bush or Charles Manson have ever killed anyone themselves.
Nice try, skippy.
2007-02-03 07:26:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by Team Chief 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
That would be the democrat Charles Manson
2007-02-03 07:47:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, Manson didn't kill anybody. He masterminded the murders of several by brainwashing some insane followers of his.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, hasn't killed anybody, but some brainwashed, insane lefties think he masterminded the deaths of 3000 Americans on 09-11-01.
Bill and Hillary are alleged to have ordered the deaths of several of their associates.
Ted Kennedy did kill one lady in 1969.
2007-02-03 07:28:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by cornbread 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Lyndon Bains Johnson
2007-02-03 07:27:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by TheWeeKiwi 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I was not aware that George Bush has been charged or even accused of killing any Americans.
But what the heck, let's run with your twisted logic for a moment.
Bill Clinton? Lyndon Johnson? Harry Truman? FDR?
And the winner is, FDR! (For the total number of American Casualties in WWII)
Bush's numbers pale in comparison.
2007-02-03 07:24:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
If you mean "kill" and not "murder" and we are talking about overseeing of killings indirectly (not actually doing the killing), then your answer is President Bush.
But you must remember...There is a HUGE difference between murder and killing. If you shoot a thug who is trying to rape and kill your wife, you are a killer by definition. However, you would be a longshot from a murderer.
Killing in and of itself is not neccesarily evil. Murder is. Manson killed for fun. Bush doesnt savor the kill. It is something he tries to reduce that is an unfortunate part of war. So in all fairness, any president who oversaw any military operation that resulted in enemy casualties or civilians inadvertantly killed by our military is a killer. That includes nearly every president to date! Comparing a murderer to a wartime president is twisting words at best. It is apples and oranges. jason
2007-02-03 07:41:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by Magic Mouse 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Dubya has, of course! The Manson family only killed a handful of people, whereas Bush is responsible for the deaths of thousands.
2007-02-03 07:29:04
·
answer #11
·
answered by tangerine 7
·
1⤊
3⤋