English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

this goof has gone on long enough ,PICK ONE CONGRESS OR BUSH,,,,,,who,s head do we chop off?

2007-02-25 08:18:58 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

my vote is bush as he is the one that pushed this mess on congress ,so that makes him the most responsable..looks like 50/50 so far,,,what did they say in the oj trial,some famous line anyone remimber it? decider

2007-02-25 08:26:30 · update #1

I think some of you are to think congress did not do their job as specified by the constitution of the united states of America,,,if that is a factor at all ,,,those votes are nulified as such,,and the blame goes to our master Bush.and more if he had knowledge of such infractions...good gosh what a mess and ,,,its still spilling blood man,,,and ladys....decider

2007-02-25 08:44:08 · update #2

PICK ONE PEOPLE AND LEAVE YOUR VOTE MARK NOW<>>CHEERS decider

2007-02-25 13:08:05 · update #3

24 answers

"W" - While congress voted to give him the authority, the "decider" made the final decision. Congress did not anticipate that he would 'not' exercise all his options before going to war.

2007-02-25 08:26:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Congress’ approval score could flow up. The Democrats don’t have sufficient votes to override Bush’s vetoes yet they have the potential to refuse to pass to any extent further investment for the war. the yank people choose the war ended. The Democrats have tried being life like and cooperative notwithstanding it doesn’t paintings. they're on checklist as having tried. in the event that they are in a position to’t get previous the obstructionist Republicans and Bush’s vetoes then they could desire to take a greater difficult line approach. the well-known public will approve. The Democrats additionally could be arranged to efficiently counter the Bush propaganda which will persist with the slicing of investment.

2016-10-01 23:31:22 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

The resolution to use force was NOT unanimous. In the House, 123 members dissented. In the Senate, 23 voted against it.

It just floors me when Cons keep repeating falsehoods over and over again. Especially when the facts are so EASILY verified.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Iraq_Resolution_of_2002

Just as the Congress can't prevent Bush from implementing his troop escalation, Congress is unable to wage war because THE PRESIDENT IS THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

This is Bush's war, for better or worse.

2007-02-25 08:31:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Dictator Dumbya because he DIDN'T comply with ALL the terms of the AUMF resolution that Congress was conned into ("facts fixed around the policy") passing. Down with Dictator Dumbya!!! I think we should be strict Constitutional constructionists about war and ALWAY have a formal declaration (except if there is 20 minutes left with incomming nuke ICBMs) anyway. Congress has not done its job there in recent decades.

2007-02-25 08:32:05 · answer #4 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 0 0

OK, now if you want a head to chop, you cannot chop at either one. This war came about because of Osama Bin laden and the terrorist To protect both YOU and me, the government had no other choice but to defend our country AND to go onto the offensive to prevent future attacks of the innocent civilians of The United States. They are also helping the world as a whole in preventing crazy, out of their mind people from wanting the destruction of everything that is not guided by their true God. finally, the people of the United states voted for Bush TWICE!!So if you want to blame bush, you are going to have to blame The US first.

2007-02-25 08:22:00 · answer #5 · answered by Unblack 4 · 1 1

The Republican Congress. They gave him the power to take this country to war without Congressional consent! Although, I don't know how this really affected anything since Congress never gave any President permission to take this country to war, no President ever asked until after the fact! Also, Congress never tried to stop him & they could have done so.

2007-02-25 08:28:55 · answer #6 · answered by geegee 6 · 0 0

Republican party is more responsible. There are a number of reasons I say that: example 1)There is a general consensus that if the US scales back, the instability will also decline. The reason we don't is because the this "cut and run" talk.

example 2) The qualifications for rebuilding experts being sent to Iraq to represent the US government are being selected by how strong of a tie or in some cases being used a political favors to children of politicians. Because of this a great many of the people who are being sent to Iraq have no experience in the field that they are being sent for.

2007-02-25 08:25:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

It not a mess to try to stop terrism but it is a mistake to try to reform the iraqi government because apart from the God of bible a nation cant stand and i will agree America is on decline in White House but we cant change Iraq!Its the media that tells you its Bush's fault but remember congress gave him promission.Its nones fault enless you say congress.
And its a LIE that bush lied to congress the believe weapons of mass distruction.

2007-02-25 08:26:26 · answer #8 · answered by rockinweazel 4 · 2 1

Bush

2007-02-25 08:21:08 · answer #9 · answered by Dr Universe 7 · 2 2

Neither. The cause is old and long. There is not one event that brought that about or one person to blame for it. Besides, those that are responsible are laying low, they aren't dumb enough to have their faces in the news.

2007-02-25 08:26:56 · answer #10 · answered by FaerieWhings 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers