YES!!! So why do so many on the left only blame Bush?? They accept no accountability!
2007-03-16 07:47:15 · 15 answers · asked by panthrchic 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
LOL- "Leogirl" :)
2007-03-16 08:22:16 · update #1
yes, here is the list of Yeas
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Campbell (R-CO)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carnahan (D-MO)
Carper (D-DE)
Cleland (D-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Edwards (D-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Frist (R-TN)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Miller (D-GA)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Nickles (R-OK)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Santorum (R-PA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-NH)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)
2007-03-16 08:06:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
LOL. What you at the instantaneous are not information is that, unlike Iraq (communicate about an unlawful conflict), the United international locations has condoned this action, and it really is basically a coalition of UN forces that are engaged in this conflict. The President has suggested the U. S. will take a again seat, likely once the following day, even as France, England or possibly NATO will be operating this attempt. also, verify the conflict Powers Act, surpassed even as Bush replaced into President so as that he ought to do what he needed in Iraq with out UN involvement or approval. Wow, you proper wingnuts have fairly variety ideas, blended with a really detrimental draw close of the information. what's it, some type of mind damage?
2016-11-26 00:14:19 · answer #2 · answered by taguchi 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
*Looks at Millie C's answer and chuckles*
Funny how the Intel from before the election, and the countless comments made by the Democrats against the rogue state of Iraq, doesn't seem to register as a blip, anymore. I remember Senator Kerry telling Larry King that Saddam needed to be shot, or some such in '99. What happened? Did all of that information suddenly go away? Just because Bush did something, where Clinton quivered in his patent leathers, instead of actually doing more than the occaisional airstrike. Funny we didn't hear about the civilian casualties,back then... I guess, after I got out of the military, they started installing switches, to inform the troops they could just shoot whomever, huh? Yeah. Nice selective memory, doll!
2007-03-16 07:57:20 · answer #3 · answered by sjsosullivan 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Wow.
You are really beating a dead horse on that one.
Congress (both dem and con) voted to authorize use of force.
They never 'voted for a war', and war was never declared. All of the war powers this administration keeps touting don't exist unless we are actually at war.
As it is, we've been running in circles in Iraq for longer than we spent in WWII.
I don't only blame bush - there are a lot of people in this administration (and some on the left) that I blame for this.
But it's his show. And he's going to pay the price for getting to be a 'war preznit'.
2007-03-16 07:52:59 · answer #4 · answered by joemammysbigguns 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The truth is most of all of them did, Both the dems and the reps Bush is being blamed because He ask for it, and they replied.
2007-03-16 07:52:35 · answer #5 · answered by Sugar 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because--please read this carefully so it sinks in:
TheDemocrats (and many Republicans) who voted for the war did so on the basis of the false information BUSH gave them.
IF Bush had told the truth, they would not have voted for the war. So it is Bush's fault.
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
2007-03-16 07:59:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 5⤋
you bet ye, they keep a low profile though, except for hillary of course.
2007-03-16 10:18:32 · answer #7 · answered by ati-atihan 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some of those democrats, just assumed that No President would fabricate evidence to further his own agenda
They were wrong
If you knew for a Fact that He purposefully LIED would you then admit that he should be impeached
Probably not
NO GOOD COMES FROM EVIL
2007-03-16 07:52:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Hillary has been catching a lot of flak for flip-flopping.
2007-03-16 07:49:52 · answer #9 · answered by EB 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The answer is yes.
And they were presented with the same faulty intel that the public was..........fabricated intel...iaw LIES
They made the MISTAKE of trusting the word of DUBYA...
and his REPUBLICAN NEOCON IMPERIALIST WARMONGERING WAR PROFITEERING sidekicks
BIG BIG mistake.
The word of DUBYA or his old man or his NAZI Grandfather ain't worth a penny.
http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/bush_nazis.html
2007-03-16 07:53:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Most of them. They love to rewrite history.
2007-03-16 08:11:06 · answer #11 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋