when he acts partisan all the time...he appoints a coal mine lobbyist to oversee mines, another pro-business lobbyist to be head of endangered species...the list is huge, but to appoint an exteremist like this guy, when congress had indicated it would not accept him, during a 2 week break and call it a recess is pretty extreme and very partisan...Should the Dem's just quit pretending and take the gloves off with guy?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070405/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_outflanking_congress;_ylt=AsN5kh7.8_ClbHhbAZ29qiayFz4D
2007-04-04 17:42:08 · 10 answers · asked by Ford Prefect 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I hope you can get into the Washington Post without a password. I'll copy it for you if you like.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/03/AR2007040301576.html?referrer=email
2007-04-04 17:44:41 · update #1
To "Kye" it seems this appointment is being sent to the court to see if it's legal...I wish you guys woiuld realize it's about laws and the Constitution, not who wears the biggest cowboy hat...Also speaking of hats...If there are no more cowboys and the cowboy hat is of no practical use...When people dress up like them are they wearing a costume? Would it be the same as a pirate or superman costume?
2007-04-04 18:17:17 · update #2
They are going to have to take the gloves off, and they have already begun doing so. President Bush reminds me of a five year old sometimes. Thwarted all of a sudden with some checks and balances he screams and kicks like a child who has always had his own way and is now confronted by opposition for the first time.
He worked very well in Texas on a bipartisan level, but when he came to Washington he did a 180 on that. He never had to worry much about opposition, he had his Republican Congress to smooth the way for him. But now? A man who gets used to operating like a dictator is going to fight like hell to retain that power. The Democrats are going to have to get in the ring and fight as dirty as him if they wish to put him in his place. Yes, he is the President of the United States. But he needs to be reminded that Congress does have quite a bit of say when it comes to war, per the Constitution he works so hard to get around.
2007-04-04 18:24:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
evaluate this. heavily, take a 2d and picture approximately this: the yankee militia soundly defeated the communists in Viet Nam in each considerable conflict fought - which contains the TET offensive which properly overwhelmed them. For all motive and purpose, the North Viet Namese have been defeated - yet they checked in with the yankee media and, to their utter amazement, they found out that they have been winning. And, real sufficient, we lost the conflict at homestead and withdrew our troops - assuring the Viet Cong a victory and the ensuing bloodbath. Do you truly think of this little bit of historical past is lost on the terrorists? it truly is the reason i've got self belief that public reflects and rallies geared in the direction of our president in a time of conflict is the comparable as helping our enemy. it truly is truly no longer that annoying to connect the dots.
2016-11-26 03:26:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In all my years watching politics, I have never seen a more partisan president than Bush. For him, everything is politics, everything is sticking it to the other side. He would rather act in a purely political manner than do anything that would smack of bipartisanship.
His appointment of the Swift Boat bankroller, a 78 year old right wing nutcase to be ambassador to Belgium is proof of that after the Senate turned the nomination down.
2007-04-04 18:05:47 · answer #3 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
LOL, I like the way you word things.
The dems won't take the gloves off because they are weak chicken s*** quiters.
Every time there is a fight they turn and run like the cowards they are.
The president has every Constitutional right to appoint during a break.
The only reason they don't want this man is because he donated to the Viet Nam Vets Against John Kerry, of which I am a proud member.
2007-04-04 18:05:59 · answer #4 · answered by Kye H 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Bush is the most pathetic whiner of all time, and the biggest loser.
He acts like he's a freakin king, this moron. Who cares what he thinks? As long as WE know his booty is out of office and IN the record books as being the stupidest "decider" of all times, I say LETS PARTY!
Bush is on his way OUT!
2 summers from now, the SHRUB will be gone, we'll undo his stupidity, and he can go back to his drinking, his cocaine snorting, and his bull milking!
SEE YA LATER< BUSHITLER!
2007-04-04 17:49:15 · answer #5 · answered by Truth 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
When his Mommy first told him that she loved him - which she didn't and he knew it - was the day HE became a pathological liar.
He's been seeking revenge since yet mainly has only been able to prove that -yes - mommy DID KNOW BEST.
2007-04-04 17:49:01 · answer #6 · answered by Your Teeth or Mine? 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
That's strange he usually says Democrat party.(singular)
2007-04-04 17:47:28 · answer #7 · answered by ? 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They should have impeached this man back in January. They will regret the decision they made.
2007-04-04 17:46:00 · answer #8 · answered by linus_van_pelt_4968 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Because everythhing they do is based on politics.
2007-04-04 21:46:20 · answer #9 · answered by Hector 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
who care about what he say---the whole world do not take him serious---he is isolated now
2007-04-04 17:47:21 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋