they blame him for everything "NOT" being done in the senate/congress since they have been in power for 9 months..... why is it! is it b/c it's easy? or is it that they have no backbone?
2007-10-18
13:09:27
·
14 answers
·
asked by
angie c
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Jim W,
What I see is all these "dem's" stating that they can't get anything done b/c Bush vetoed it... Well, guess what!!!!!!! IF they really wanted to END this war.....It's CALLED DEFUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! very simple....... Oh that's right! The dem's don't or won't do it because if they did and the area became chaos the dem's would get blamed......... What's amazing is that the dem's are soooo worried about what the "radical" left wants.... that they put them first before our nation's security...... So don't call me a person who has no backbone...MY FATHER was in veitman and actually go spit on by liberals like you.... you'r pathetic!
2007-10-18
13:20:40 ·
update #1
I give him credit for the simple fact that he doesn't change his mind because people may not like it..... I like the fact that he has morals and integrity....unlike the dem's their moral standards sway like the wind...If it's good for them at the moment they will go for it but if it isn't they change their minds.... Prime example Hillary Clinton...Can she make up her mind?
2007-10-18
13:23:06 ·
update #2
again, why are they blaming bush?
white star!!!!!! this is for you.. we wouldn't be in this mess if it wasn't for Clinton...He downsized the military and he had 10 chances...LET ME REPEAT!!!! 10 chances to get him but didn't do it!!!! So why did Sandy "burgler" take info out " in his pants???? was it because Clinton didn't want to look bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and you dem's want hillary in office...what a joke!
by the way, why is it that the DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS/SENATE have a lower rating than BUSH?????
2007-10-18
14:36:54 ·
update #3
The dems are interested in undermining Bush any way they can. Just look at Jena Six. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and a number of others are blaming THAT on the Bush administration too.
It's simply a way for people to avoid taking responsibility for their own actions.
Edit: Zardoz,
So we want a congress that constantly takes the time to pass meaningless "nonbinding" resolutions, attacks private citizens, offers amnesty to illegal alien CRIMINALS, and absolutely REEKS of socialism? Can I have some of what you're smoking dude?
Sheesh... By the way, I have news for you... This is NOT a democracy. It's a Republic; a representative government. Go back to civics class.
In the case of natural disasters, we all need someone to blame. The president is just an easy target, especially with his approval so low (even though it's STILL double that of congress.)
2007-10-18 13:12:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Firestorm 6
·
6⤊
6⤋
Yeah......hard to get things accomplished when ONE person holds the final VETO on an issue that was passed by more than half the senate. Guess having the majority doesn't work if you still have a puppet pulling strings for a political agenda........oooooooo burn. Okay, I hate mud slingin. Anyways, for example the child health care issue. Not wanting to pass the bill because it may include some middle class families. Dear God Noooooo! I mean really, what would Jesus do? Republicans think he would want the middle class to suffer the burden of carrying expensive insurance, high deductables, or worse a 25,000 dollar hospital bill. Hey, the rich get paid either way. It sucks when it would be better to be poor and live in government housing rather than scrape by trying to keep out of bankruptcy. You have no rights as a worker unless you have friends/family in the business, monthly payments are made at the end of the ten day grace period, and any unnexpected expenditure of 100 dollars or more could set you back two months. Not to mention as gas prices rise, your food supply falls. Thats just the way it seems. Universal healthcare may seem like communism to some, but it sounds like an idea straight from Jesus himself. If God suddenly spoke to everyone and told them it was right, would you listen or choose to ignore? Sometimes I wonder if you would choose money over your soul? And to all others...... pay it forward.
2007-10-18 13:36:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dirty Mutt 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
angie, you are full of spite and hatred. the democrats do not immediately cease the funding for the war for 2 reasons:
1) they do not have the congressional support. the large minority (48%) republican congress would never support an immediate end to funds...hell they won't even support a timetable!
2) everyone cares about the troops. the democrats know that if they only appoved funds for the withdrawal of troops, Bush would not bring the troops home and they would be stranded without support. the cons would spin this to appear that that the democrats had in fact abandoned the troops, when in fact Bush, the commander in chief, would have failed to spend the money in the way in which congress had authorized. Bush is blackmailing congress and the country as a whole.
2007-10-18 13:38:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Free Radical 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, I used to think because it's easy and because they have no backbone, but I heard a theory today that makes a lot of sense. They're mad because he's still winning. He blocks their nonsense at every turn and forces them to make the logical changes in bill, like SCHIP that he's told them he's wanted all along. He's got even Democrats telling Pelosi that the Armenian genocide bill is hurting us and putting our troops in Iraq at greater risk. They can't get anything done unless they do it his way.
First, they DO want to undermine Bush at every turn but they haven't been one bit successful. If anyone is undermining anybody, Bush is undermining them!
Second, if they American people really wanted the legislation that Bush vetoes, why is congress unable to override his vetoes? Because many in congress realize that the voters will not be happy with this nonsense legislation.
2007-10-18 13:23:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
So Democrats have been in power for 9 months and we should blame them for everything. Take a guess what happend in Bush's first 9 months in office. I will give you a little hint. It involves Planes and Buildings. Yet for some reason we are not supposed to blame him.
2007-10-18 13:41:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by White Star 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
there is not enough majority in the senate to get things done. They would need 61 seats to be able to override a veto, or pass a bill. But don't worry, they'll get there 65 this election year.
2007-10-18 13:22:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
They're all in it together, they have dinner, go to shows they see the same lobbyist, the only fools are the voters who voted for them, the way I see it.
Republicans and Democrats are our public enemy number one. They're all a bunch of Nazi communist freaks
2007-10-18 13:20:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by man of ape 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well enlighten me then angie. What exactly has Bush done that I'm not giving him credit for....? I'll await your answer.
Oh, so you give the idiot credit for "stickin' to his guns"....
Yeah...I was talking about A POLICY ISSUE that he deserves credit for...not the fact that he sticks with his moronic choices.
2007-10-18 13:18:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
4⤋
It's because the Congress keeps passing legislation the American people want, but Bush vetoes it. He really doesn't care what the people want. He's like a little King. Bush apparently doesn't like democracy.
2007-10-18 13:13:01
·
answer #9
·
answered by Zardoz 7
·
7⤊
6⤋
its total liberal pap and it makes excuses for an inept leadership with the liberals.
2007-10-18 13:50:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by koalatcomics 7
·
1⤊
1⤋