2007-10-23 17:34:45 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Nobody involved in the fires is blaming Bush -- they're too busy trying to fight the fires, or take care of the hundreds of thousands of people who have been forced to flee their homes -- or they're part of the hundreds of thousands of people who are wondering if they'll have homes to go back to.
People may eventually blame Bush for not providing enough aid -- such political games are common. But the fires themselves are not political -- they are tragedy.
And anyone trying to score political points by turning this tragedy into a political opportunity should be ashamed of themselves.
And that includes the people blaming Bush for not supporting California's firefighting efforts years ago -- and it includes the people blaming Democrats for not allowing controlled burns (burns of forests hundreds of miles north of where the fires are now).
2007-10-23 18:04:11 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
OMG ... this is insane ... no one has ever blamed Bush for anything ... other than lying to the American public about Weapons of Mass Destruction, plunging the country into a war that we shouldn't be in and bilking the American Tax payer by allowing multi-billion dollar government contracts to be awarded to his friends {without a bidding process}
Other than that he is a saint .. ugh.
2007-10-24 10:05:48 · answer #2 · answered by Big Daddy 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I saw someone who looked like Bush with a set of matches go into the woods before the fires were started.
2007-10-24 00:51:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
What hasn't he been blamed for!! Some say he is to blame fro Femas slow response to Katrina when in reality he called the Governor of that state and asked (as is the law) her permission to bring in help. The governors first response was no not yet. The red cross was lined up and waiting to come in to help just across a bridge yet were denied permission to go in for hours. And of course Bush gets blamed for the poor leadership of that state.
2007-10-24 01:01:36 · answer #4 · answered by crusinthru 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Too late; already being blamed on Bush, Cheney and the Halliburton Weather Machine.
2007-10-24 01:34:45 · answer #5 · answered by tercelclub 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Oh come on, we have been trying to fight the deification of Bush since he came into office! Like we're about to start now by claiming that he has power over all of nature.
Next!
2007-10-24 00:47:34 · answer #6 · answered by peacedevi 5 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Ha ha ... I was wondering the exact same thing.
I live very near the fires north of LA, and we have a raging liberal in our local paper who blames Bush for everything. I was thinking of writing to the paper and asking when he'll blame all this on Bush.
I'm sure somebody will come up with something!
2007-10-24 01:01:09 · answer #7 · answered by USAisNumber1 3 · 2⤊ 4⤋
He wont get blamed for the fire itself. He'll get blamed if the help like fema and the red cross manage it wrong.
2007-10-24 00:45:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
I've seen several questions today blaming Liberals and Democrats...now you turn it so that it blames Liberals for blaming Bush...nice try...if you can't make the "the Liberals did it" stick....go for the "and now they're blaming the Conservatives" stick.......pretty lame
2007-10-24 00:42:03 · answer #9 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Bush has already been blamed by the liberals. I guess he got bored with creating hurricanes, and collapsing bridges, so now he is starting fires.
2007-10-24 01:03:57 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋