Why do people blame Bush exclusively?

You are 100% ccorrect. the liberal media has been biased against bush fro the very first day he decided to run for office. There is no way that they would ever give him cred for all the good he did! I wonder what would have happened had Obama, or Al Gore, or some of the other liberal democrats had been in the white house on 9-11. When the hostages were taken during the Jimmy Carter years he screwed everything so bad that he had the whole world laughing at us. Obama will have us bowing to Mecca!

When Harry Truman became President he put up a sign in the Oval Office that read "The Buck Stops Here". Panels of experts give advice only, the President alone makes the decision, and he alone is responsible for the consequences. Any man who is not ready and willing to do that has no business in a position of command, let alone that of Commander in Chief.

Because Bush is the President of the United States - most people aren't into politics enough to recognize the series of steps and people involved. Additionally, when Bush gives a speech on the economy or something he sounds like a blithering idiot - which also leads people to believe he's making idiotic decisions (which he is by the way)

Charles, she didn't say he wasn't responsible for anything. She said why is he blamed exclusively. Why don't you put a little thought into your answers?

Okay, maybe not everyone was happy, but a vast majority. Why are you people so ignorant that you have to nitpick at tiny details instead of answering the freakin question?

To win back the white house. They've been so ridiculous that I now have absolutely no respect for the media or the drones that hang on their every word. We won't go into my contempt for this congress.

because his personal agenda is the reason the country has been falling for 8 years. failed foreign policies, his fault. invasion in iraq costin 1.8T debt, his fault. katrina victims not recieving immediate help, his fault, borrowing money from china, his fault, hated around the world, losing much respect, his fault, etc...

They are young, inexperienced, and do not truly comprehend how their government works. The bleeding heart liberal media tells them Bush is to blame, so it must be true.

You're right, Bushy isn't responsible for ANYTHING.

"At the time, everyone was happy we went to war. "

Big Fat Total Lie.

Honey, it is NOT a "group of experts that make the decisions."

George W. Bush FIRED everybody within a mile of him who EVER spoke out in any kind of critical manner, or who even SUGGESTED he may be just a teeny bit wrong about something. BUSH and CHENEY are the ones who decided, way before 9/11, that America was going to invade Iraq.

Then, they systematically set out to hunt and peck and search for any tidbit of intel which would "justify" that decision. The CIA TOLD them Saddam "was not a threat."

Do you know anything about "the sixteen words in the State of the Union Address" when bush went on national television, addressed the country, and knowingly LIED about the yellow cake?

No, I didn't think you did.

WE BLAME BUSH BECAUSE BUSH IS TO BLAME.

Read a newspaper.

*****************************************

There's no other way to say it other than to say, "You are wrong. Or mistaken. Or misinformed. Or forgetful."

Let me repeat it:

Bush and Cheney had decided BEFORE 9/11 that they were going to invade Iraq. During the Secret Energy Taskforce meetings between Cheney and Big Oil (in March of 2001) there were maps of Iraqi oil fields spread out all over the conference table.

They matched intelligence to suit their agenda.

How much plainer can I be?

And it was NOT 'one guy' who objected. And I noticed you skimmed over the part where bush kicked everybody's as$ out the door who TRIED TO GET HIM TO BE REASONABLE?

What the hell do you think Colin Powell was all about?

Know what's INCONCEIVABLE TO ME?

That people like YOU are trying to apologize for that murderous fascist sociopath.

And liberals are the ones you guys are trying to paint as "anti-American?"

HAR!

*****************************

You were NOT 're-elected" my dear. Diebold screwed the votes - everybody knows it. I certainly know it - since MY vote was not counted on the machine I voted on. The same polling station I've been going to for six years.

*****************************************************

Hard Evidence Of Bush's Crime Of Iraq

(The True But Sickening Story Of Why We Are Really There)

This is just a very brief summary of the worst crime in American history. Full details of the hard, eye-witnessed, documented, and fully referenced evidence and proof are presented 7 pages below (first posted here in June, 2006).

Both the unprovoked Iraq war and its phony WMD cover-up lies were planned years before 9/11 by Bush. Here is the compelling evidence of that tragic fact:

In 1996 three American neocons prepared a mid-east conquest plan for Israel called Clean Break. This plan by its lead author, Richard Perle, called for an unprovoked attack against Iraq and Syria (later revised to just Iraq). Any unprovoked attack on another country is by International Treaty a war crime. Israel did not pursue this plan, but Bush did a few years later. The other two authors were Douglas Feith and David Wurmser.

That Clean Break plan had four major elements: 1) Adopt a foreign policy of preemption, 2) Get the US out of the Israeli peace negotiations, 3) Initiate an unprovoked attack against Iraq to remove Hussein, and 4) Have the President deliberately lie to the public that there was a false threat of a WMD attack from Iraq to cover up that lack of provocation (examples of these lies for press release were included with Perle's report). (A Pretext for War, Bamford, pgs. 258-265).

In 1999 candidate Bush hired the neocons Richard Perle as his mid-east foreign policy advisor and Condi Rice and Paul Wolfowitz (the architect of the Iraq war) as his foreign policy advisors. Together they revised the original Clean Break plan to now focus an unprovoked attack on Bush's preferred target; Iraq.

Bush's revised Clean Break plan contained the same preplanned criminal cover-up: the phony WMD attack threat from Iraq. Under US law telling deliberate lies to create a false threat that would (and did) cause harm to others would, by legal definition, be felony criminal fraud.

This Bush revised plan carefully followed the neocon ideology as outlined in Google, under neo-conservative ideology. You can also find Clean Break in Google, as well as Project for the New American Century; the neocon political master plan, including the names of all the top neocons in the country advocating an unprovoked attack on Iraq.

In January of 2001, in his very first National Security meeting (only 10 days after he took office, and 7 months before 9/11), president Bush formally adopted the first two Clean Break provisions as national policy and made it clear that he wanted to attack Iraq on an unprovoked basis, as witnessed by Colin Powell and Paul O'Neil. Days later he officially implemented both provisions. A few weeks later he hired all three of Clean Break's authors and Wolfowitz into the top four war policy positions in the government: along with Cheney and Rice, the neocons were now in charge.

In 2002 Bush formed several different groups of necons to develop pro-war propaganda, including the White House Iraq Group (WHIG). This group included all the top propagandists in the GOP, plus Rice, Libby, and Hadley, and met weekly out of Cheney's office with Karl Rove as its Chair. Collectively they all perpetrated felony criminal fraud upon the American people. (A Pretext for War, Bamford, pgs. 160-74, 283-331, 317-331, 367-377, Hubris, Isikoff & Corn, pgs. 27-65, 208-22, Greatest Story Ever Sold, Rich, pgs. 184-198, 217, and Hoodwinked, Prados, pgs. 185-95).

As per the Clean Break plan they developed and packaged all the intentionally false and fraudulent stories we heard about, including the deliberate lie that Iraq was connected to 9/11, and the numerous detailed imminent threats they falsely claimed Iraq posed for America, using its nonexistent WMD, as plotted three years before in Bush's revised Clean Break plan. Their fraudulent lies followed a tragic pattern of practice by Bush.

CIA Director Tenet was a career bureaucrat and had an intense desire to please Bush, and Bush had a mental obsession to attack Iraq and to keep any facts contrary to his argument for going to war from becoming public. Consequently Tenet became intimidated and co-opted by Bush regarding the intelligence that Tenet would report out of the CIA. Bush's heavy handed influence on Intelligence services to report only pro-war stories led to Tenet's deliberate cover-up of the best intelligence feat of the war effort.

The CIA's Charlie Allen had sent 30 American relatives of Iraqi WMD scientists to Iraq to find out from them the current status of their WMD programs. Unanimously, they all reported back in September, 2002 (months before the attack) that all of these WMD programs had ended by 1991 and all WMD had been destroyed. Allen's report went to Tenet, but Tenet ended Allen's project, ignored the facts of his report, and reported these facts only to Bush, if anyone.

All of Allen's findings were fully confirmed: in 1995 by the CIA's intelligence debriefing of Hussein's son-in-law, Kamal, in exile in Jordan (well known but completely disregarded by Bush), and after the war by the facts on the ground (State of War, Risen, pgs. 23-37, 84-107), as reported in September, 2004 by the Iraq Survey Group (CIA & DIA) (see Google) .

Three weeks after Tenet read the solid well corroborated Allen report of zero WMD in Iraq (no production and no inventories = no threat from Iraq), Bush (at Rove's suggestion) launched an urgent propaganda effort to convince an unbelieving Congress that Iraq was a major imminent security threat. He sent the co-opted Tenet to appear in a secret session before the Senate intelligence committee to convince them.

Tenet dutifully told them the Bush induced lie that the CIA's most recent intelligence concluded that Saddam was rebuilding his nuclear program, estimated there were 550 sites where WMD were currently stored, and its assessment was that Iraq had developed UAVs that could deliver both biological and chemical agents, perhaps to the U.S. mainland.

He and Cheney had told much the same phony baloney story to the four congressional leaders earlier that same day, using photos to make their case; with the unlearned Cheney providing his own evil interpretation of the raw and blurry photos showing what he said were Iraqi nuclear weapons sites. Tenet did not correct him. Looking at them, Sen. Daschle (a former photo analyst in the Air Force) said the fuzzy photo images could have been anything. (Hubris, Isikoff & Corn, pgs. 21-32).

In March, 2003, after the fraudulent congressional briefings and their subsequent unwitting approval, Bush ordered the attack on Iraq knowing full well that he had committed felony criminal fraud to start this phony war that he knew would kill at least thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and American soldiers. Bush would try to argue their deaths were just collateral damage, to be expected in any war.

But that is not the case when preplanned deliberate criminal fraud lies were the only basis for approving and starting this preplanned unprovoked war to begin with. Bush felt these lies were necessary because the truth would have prevented his war. So he created a fictitious threat that he ensured most people would actually believe; which they did.

But, without a real threat the war remained totally unprovoked, and a war crime in the eyes of the world. Then the massive number of deaths caused by that war become premeditated murder .

You are a bushbot. Unreachable. I will pray for your soul.