Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
The board who bought your bullsh!t owns 100% of the blame. Not the faker.
Lincoln Chafee was the only Republican in the Senate to vote against authorization of the use of force in Iraq. His reward for being right was to get himself run out of the Republican party and elected office.
Republicans fell in line like always - and with a press that was a full out cheerleader for the war - most Democrats were too fearful of hurting themselves politically to oppose.
|
and therein lies the rub. these folks are up their to do the right thing for us, not what will get them re-elected. the dems who voted, the reps who voted,
all share equal blame. i don't care why they voted for it, they voted for it-whether falling in line, or afraid of losing votes-they voted for it.
bush may have asked for the vote, congress gave it to him. checks and balances didn't work, which is the reason for both of them to exist, to keep the other in line.
so, people blame a republican-led congress for allowing a republican president free rein. do we REALLY want a democratic congress and president?? do the checks/balances work better when it's not all one party? i've seen some that think it does, and others who don't. thoughts?