Printable View
Well no, I would never assert that. I believe he's in office precisely because he's one of them (as was his dad) and so no string pulling was required. What I meant was even if it WAS some other president without the same family ties, I'm not sure how much real resistance they could've offered.
JFK...my hero
we have the same birthdate ;)
I am sure Bobby and him were targeted because they wouldn't cow down to the powers that be...
MLF
What world would this take place in?, ever since Cromwell, everyone knows who signs the cheques.Quote:
power holders: George we need to go to war
Bush: no
power holders: George we need to go to war
Bush: I won't give you my support
power holders: George we need to go to war
Bush: no
power holders: George we will replace you
Bush: so what
[future scenario]China calls in loans because US won't allow it to annex Taiwan, US president stood firm, country goes to hell in a hand basket (made in Tiawan of course), mass unemployment, riots in Beverly Hills[/future scenario]
As much as I would also like to place the blame squarely on Bush's shoulders, I can't, cause it was a team effort, all of the Republicans were involved, now should some of them have abstained from toeing the party line, probably, would they, most likely not.
I think it was a combination of errors on everyone's part, Democrats and Republicans. I agree that in today's society no one is willing to step up and take the blame anymore, but can you blame people, the very people they look up to, pass the buck all the time, so everyone is as much to blame because we allowed this to happen.:eek:
JPnyc...I agree...Junior wanted to go...but that's not my point ;)
The US cannot go to war without the Presidents seal of consent ;) Congress cannot start a war to my knowledge without the Presidential approval...neither can the banks...or the Rhodes Society...
amazing what kind of ' resistance ' can be put forth simply by saying ...no. ;)
Dalek...I was illustrating the power of convictions :p
But they might end up like JFK.
We are all going to end up like JFK...dead that is...the moment we are born we are condemned to die...we all live under a death sentence...
it's not when you die that matters...it's how...standing up or on your knees ;)
I think Abe may have said no, just as he was being shot, probably no to having sugar with his tea...:D
If world leaders had of had the gumption of their convictions, we may have not had two world wars, or the Inquisition, or genocide, or hunger, or Chretien, or Quebec, or...you get my drift...woulda, coulda, shoulda.
I think that when stuff happens, it's like an avalanche effect, once it starts going it's kinda hard to avoid/stop.Most Government's don't realise that the papers they are signing (like alliances) can someday pop up and smack them in the face....."obligations", the Bush's had obligations (they are called Sheiks).
In this case...I believe convictions wasn't really an issue...Junior was more than willing to go with the flow...
the only point I was trying to illustrate here in opposition to ShaqDevil's remarks was that we still have to accept responsibility for those decisions regardless of how we arrive at them. ;)
We can blame Daddy for his decisions
We can blame Bubba for his decisions
We can blame Junior for his decisions
We can blame Daffy Duck for his decisions
and even though one may affect the other...you cannot blame Bubba for Junior's decisions...Junior is responsible for Junior's decisions. ;)
When we are deciding who to vote for we look at a person's voting record to see how they stand on the issues...how they voted...not, why they voted that way...were they threatened? were they bribed? were they stoned that day? etc...
we look at the record and see where they stood...we evaluate them on the decisions they made...regardless of what led them there.
We hold them responsible for those decisions...not the person who used to occupy that chair. ;)
And the same applies to the Presidency...we evaluate a President based upon the decisions he makes...upon how he votes...not upon what led up to that decision...but solely upon his record.
Do you blame Ross Perot for withdrawing from the race back when? He claimed his family was threatened, and I believe it completely.
That is a different topic altogether ;) There is a difference between: eg. if you don't do this I will do something to you...and...if you don't do this I will do something to your family ;)
Just like there's a difference between dieing for a cause...and...allowing others to die for a cause ;)
The third party is not placed into a position to allow consent.