Why do Democrats get a free pass

[Kylie]

Bush is responsible for his part, but he inherited problems left to him by Clinton and the Presidents that came before him. Bush is the latest part of the problem, he is not the sole contributor to it. There were problems before him, they'll be problems after him. It's no fair to blame either side solely for the state of our country.

[Andre]

After roughly 7 years in power, that excuse gets lamer and lamer.

[DevotedToAMC]

Clinton didn't really hand him any problems when Bush got into office. He had a surplus at his hand and a comprehensive strategy to get Osama Bin Laden...Clinton almost had him but pursued him vigorously and the same cannot be said of Reagan and daddy Bush.

[Kylie]

I know, a Democrat will bring home the troops, and the world will be hearts and flowers and we'll all join hands and sing kumbaya. People are fooling themselves if they think America was wonderful, happy, and well off before Bush took ofice, and they're fooling themselves if they think a new President is going to solve everything. In two years, we'll be wondering what the hell we got ourselves into all over again, Republican or Democrat, and people will be wondering what kind of idiot we elected to office. It's not the only the office that needs an overhaul it's the entire system, and until the system has the necessary changes made to it, we won't see any real progress.

And for the record I am NOT a Republican and I'm not a Democrat either. I think the party system in this country is a HUGE chunk of what's wrong with it, but that's for another topic

[Roman]

People will be wondering what kind of idiot we elected.

What do you think they're saying right now?

[Kylie]

LOL, yeah, I don't live under a rock. Hell, I've studied this [!@#$%^&*] for the last five years. I'm just saying it's not going to go away with a change in office. And it's not all just going to get magicially better because we get a new President, which people seem to think it will just because he's gone.

[DevotedToAMC]

I can tell you that America right before President Butthead got into The White House to start his killing spree was in great shape and the kind that symbolized what it really is about. People were working, most people had health coverage, civil rights was a key issue and upheld, the world was allied with us...I flew to Europe in Summer of 1999 not having one worry over if a terrorist would hijack the plane and drive it into two towers. Now I'm afraid to just fly for pretty much down to Southern California but I will still do it....the point is many people are cautious about flying and with good reason. Terrorism has increased since 9/11 and Iraq; that is a known fact. Sure we had some problems right before Preisdent Butthead got elected but they were miniscule compared to the ones that monkey face created all on his lonesome.

I hear rumors that daddy Bush has pretty much disowned his son now for Iraq....it would not surprise me! At least daddy and Jeb have a brain. I also have much respect for daddy for having to deal with lunatic Reagan for eight years and with that uptight psychotic bitch of a wife of his for many years. Maybe after monkey face gets out of office, he takes his beloved mother, his Stepford phoney wife, and his white trash twin daugters who give real twins like my brother and me a real bad name (heck if one of the Bush brats were to run for president, this twin would not vote for either one! And I don't think my twin brother would vote for them either) and they go crawl under a rock never to be heard from again. Better yet, let him go to Iraq and fight his own war and take Cheney, Rice, Rove, and Gates with him

Another perfect solution for Bush would be to have him walk in downtown San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angeles, Oakland, Newark, or New York City without no security. He would not last five seconds (and I think I am being generous there).

[Roman]

Whose saying that? I haven'ts een anyone say that. All I think folks want right now is a change of direction, the same type we got after Reagan and the same kind we got after Bush 1.

And........I've been studying this for the last 30 years, and have seen WAY more crap in higher office and in the Congress than I care to remember. Nobody's holding hands and singing, as you put it.

I just see people who are sick of fingerpointing on bith sides, and want something that would be unique in this day and age....

A government of the people, by the people and for the people.

[DevotedToAMC]

That would be nice. I would like to have seen either one of my U.S. Senators, Barbara Boxer or Dianne Feinstein, to be president but if not them I will take Hillary and she is my first pick to be the nominee next year and I just endorsed her for $10

[Kylie]

Um, I thought i figure pointed at both sides? Holy crap. I'm not either side of this stuff. I don't think either side is right and I don't think either side is wrong. I just think that most people are putting all their eggs in the basket of our new president, which I think is a mistake.

[Tishy]

Before the Bush White House, the Clinton had his share of terriorist attacks as well. The first bombings in the WTC in 1993 for example. There was the USS Cole bombing in 2000. I would not call them miniscule. We missed getting Osama by two days in the Clinton era. Bush inherited this problem. It didn't just start when he became President.

Clinton did a lot of things domestically that were great for us, but health care was not one of them. Way too many Americans are without health care. It was the same in the Clinton era, Sr Bush's era, etc. It was not something that started in Dubya's era.

There have always been airplanes that have been hijacked, it's just now after 9/11, we are more aware of it. I vividly remember Pan Am flight 103 in Scotland and the bombing on that flight in 1988.

Bush didn't start this mess we are in, and neither did Clinton. Can I pinpoint when it started, no. But trashing Bush like this isn't going to solve any problems. Republicans and Democrats need to ban together to bring our troops home, bottom line. Let's stop placing blame and just bring our men and women home to their families.

[Roman]

That's fine. Nobody says that it isn't. Others want to see a new president, and feel strongly about seeing bonafide change. They don't think it's a mistake. That's what they want to see.

[DevotedToAMC]

At least Clinton responded to the attacks that happened in 1993....Dubya waited about TWO MONTHS before he finally invaded Afghanistan to look for OBL but truth be told he couldn't give a [!@#$%^&*] less about finding him. Those two events you brought up...we didn't lose anywhere near the amount of deaths that have happened at Dubya's hands (9/11 and the Iraq War). There are going to be attacks under a president but it is the response to them that is important. Bush was given the August 6th PDB warning of attacks on America and yet he did not meet with the FBI or the Head of Counterterrorism and plenty of theorists are now saying he had a hand in 9/11 and so far their evidence is quite convincing. Clinton was the president who pursued OBL vigorously while Reagan was too busy playing his Star Wars games and more than likely smoking the crack pipe, Bush wanted to protect his oil interests when Hussein invaded Kuwait, Clinton comes along and puts together a comprehensive strategy to get OBL (and I hate it when people bring up 1998 and Sudan. He did not have enough evidence to convict OBL and send him to prison....if he had enough, of course he would have taken him. But he is a lawyer and knows when there is little to convict).

Bush deserves to be trashed as far as I am concerned. Not one thing he has done as president has been a success and it takes a terrorist attack for him to FINALLY start acting like a president. The mess may not have been his fault or Clinton but as president he should make an effort to wieve through it and protect the people and he miserably failed by not responding to the August 6th PDB. In my opinion, he let 9/11 happen so it would justify a war with Iraq since he planned it before he got into office to settle a vendetta. Well how stupid is it to go to war over someone who wanted your father dead TEN YEARS AGO?! Plus he has his connections in big oil and wanted to profiteer off of people's deaths and yes he certainly has done a good job of raking in millions of dollars and building up a deficit that is more than his predecessors' combined. Yep he just goes in like a cowboy and threatens them with harm unless he gets a contract where he makes big money off of oil.

There are very few Republicans in Congress who are pushing for this war to end...it's mainly been the Democrats voting on a bill to withdraw troops and they are seeing very little support from the conservatives. Let's hope that changes.

[Keith]

Too many people don't care enough about change to make politicians care to make changes. And when I say they don't care enough, I'm talking about getting down to the polls. I'm so completely with Kylie, it's not even funny. This country has become so enraptured with political mudslinging, that no one can see clearly anymore. We haven't been a democracy for a long time and Bush has merely prolonged this period of bureaucracy, IMO. Clinton was a good president, but he didn't bring about sweeping change. No president in the future will, either, no matter who they are or what their supposed issues they care about are. Not until the flaws in this country are truly evaluated. And I personally wonder if it's not too late.

I get so sick of people saying that we should be happy we have what we have, compared to other countries. I was promised that American dream. It's in there somewhere, but the same money-based crap that led the forefathers of this country to revolt surround us today. But do we care? Absolutely not. The system is beyond flawed.