Excuse me, but if mr. bush wanted the Presidency so badly, he gets the full package. If things were sooo bad, he should have saved his good(?) name and let VP Gore take the bull by the horns. In other words, it’s such a smear campaign to blame Clinton.
Under whose watch did Enron occur? And, what punishment and restitution did the Republicans demand for the American people? Exactly. What we have here is another Teflon President who, like his dear ole dad, fails to make a move to do ANYTHING to improve the job market - using the stock market as a smoke screen. If you want American jobs back, deflate the inflated bottom lines of all these companies. Or, maintain the bottom line by slices the salaries of the (esp.) each and every CEOs and save a few million
jobs!
What do you care about, anyhow? Clinton’s affairs, or Bush’s indifference to the American people? Which one is taking food out of your mouth? A smart America wouldn’t give a hoot about Monica’s little power play. A smart America would have seen past that to the real issues that make America work!
Please wake me up when bush starts working for a living!
I don’t think that the flow of events neatly dovetails with Presidential terms in office so that you can say, “LBJ caused this, 'The Gipper” caused this, etc."
The fact is, though, that the current office holder gets the blame, or credit, for the things that happen on his or her watch.
I once heard and Admiral say to a Captain who started to speak about the difficulties he had inherited, “Don’t blame your predecessor. It’s your job now - fix it!”
Ah, the fingerpointing of the two political parties. If something good happens the party in power takes credit as well as the party that was formerly there. If something bad happens the party in power blames whoever was there before and the party that was there before blames the current party.
Take credit for the victories and point the finger for the defeats.
That seems to be both parties motto.
Ah, the fingerpointing of the two political parties. If something good happens the party in power takes credit as well as the party that was formerly there. If something bad happens the party in power blames whoever was there before and the party that was there before blames the current party.
Take credit for the victories and point the finger for the defeats.
That seems to be both parties motto.
If they both have someone else to blame, no one has to be held accountable.
People, people, people…for the last time…
To blame the Enron Scandal on George Bush is just ridiculous fantasy land. Enron became what it was under Bill Clinton. Enron made Billion Dollar deals under Bill Clinton after donations, meetings and official trade missions with the Clinton Administration. A governor of Texas doesn’t make Billion Dollar Enron deals possible with India, or give Enron access to 11 Official US Trade Missions fron Austin, Texas. To Blame President Bush for the Enron Scandal is like blaming the new President in Afghanistan for that Country’s current economic problems.
(From here.)
If I like President Yazvonk, then yes, all the economic problems occuring while Yazvonk is in office are “inherited from” the most recent predecessor not of Yazvonk’s own political party. If I dislike President Yazvonk, then it’s all his fault and his party’s fault.
Repeat ludicrously, making up numbers and statistics as needed.
The first thing any new government does is get an “independent” auditor to find out “the real numbers”. Surprisingly, the new party always inherits a mess from the old one. I am shocked. Shocked!