Bush takes responsibility? I wonder what he means by that

[R00k]

Yes.

[busetibi]

okay cut to the chase here, if bush went,(which will not happen) who would make a good president? and why?
dont cop out and say 'anyone other than bush' i want a name and reasons

[Freakaloin]

whats it matter?

[busetibi]

well the reason i ask is, i see you giving bush heaps, he may or may not deserve it, but ive never seen you suggest a person that could do a better job, so, im asking

[Foo]

One of the secondary sad things about the state of US politics right now is that half of why Bush is still popular is because noone is putting forward a viable candidate either.

Part and parcel of the 2-party system over there sadly.

Second, the impeachment of Bush wouldn't be for the sake of getting a better president in his place immediately. The significance of impeaching a president sends a message to all parties about what the public thinks, and would result in wider changes than just switching out the 'front man'.

[R00k]

One of the secondary sad things about the state of US politics right now is that half of why Bush is still popular is because noone is putting forward a viable candidate either.

Part and parcel of the 2-party system over there sadly.

But even that part is irrelevant when you have an uneducated electorate who only has a very narrow, one-sided, tube-fed view of current events. Sadly, a very good candidate could come along, and it would still be fairly easy for a worthless candidate to beat him out - as long as that candidate had plenty of media power.

Second, the impeachment of Bush wouldn't be for the sake of getting a better president in his place immediately. The significance of impeaching a president sends a message to all parties about what the public thinks, and would result in wider changes than just switching out the 'front man'.

This is a very important point, and that's exactly what I hope would follow a Bush impeachment if it were ever to happen.
The only potential flaw in that process, is the fact that the electorate's opinion can only be manifested as political change, through the Congress. And if our Congressmen are unwilling to make it happen - due to corruption or party politics or whatever reason - then things will continue unchanged. And our Congress hasn't shown a ton of initiative lately in speaking the people's word to positions of power. But I'm still hopeful that it could happen if an impeachment occurred.

[R00k]

well the reason i ask is, i see you giving bush heaps, he may or may not deserve it, but ive never seen you suggest a person that could do a better job, so, im asking

Well, the main thing is to support a platform of policy directions - which is why parties are still important in our system, even if the two prevailing ones we have seem to be worthless.

I believe there is still a center ground in this country - a group of basic ideals and beliefs that nearly every one of us could agree on, if we stripped away all the extra governmental responsibilities that politicians have pushed through the last 50 years just to get elected.

And I believe that if a candidate came along who stood up for REALLY narrowing down unneccessary government, and at the same time building up basic programs that we rely on, and that are the basis of a self-created government, then that candidate would get tons of support. But that candidate will be strongly resisted by both the current parties, because they like having a stranglehold on the market of political ideas. As long as reps and dems are the only viable choices, then between the two parties they can decide, at least, what changes should NOT be made, because some things are in the best interest of both parties. And from that point, they can differ on other things and still retain their power.

So any candidate who wants to take our government back to the days of simply existing for all of its people has a real uphill battle to fight, even to get airtime on television to get his voice heard.

That being said, if I could find a candidate who not only ran on such a platform of basic government services, states' rights, and individual liberties, and also came across as a principled person who would devote his time to standing up for those things, then that is the person I would vote for.

And if I had to pick a person, right now I would probably pick Christopher Walken, because he isn't a career politician and his basic statements sound like the beginnings of a good platform. But he doesn't have any party of supporters, or a stated position on tons of issues. Until that happens I can't say I'd vote for anyone.

As far as politicians, the only ones in Washington I would ever even consider voting for would be John Conyers, Cynthia McKinney, or possibly Ron Paul. They are the only ones, to me, who seem to have a single shred of principle which they base their decisions on. I may not agree on all their stances, but I know that they do not think of their decisions in terms of 'political capital' or barter with or sell their votes on policy issues. And they have proven to be people who not only stand up for what they believe in even in the face of great pressure, but also spend a lot of time researching their decsions, and actually take their public service roles very seriously, which is more than I can say for any other professional politician in Washington that I can think of.

[Freakaloin]

wtf?^^^

[Foo]

And if I had to pick a person, right now I would probably pick Christopher Walken, because he isn't a career politician and his basic statements sound like the beginnings of a good platform. But he doesn't have any party of supporters, or a stated position on tons of issues. Until that happens I can't say I'd vote for anyone.

Lol, nice one.

[R00k]

wtf?^^^

What, you can't read that much?

[R00k]

And if I had to pick a person, right now I would probably pick Christopher Walken, because he isn't a career politician and his basic statements sound like the beginnings of a good platform. But he doesn't have any party of supporters, or a stated position on tons of issues. Until that happens I can't say I'd vote for anyone.

Lol, nice one.

Well it's just that, right now, any career politician leaves a sour taste in my mouth, and I can't see myself voting for another one.

[Freakaloin]

it was just stoopid...

[Tormentius]

well the reason i ask is, i see you giving bush heaps, he may or may not deserve it, but ive never seen you suggest a person that could do a better job, so, im asking

A chimpanzee could do a better job.

[Freakaloin]

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/

[R00k]

But I will say one thing. I haven't closely followed politics for most of my life. Only for the last 4 years (give or take) have I really paid attention to important issues and tried to get around all the spin and 'partisan hackery' (thanks Jon S.) that dominates most of politics.

And I have to say, even after all that, I am only just now really starting to shape my own personal political view, and really starting to realize what's important to me, and recognize what is happening to all the information before it gets to my doorstep.

This is the biggest problem with our country right now. Not neccessarily that our media helping politicians' goals and making it harder for us to educate ourselves politically - but that the majority of us are LAZY when it comes to politics. It's taken me this long to feel comfortable in saying that I have a well-educated opinion, and feel like I have what it takes to be a responsible voter -- and I barely know anyone personally, who would be willing to put the time and energy into their political decisions that it takes to educate themselves enough to be responsible.

It isn't a great civic duty to anyone the way it should be - it's more like rooting for the home team. And that is damaging us more than anything else.

If you support any politician or party with great zeal (like a lot of people do), then you should be educating yourself on those parties' and politicians' effects on your and your neighbors' constitutional guarantees with the same amount of zeal. Otherwise you are just a fraud - just a dumb, blonde cheerleader for the big game, and not a player at all.

[Freakaloin]

america is fascist-lite, period...politics and all that is a diversion..just like sports and entertainment...

nazism was defeated in ww2...not fascism...its alive and well...cept now its morons in nice suits with big smiles...

[Tsakali]

this might very well be another one of his clueless decisions (taking the blame) or it could be a well thaught out exit plan for the shake of the republican party. As long as his party disaproves of his actions and can effectively place blame on that single person they can wipe their hands clean of the bitter taste he has left on the people of his country,and the rep's would be in better shape in time for the next elections.
Lets face it the pawn served the game's purposes well, it's time to push forth another piece.

[Freakaloin]

its a karl rove decision...bush can't make decisions...