How responsible are bush & cheney for our economic & national problems?

[Philosoraptor]

I know it's always easy to blame the presiding administration for all our woes, but, be objective and fair and tell me how responsible you think bush and cheney are. Are they just unlucky enough to be in the oval orifice at the wrong time, or should they be held responsible on some level?

[Orrex]

1. If the economy were booming, you know that they'd give themselves full credit

So now that it's in the shitter, I'd say that it's about 90% their responsibility; the other 10% is Reagan's fault.

[DireStrike]

3. Yep, good point.

Although I put a lot of the responsibility on fraud and cheating in the financial markets, why not point the finger at the guy in charge?

[Demeter]

6. Because They Are SUPPOSED to Stop This Crime

They are the Executive, after all. They did nothing, and did it so well that we are all going to suffer unto the third generation. They think to avoid the consequences, but just as the Nazis were hunted to death, so too will the Bushbots be pursued and brought to justice, or at the very least, never feel safe and secure again.

[LeftishBrit]

2. My view from the outside...

is that they carry a lot of the responsibility, but one needs to put quite a bit of responsibility where it has always belonged: with St Ronnie! And his collaborator Maggie.

[Greyhound]

4. Somewhat, they couldn't have done it without Raygun, 41, & Clinton. n/t

[Lost4words]

5. And with the help of more than a few of our beloved democrats!

8643

[Greyhound]

7. Oh yes indeed. I'd say about 95% of the Republik party is thoroughly controlled by

the corporations and about 70% of ours.

[blue_onyx]

8. Mostly Bush's fault

But he also got the help from Reagan, Bush Sr. (for developing and agreeing to NAFTA), and Clinton (for allowing NAFTA to go through).

[Neshanic]

9. Nine people think "somewhat"? Jesus.

[ieoeja]

11. Sure. This has been building 1981.

The current administration could have turned it around, but were true believers in Reaganomics.

They are "somewhat" responisible for not stopping it. But they are *only* "somewhat" responsible because they did not create it. Reagan did, and nobody has done anything about it since.

[blm]

14. Go back to BCCI report from Dec1992. The set up for fascist policies began in earnest in 70s.

They all should have been fully exposed and jailed in the years after the BCCI report's release.

[ProfessorGAC]

10. Totally

Anybody with a keen eye saw this coming. And they did nothing.

Anybody with a more than surface understanding of econ, knows tax cuts aren't more important than deficits. And they did nothing.

Anybody knows that somebody has to pay for a war, that they started. And they did nothing.

And anybody who knows that human nature is stronger than the "purity of the free market" would have restored regulatory power to DFI. And they did nothing.

I see no logical reason to hold anyone else responsible.
The Professor

[hamsterjill]

12. Economy was good with Clinton

The economy wasn't in the tank when Bush took over from Clinton; therefore, in my mind, Bush is responsible.

And Bush is also responsible for NOT keeping Unca Dick in check.

[blm]

13. Read the BCCI Report - all of this was set up long ago by the fascists involved.

Why were they all let off the hook throughout the 90s instead of fully exposed and jailed?

[Uncle Joe]

15. I picked totally, although in truth I believe they're only 95% responsible

but that seemed like too much for the just somewhat selection.