Always using the extreme to prove your point. Again (and again and again), I've said that Bush does not have SOLE responsibility. You seem to blame him and no one else for everything, no matter how removed from the problem he is. There is NO WAY any leader can know everything happening, especially with a country this size and world this complex. That's why there is delegation of responsibility. That's why there is a division of power. According to your way of speaking things, Bush is responsible for every paperclip stolen by the lowest federal employee. No compromise. That's ludicrous. And to say he's responsible for my actions, your actions and/or the actions of some business man stretches the point far past the breaking point.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dino wrote: > > did you. But as per your argument, if I stub my toe it's Bush's fault. > > Accountability. Leadership. > > > > Ok, let's try this another way: > > So according you Bush isn't responsible for anything. Essentially we > don't need the executive branch of government because the don't do > anything since we don't shouldn't hold them accountable for anything. > > Does that sum up your position? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:273358 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
