All of the above. By 2008, we were at the end of LBJ's first term. Thank god we didn't elect Nixon.
And that had fuck all to do with bush, and everything to do with the events surrounding the president. Do you think anyone else would have acted differently? Would a democrate stood by without going to war in the middle east? Would a democrat not have approved of the same economic muckery that bush did in order to boost the economy? Bush didn't set us back forty years. We did.
I don't know why we're even having this debate in 2014, 12 years after the push to invade Iraq. No president since LBJ save for Bush has had the audacity to lie through his teeth to start a war (or escalate in LBJ's case).Do you think anyone else would have acted differently? Would a democrate stood by without going to war in the middle east?
Because you still seem to think it is the fault of Bush for what happened in his term. We have had only a single president since Bush, Obama, who still has yet to go to war in Iraq even after all the things to have happened there with ISIL/ISIS/DumbFucks. Secondly, the conversation is not about LBJ setting the US back fourty years, it is about bush.I don't know why we're even having this debate in 2014, 12 years after the push to invade Iraq.
No president since LBJ save for Bush has had the audacity to lie through his teeth to start a war (or escalate in LBJ's case).