or if not bush, then one or two bad apples jerking his strings.

not so. the people that put the gun in bush's hand are responsible.

king's used to declare war, after consulting their war-lord nobles. america uses the same medieval model of society. the fact that senators and president are elected changes nothing, for their power is so great that they do immense harm too quickly for elections to control them. worse, their power is so great that they control information, and it is difficult for the electorate to realize who is at fault.

america's constitution guarantees intermittent disaster. running a modern nation on medieval principles doesn't work very well. worse, when the rulers are not the people, national policy will benefit the rulers, not the people.

so who is responsible for the calamitous bush regime? anyone who doesn't stand up and say the obvious: "we, the citizens of america, pay the bills and take the casualties, so in future we will decide the activities of the nation through referenda."

or you can remain on your knees and complain endlessly about the disasters wreaked on you by your masters. seems an easy choice, except people raised on their knees don't understand the advantages of standing up.

politicians have counted on that for thousands of years, and the human race has been breeding for submissiveness so long that there may be genetic predisposition for it in most societies. that's why a place like afghanistan is so hard for western generals to understand. the women there are tough, and the men are warriors, not wage slaves. the usmc is going to wish they were back in iraq.

who is responsible for bush? who is responsible for grandiose plans of empire? who is responsible for corrupt politicians, complacent generals, national policies based on old men's fantasies of power? you are.

fortunately, mccain is hurt worse by being old, out of touch and shifty. oh, and a republican too.

otoh, bho has a sympathy vote, while mccain gets the vfw crowd. what's important is, when i was a boy in mississippi, a pollster asking if you would vote for a 'nigra' would have to explain what he meant, and then likely run for his life or draw incredulous laughter.

barack is still the favorite, and if not this time, then next. america has made some progress. there'll be women, latinos and asians along in due course. this won't cure america's problems but will at least spread the blame more widely.

picking presidents is a sad substitute for democracy, though. did you think you were getting the iraq war, a trillion dollar deficit, and collapse of the financial system, when you chose a man who couldn't finish a sentence?

there is always the possibility that (average intelligence - dysfunctional education) / self indulgence = extinction.

this could be mother nature's way of getting rid of a rash on the north american continent.

you don't vote for policies, you don't vote for plans, you are only permitted to vote for people, and they tell you what you want to hear. how can it be otherwise, do you expect someone to commit professional suicide?

when was the last time a salesman told what was wrong with the product? leaving your nation in the hands of politicians is as sensible as handing a power of attorney to a financial adviser.

of course, you're born with your political power of attorney in the hands of politicians, and brought up being told that's how it should be. as though the rule of politicians was like gravity: not perfect in every way, but inescapable.

poor mugs, you bought it. it is escapable, but escaping needs effort. so maybe it is inescapable after all.

or was it a case of you knew, but didn't care until you found yourself down among the losers?

most americans are well satisfied with the current system, so much so that there is no socialist party. so you gotta save yourself- i recommend prostitution, if you can cope with the hours. mugging is good too, if you're strong and quick.

but best of all is stealing in the approved white collar way: selling things of high price and dubious value. get started by running for political office, that'll teach you all you need to know about lying and doesn't need qualifications such as ethics.

but bush is not the problem, he's just an example of american society, today and in the past. "collateral damage" is just the latest manifestation of the minds that invented "free-fire zone."

america has always been brutal and corrupt, poor dubya is only getting a bad press because the empire no longer can accomplish it's goals quietly, with assassination, bribery, and support for puppet quislings.

the 'liberal' side of politics will attempt to get back in power by pointing at bush and saying "we're not like that!". but they are, when it suits them. lbj 'freed the slaves', but he also initiated military policies that got nazis hung.

america runs on greed, arrogance and selfishness. it was designed that way, for and by 'men of property.' when obama talks of change, he says very little about what and how and nothing at all about preventing 'change-back', when the next republican gets in.

politicians can't save america, and the people are too ignorant to break out of the cozy little illusion that it doesn't need saving. evidence of that is simple: it's a close race, in the face of republican economic, military, and financial incompetence. god help america, no lesser aid can prevail.