What is Digg?170 Comments
- Swivelstick, on 12/31/2008, -6/+52"The Bush administration specialized in deceit. How else could you get the public (and a feckless Congress) to go along with an invasion of Iraq as an absolutely essential response to the Sept. 11 attacks, when Iraq had had nothing to do with the Sept. 11 attacks?"
Dunno if this bloke is a reporter don't really care he is making comment on what the MEDIA should have addressed years ago. After all how else did it happen without the compliance of the MSM.
A brave boy in the media critiquing after the fact well done to you, yet any dissenting voice during this period would've been portrayed as unpatriotic by the like of you and yours. So ***** you and everyone else complicit in the subterfuge. - MalarkeyPN, on 12/31/2008, -7/+36I remember thinking in 2004 when Bush won re-election, "This is worse than 9/11."
Turns out I was right. - depro9, on 12/31/2008, -4/+26The rich get richer & the poor get sicker. Mission accomplished!
- apothekari, on 12/31/2008, -2/+24I agree with you but to be fair Bob Herbert was at the forefront of efforts to bring this Administrations MANY transgressions to the public.
from 04 :http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940 ...
from 05: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/02/opinion/02herber ... - TheAttacks, on 12/31/2008, -4/+26Bush is going to be missed. . . . by some insane ***** who are too blind to see their way towards the cliff they should jump over.
Bye bye, Mr. Bush, thanks for nothing and have a nice ***** day. - Dumbledorito, on 12/31/2008, -2/+21The Bush admin. effectively cowed or silenced its critics under the auspices of "bias," "unpatriotic," or even "traitorous." They would freeze out anyone who asked uncomfortable questions, they planted people like Jeff Gannon at press conferences, or in some cases they just claimed that answers to simple questions were "classified" or would somehow hurt the war effort.
It was all very well-orchestrated for the first 4 years or so of the war, but eventually, ***** starts to stain and smell, and without any spinnable fruits of their efforts (the "War on Terror" and all of the Homeland Security policies), their bullying just started to seem like desperate acts.
As for the media, look back at a lot of the criticism of the post 9/11 Bush administration. A lot of them were quite on the mark, but were shouted down at the time for being "anti-Bush" or "liberal," when they were only being quite correct and accurate in their assessments. - WordsnCollision, on 12/31/2008, -10/+28Bush is quiet because he's too busy signing bills to push Cheney's agenda in the few days he has left. Hopefully the Obama transition team is taking note and will reverse them.
- hackiavelli, on 12/31/2008, -6/+22"This is the man who gave us the war in Iraq and Guantánamo and torture and rendition; who turned the Clinton economy and the budget surplus into fool’s gold; who dithered while New Orleans drowned; who trampled our civil liberties at home and ruined our reputation abroad; who let Dick Cheney run hog wild and thought Brownie was doing a heckuva job."
The Bush administration in one sentence. - hackiavelli, on 12/31/2008, -2/+16People kept saying 2008 was the most important election in their lifetime. I never would have guessed it at the time but it was the 2000 election, before all this mess started, that was really the most important.
I look back at all the crap we were "worried" about during the Clinton years and almost want to cry. Trivial, trivial *****. In hindsight the greatest measure of Clinton's success in office was how devoid of real problems we were. - geoffg, on 12/31/2008, -6/+19My guess is it will take 5 years for the economy to recover...Obama 2012!!!
- jdenzer, on 12/31/2008, -4/+17Helping families keep their homes is WRONG
Helping CEO's keep their corporate jets is RIGHT
That is the "Republican Ideals" - katorga, on 12/31/2008, -6/+19If congress actually did its Job...vote to or not to declare war. None of this would have happened. As it is Congress never stands for anything; it only stands back and criticizes whatever is happening. The best example was Barney Frank bemoaning the lack of oversight on the bailout...HIS OWN COMMITTEES FUNCTION! All we have today are very politicians skilled at playing The Game (raising money, getting elected, lining their and their families pockets) and no Statesmen.
When you have that, the executive and judicial branches are going to swoop in and fill the power vacuum.
Obama won't help because he is the epitome of the current congress. Heck he doesn't even bother to vote. - bluebirdgm, on 12/31/2008, -3/+15I hope Bush doesn't do anything more remarkable between now and Inauguration Day. History's final footnote for his Presidency should be that shoe incident.
- tgjerusalem, on 12/31/2008, -5/+17What will happen to Bush? It's unlikely he'll actually face charges for his actions as president, but has he said anything about how he plans to spend his years as an ex-president?
He's a wretched failure, possibly the single most despised man in the world, and going down in history as the author of one of the most shameful and destructive eras in modern American history. And I think the lights of reality are finally starting to dawn in his life. Even Nixon had the intelligence and competence to rebuild his life as a statesman and author, a path I seriously doubt Bush can follow.
So wtf is he going to do? Go clear brush in Texas for the next few decades while he quietly drinks himself to death? - charlietuna, on 12/31/2008, -1/+12Congress was complicit. The mood after 2001 required a more thoughtful leader who was honest about the need for sacrifice. Someone who was eager to explore less jackboot oriented options to addressing the foment in the Mideast.. Instead we had Dubya send in the jackboots, so now we broke it and we own it.
And Congress wrote him a blank check. - skiner24, on 12/31/2008, -6/+16I heard Laura Bush on NPR saying her husband would be remembered for protecting our country after 9/11 and for his AIDS work in Africa. I know that's not what I will remember him for.
- AmazingSteve, on 12/31/2008, -2/+12Congress was also VASTLY Republican at the time.
- inactive, on 12/31/2008, -0/+10neocon in 1865 =/= neocon today
- al3efroman, on 12/31/2008, -4/+14For some reason, your excessive use of capitalization has lent no credence to your argument which, let's be honest, is rife with "half-truths" and excuses. The blaming the victim part was brilliant, by the way.
Pathetic, indeed. - mclaincausey, on 12/31/2008, -1/+10That must be one of the more ignorant posts I've come across on Digg, and that's saying a lot.
The war will cost $3T or more. Bush turned a $360M surplus into, so far, a $10.5T deficit. Now, I should point out that the $360M is kind of illusory, as federal debt offsets it, but there is no debate that we had more fiscal responsibility, far less borrowing, a stronger dollar, etc., under Clinton's watch. That said, Clintonite centrists as well as right wingers share in the culpability for the financial mess before us.
So the reversal of fortunes is not JUST the war, the war is one of many factors. The Congress was complicit in the war, but anyone willing to do the research knew this war was *****. I knew the whole time. I won a bet that they wouldn't find WMDs. If I knew, then believe me, our intelligence and military intelligence knew. The intelligence was cherry-picked by a corrupt executive branch that meddled in intelligence affairs.
People were not too stupid to leave, they were too poor. New Orleans is an absolutely destitute city. The type of public works required for New Orleans' levee system and wetlands restoration will require federal assistance. The poor state of LA cannot afford it.
You haven't provided a single example of lower taxes increasing government revenue. You just expect us to accept your argument without substantiation. You probably have never even heard of the Laffer curve, the model used as the basis for tax cuts driving revenue, and thus you don't understand the concept of diminishing returns. Allow me to retort:
Answer me this: if supply-side economics is such a panacea, then how come every time the Republicans implement it, we have a short-lived growth followed by lingering recession? How come all the economic indicators that would show that the Bush tax cuts provided stimulus, such as the HOUSING MARKET, are all in bad shape? If we were to extend the Bush tax cuts until 2010, we would come up almost $2B short of where we would be if we let them expire (from Congressional Budget Office)--LESS revenue, not MORE. Supply-side economics was never really taken seriously by real academic economists, and the recent research by CBO and others has put the final nail in the coffin. The only people who cling to this disproved, and demonstrably failed, policy are those self-interested folks who benefit from it, and folks like yourselves who are ignorant and accept the propaganda.
As to the popularity of Congress, Congress is NEVER popular. Congresspeople are popular among their constituents. - mclaincausey, on 12/31/2008, -2/+11That must be one of the more ignorant posts I've come across on Digg, and that's saying a lot.
The war will cost $3T or more. Bush turned a $360M surplus into, so far, a $10.5T deficit. Now, I should point out that the $360M is kind of illusory, as federal debt offsets it, but there is no debate that we had more fiscal responsibility, far less borrowing, a stronger dollar, etc., under Clinton's watch. That said, Clintonite centrists as well as right wingers share in the culpability for the financial mess before us.
So the reversal of fortunes is not JUST the war, the war is one of many factors. The Congress was complicit in the war, but anyone willing to do the research knew this war was *****. I knew the whole time. I won a bet that they wouldn't find WMDs. If I knew, then believe me, our intelligence and military intelligence knew. The intelligence was cherry-picked by a corrupt executive branch that meddled in intelligence affairs.
People were not too stupid to leave, they were too poor. New Orleans is an absolutely destitute city. The type of public works required for New Orleans' levee system and wetlands restoration will require federal assistance. The poor state of LA cannot afford it.
You haven't provided a single example of lower taxes increasing government revenue. You just expect us to accept your argument without substantiation. You probably have never even heard of the Laffer curve, the model used as the basis for tax cuts driving revenue, and thus you don't understand the concept of diminishing returns. Allow me to retort:
Answer me this: if supply-side economics is such a panacea, then how come every time the Republicans implement it, we have a short-lived growth followed by lingering recession? How come all the economic indicators that would show that the Bush tax cuts provided stimulus, such as the HOUSING MARKET, are all in bad shape? If we were to extend the Bush tax cuts until 2010, we would come up almost $2B short of where we would be if we let them expire (from Congressional Budget Office)--LESS revenue, not MORE. Supply-side economics was never really taken seriously by real academic economists, and the recent research by CBO and others has put the final nail in the coffin. The only people who cling to this disproved, and demonstrably failed, policy are those self-interested folks who benefit from it, and folks like yourselves who are ignorant and accept the propaganda.
As to the popularity of Congress, Congress as a whole is NEVER popular. Congresspeople are sometimes individually popular among their constituents. The gridlock the Republicans are have created is more to blame for the relative negative favorability than anything else. - oldhick, on 12/31/2008, -0/+8@tdclark23, didn't punish the south? Is that what you call burning every single capital to the ground from Atlanta to Richmond? The looting, the pillaging, the rapes, and the burning? Really? Interesting. I too am glad he kept the country together though. I just believe there were alternatives to war.
I'm surprised I said something block worthy. I'm sure I've said plenty of stupid things and I have many friends on Digg whose opinions I cherish, but I still disagree with on somethings, but I try not offend or to be too abrasive. If you see me acting like an ass, please call me on it. I'm far from perfect and look to others to help me know if I'm getting out of line or acting inappropriately.
@jgzman, look up Chief Justice Roger B. Taney. Your knowledge of history is lacking... Lincoln was NOT authorized to suspend habeas corpus. Only Congress was. 'Lincoln ignored the court's order and continued to arrest prisoners without the privilege of the writ" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_B._Taney#Lincol ... - mclaincausey, on 12/31/2008, -0/+8Dude, if you can't get a credit card you are either not making a decent wage or you have been fiscally irresponsible in the past. You can get a credit card waiting tables with a 500 credit rating.
- oldhick, on 12/31/2008, -2/+10That's not really fair at all. I don't agree with Robjayne that our biggest problem is the Fed, but certainly this country was going down the tubes long before Bush.
This article is the same situation you're mocking Robjayne for. Ignoring the systemic loss of liberty, un-Constitutional agencies and powers that the government has seized for the last 90 years, and pretending all blame falls at Bush's feet is simply an excuse to bash Bush and the GOP.
Certainly they are worthy of bashing and have at 'em, but not at the expense of ignoring all of the precursors that got us here. - noangelcame, on 12/31/2008, -0/+7I miss the innocence my generation seemed to have prior to the Bush Administration. Now,. so many of us are too angry and consumed by politics and cultural divides.
- oldhick, on 12/31/2008, -2/+9FYI, the Executive branch prepares and present intelligence reports. The Legislative branch is largely at the mercy of the Executive branch for analysis of intelligence so that point is ridiculous.
Fannie and Freddie didn't cause the financial meltdown. They certainly didn't help it, but to blame Barney Frank and Chris Dodd for the meltdown is silly. Blame them for being selfish idiots. Blame them for not having enough intelligence between them to deserve a middle school diploma, but you can't blame our economic collapse on them.
You can blame the people of New Orleans all you want. To be honest, I'm not incredibly sympathetic to their handling of the situation, but I'm deeply troubled by what those poor people went through. Claiming Katrina saved them is embarrassing and truly ignorant. You can do better than that and if you can't, you really should think about taking some time to reflect on whether you should even open your mouth.
History has shown that lower taxes can increase government revenue. But conservatives believe in fiscal responsibility, not lower taxes. Recent history has proven that lower taxes ALWAYS leads to deficit spending and grows the national debt. Both Reagan and Bush dramatically increased spending while cutting taxes and have nearly bankrupted our government and have decreased the value and role of the dollar in the world economy. Fiscal responsibility means paying for what you're buying, not deficit spending accompanied by lower taxes.
I hope you were simply hurried and frustrated. - inactive, on 12/31/2008, -1/+8Whatever really happened there, Bush was not at all interested in getting to the bottom of it. He resisted starting an official investigation for over a year, and then tried to put Henry freakin' Kissenger in charge of it! It was poorly staffed, sloppily executed, and severely underfunded. In the end:
"commissioners believed that key agencies of the U.S. government, including The Pentagon, the FAA and NORAD were deliberately deceiving them, and that the CIA was deliberately impeding the work of the commission. On the whole, the chairmen of the commission believed the commission was set up to fail." (wikipedia) - AMCarter3, on 01/01/2009, -0/+6Well said Bob Hebert! A perfect summary of 8 years of a deceitful, corrupt administration. As a country, we should now know exactly what it feels like to be deceived, raped and violated. What a disgrace! It's time to move on.
- charlietuna, on 12/31/2008, -3/+9Here we go again. Seriously, and without ranting, what modern sovereign countries have no central bank and no federal income tax?
- jdenzer, on 12/31/2008, -3/+9Refresh my memory, what part of the Constitution states we we give billions of $$ to the banks. And we are not allowed to know or ask what they do with the $$.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28344965/
and this is a secret too, right
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081221/ap_on_bi_ge/ex ... - noangelcame, on 12/31/2008, -1/+7@gweller It is routine for Norad to intercept any plane that has gone off course. They do this so that if a pilot has become disabled during flight, they can help safely steer the plane away from a populated area if an emergency landing is required. Norad intercepted 67 flights the year before 9/11 with a 100% success rate. The fact that they failed to follow routine procedures 4 times on the same day is highly suspicious, and unfortunately was never properly investigated.
- oldhick, on 12/31/2008, -0/+6@emkaysmith, Luckily for us you don't get to decide what IS American and your knowledge of Libertarians isn't very complete. Why would you say Libertarians have no use for democracy? Love for the Constitution, fiscal responsibility, and protection of our rights and liberty are noble goals. Maybe you should learn more about various forms of Libertarians before you make ignorant statements and generalize a very diverse philosophy.
- mclaincausey, on 12/31/2008, -1/+7What do you mean, "even the Auto Industry one?" The banking one is much more offensive. There was little debate about it and absolutely no oversight, and it was a staggeringly higher sum. There are executives who have been paid $25M out of this bailout for as little as 3 MONTHS of compensation. The bankign bailout was a transfer of wealth from the middle to the upper class: plain old theft.
- Phalanxia, on 12/31/2008, -7/+13Libertarians...always seeking to make an excuse to put forward their ideas...sheesh.
If you hate your current system so much, why don't you revolt/move to Hong Kong? - jdenzer, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7"I can't even get a ***** credit card yet illegal aliens and unemployed people somehow were able to take out mortgages"
So you are blaming illegal aliens and unemployed people b/c you can't get credit.
Guess your 'decent paycheck' is not so decent.
Why don't you just get another job?
-See how easy it is to be cynical. - pacerx, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A506 ...
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.htm ...
No, you're right. The administration never tried to link the two. - ohearn, on 12/31/2008, -1/+6Yes, TG. The "family values" republicans and the religious right do think it's a good idea as scary as that is. I'm very conservative fiscally, but the republican party seriously needs to drop those 2 groups like a bad habit if they want my vote.
- inactive, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7The insanely rich and the insanely stupid continue to support Bush. Together they comprise about 23% of the US population.
- AmazingSteve, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7Says the assclown from the Right with no coherent thoughts of his own. Just the garbage shoveled in by other Right wing nutjobs. Have a seat moron. Facts are facts and you lost the election, so nobody will be "creating thier own realities" again for quite some time. It was'nt just an election pal, it was a refferendum on the Conservative movement and it was soundly rejected by a WIDE margin. Deal with it.
- tgjerusalem, on 12/31/2008, -1/+6Does anyone *actually* think a Palin presidency would be a good idea?
I would really like to hear a serious list of reasons why on earth she should ever be treated as a serious political figure again. What qualifications does she have, that could possibly make her a better 2012 option for the Republicans than practically anyone else they could nominate?
The only appeal I see is the schadenfreude of watching the Republican party implode. But while I hope Obama's presidency is strong and successful both now and in the next election, in reality it would be better to have an intelligent and thoughtful opposition party to serve as devil's advocate. - untreadatom, on 12/31/2008, -0/+5FTA "I don’t think he should be allowed to slip quietly out of town. There should be a great hue and cry — a loud, collective angry howl, demonstrations with signs and bullhorns and fiery speeches — over the damage he’s done to this country." - With you there.
"And then there’s the Bush economy, another disaster, a trapdoor through which middle-class Americans can plunge toward the bracing experiences normally reserved for the poor and the destitute."-- And then you go and say some stupid ***** like that!!
I love how the focus is the middle-class "bracing" for a ***** existence that only the poor and the destitute should be dealing with.
How is there not the slightest hint of concern for those who already fall in that poor and destitute crowd? It’s ok for American citizens to live like that normally as long as it is a small and marginalized group. But as soon as that ***** is bothering the “middle class”-then that ***** is a problem? What the *****?
I want to throw shoes at a lot of people right now. - pacerx, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7"All the liberal character assassinations of Bush is a testament to his success. The President should be proud he got under their skin so much...but fortunately for the office of the presidency, he's a much bigger man than that."
This statement exemplifies everything that is wrong with the Republican party. Governing for the purpose of annoying your opposition, rather than having actual goals. - kayvman78, on 12/31/2008, -2/+7Are you on crack or just a mindless Apologist? The architect of Deregulation was Phil Graham. The dems had a good hand in it too, but the pioneers of deregulating their buddies is a republican effort. But that is beside the point, you are holding onto a sinking ship and as the water fills up your lungs, you're still trying to say the ship isn't sinking. I'm sure if your buddy Bush were to actually have gotten our Social security system into the stock market and lost 75 percent of it by now you would still say it wasn't a bad choice. Sad really. Good luck with everything.
- charlietuna, on 12/31/2008, -0/+5First time I ever heard that accusation. :-/
Oh please, as if the Times never runs articles sympathetic to the Palestinians. You can criticise the Op-Ed, but the quality of the Times is on par with the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and BBC. - ragingflamerboy, on 12/31/2008, -0/+4uhm, the american economy was kinda bad about 6+ years ago. You're a failure if you're blaming the recent democrats. You're an absolute socially retarded baby if you didn't see the problem immediately after your country soaked TRILLIONS into a faux-war.
- pacerx, on 12/31/2008, -0/+4Contrary to popular belief, Bush did actually have some positive contributions to the world at large, but the damage done during his tenure overshadows it greatly.
He also did a great deal of work on combating human trafficking. - jdenzer, on 12/31/2008, -1/+5"how's that Congressional approval rating working out for you?"
Funny, I didn't know Congress was made up of 100% Democrats in the Senate and House.
And the Bush Administration cabinet is made up of how many Republicans. - pacerx, on 12/31/2008, -3/+7That's a pretty inaccurate statement. I know you're referencing the CRA, but nothing about that Act forced institutions to loan to unqualified buyers.
But I guess it is pretty convenient to blame low income minorities who control less than 0.1% of the wealth in this country for the financial problems caused by the people who control over 75% of the wealth. - jdenzer, on 12/31/2008, -3/+7"yet illegal aliens and unemployed people somehow were able to take out mortgages"
Don't be so naive, you think the only people affected were "deadbeats"
Imagine being someone who owned a mortgage for 10 or 20 years, suddenly b/c of the economy you lose you job. You go to the bank and ask for a lower rate or extension. And they tell you tough.
And at the same time your tax dollars are going to the bank execs who said to you "hey tough, not my problem"
"I am someone out of college" - that explains it, when you grow up you will understand - akamurph, on 12/31/2008, -1/+5Nice name dueche
-
Show 51 - 100 of 170 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is