What is Digg?59 Comments
- anar1987, on 10/12/2007, -5/+24Things not going very well for Bush...
- littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25Yeah that's a lot. And Cheney Rice and Rove aren't even on the list.
- UrbanOne, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15@ usercc:
"Bush is a disappointment but Clinton was an overtly corrupt person in office and out."
?
And .... what exactly did Clinton do, in or out of office, (with the exception of Monica Lewinsky,) that warrants a label of "corrupt?" - SOULEVENT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11NeoCon Kitty is in your White House, murdering your Americans!!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9He was doing one heckuva job, last I heard.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Chimpeach.
- dingxisxgood, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11what about Brownie?
- UrbanOne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@ Grogan:
This article is about the Bush appointees who have left or are about to leave "under a cloud," NOT just the appointees who have resigned their positions.
Warren Christopher, for one, is highly regarded, as are most of the others on this list.
It would be unfair to compare the good people on the list you posted, to the list in the Washington Post article. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11The best cloud for Bush and his friends would be mushroom-shaped!
- laserblazer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Bush's policies are more likely than any to put America under a cloud - a mushroom cloud.
- tehbishop, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7About Clinton's time in office, or the Dems (or previous Rebublicans as well) -- does it MATTER?!
This just means that both 'choices' or sides of the coin are the same damned slimebags. Time to clean house, and vote SOMETHING ELSE. If both sides see that neither is good then ... why do we still have so many voting them into damned office? - SIDSI, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well the government is corrupt and has been for a long time As far as U.S. Attorneys go from 1981 through 2006, a total of 54 US Attorneys were replaced, having not served their full four-year term. Fifty-two submitted resignations on request, two of them however, were involuntarily dismissed. Both were Reagan appointees.
- BDLAMB, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yeah.. Where's 'Heckuva Job Brownie'?
- weaksnyc, on 08/14/2009, -1/+5@courtesyflush
So... you describe Clinton as a walking scandal. Are you defending his actions? If not, then it sounds like you are in 100% agreement that the current administration deserves punishment.
This whole "I have no defense for the administration that I support so I'll throw out stats about Clinton" crap is BS. Clinton was impeached. Regardless of where you stand, if you support the Clinton impeachment, you also support impeaching Bush. You can't pick and choose. - PapaZit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7@ UrbanOne:
"And .... what exactly did Clinton do, in or out of office, (with the exception of Monica Lewinsky,) that warrants a label of "corrupt?""
If you think the Clinton administration wasn't corrupt, you are blind. Still it's tough to ***** up more than Bush has. - Comatose51, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You did hear the clip of recorded telephone conference where Michael Brown stated how he was worried about the dikes right? Brown has been the Bush scapegoat for the disaster. The Bush administration officials was the one who ignored his pleas before the storm. This was reported by NPR a few months ago, IIRC.
- observer1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Ethics by comparison is a ridiculous argument.
- tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This is clearly all Bill Clinton's fault.
According to the Neocon philosophy, all future cases of government corruption can be traced to Clinton. I guess when you have no excuse for what you've done, you have to blame somebody, but this is getting to be ridiculous. If you hate Clinton for things he did, you should also hate Bush for doing the same things.
And lets not forget about Nixon since we're bringing up the past. ; ) - KuntaKinte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4the bush administration wishes they were under a cloud, they are under a ***** hurricane
- bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3HA HA HA HA...
Oh, Right, I forgot about Clinton. Yeah, that ***** is to blame for every ***** up that has befallen this administration.
Hey, I even heard it was Clinton who caused W to choke on the pretzel a couple years back.....
WOULD YOU STUPID ***** JUST SHUT THE F UP ABOUT CLINTON. IF YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED, THE DUDE HAS BEEN OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE FOR OVER SIX YEARS! - HotMovies, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Does anyone know where Rummy is?
Just cause he's not the SoD doesn't mean he can't start some *****. - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I didn't believe a word you were saying, but when you HIT THAT CAPS LOCK BUTTON, and then it all started to make sense.
- NSMike, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Your attempt at humor fails. Move on, dude. This is like this 6th article you've done this to.
- bigturns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2At least now the ***** will know how we've (those Americans who can still think for themselves) felt for the last 6+ years!
- SOULEVENT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2keep defending your thieving serial killers, BushCo, Im sure satan is looking forward to some faux Christian company in hell. YOU PEOPLE HAVE NO LEG TO STAND ON ANYMORE, YOU ARE LIARS, YOU ARE MURDERERS, AND YOU BETRAYED YOUR COUNTRY, KNOW THAT AS FACT, EVERYONE ELSE ALREADY DOES!!!
- WaltFrench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2TYPO ALERT
- The headline should be "Administration Under a Clod." - UrbanOne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ bamont:
OK. Yes, I'm a Clinton supporter. And no, I don't hold him as the moral authority for this country. BUT, there is no comparison that will ever (honestly) show that Clinton did more harm, or was as corrupt as Bush. (I don't think Clinton was corrupt.)
"Remember this - 4 years ago, over 60% of this nation thought the war in Iraq was justified."
Yes, because the so called "facts" were lies.
"My how things change, and my how easily the ignorant put their confidence in the eyes of the majority."
Things change because truth sheds light on situations. Actually, the truly ignorant tend to make up their own versions of the truth. - Caffeinate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think the American people have given W enough benefit of the doubt. We went to war based on lies. Does that not bother some of you? He is going to go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever to hold the office. ______ fill in the blank with whoever has also committed wrongs in the office; that still doesn't absolve Bush of his own failures.
- vatosplace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2
WAAAHHHH CLINTON!!!
WAAAAHHHH CLINTON! - Comatose51, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Under a cloud? How about you reap what you sow? Call it karma or people will show their true nature eventually, but he was the one who appointed these ***** to jobs they are ill-suited for in return for their loyalty. We all know how that has worked historically. We're only surprised that it can happen in America. The saving grace for us is that these rats are being found and prosecuted. Bush was always personal loyalty/politics first and the country second.
You reap what you sow. - tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I guess The Associated Press hates America. Don't they know you aren't supposed to acknowledge these types of things?
- PapaZit, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6in reply to grogan: Clinton hasn't around since 2001. It doesn't matter if his administration had similar problems. Bush is in power now and we should hold those in power accountable for their wrongdoings. It doesn't make it right that Clinton had problems too. It isn't a bipartisan issue.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Does Diane Feinstein count?
- adarkmethod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2did you guys hear? apparently there's only two sets of political ideals in the united states. If the democrats do things that are immoral, illegal, or corrupt, we just try to convict them of personality flaws(like adultery), and when that fails, we just ignore all of their crimes and elect a republican in the next couple elections. Then, when the republicans commit war crimes, perjury, and other honesty related crimes, its decided that our best option is to jsut stand behind the president publicly, talk ***** about all of his policies in private, and wait til his term is up so we can go back to the democrats for 4 to 8 years. Its so much easier to ignore the posibilties of 3rd party candidates. Why would we want to dirty our hands with such weirdos and outsiders? Some of those nut jobs even think that we should ignore the absolute fact that every other country in the world is motivated by the sole desire to blow us up, and spend money on something that ISN'T foreign wars to defend ourselves. Man... those guys are ***** crazy. I'd sure hate to live somewhere that people thought there were more than 2 sides to an issue, especially when everything is so obviously black and white. Its all about good vs. evil, and good must prevail. STRENGTH THROUGH UNITY. UNITY THROUGH FAITH, THE UNITED STATES PREVAIL!
- CogitatorX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Is that cloud Galactus?
- CourtesyFlush, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Gawd, what *****.
You can't even allow a simple question to be answered without crying and whining about it for hours.
What's the matter? Does Clinton's record embarrass you?
Or is it that you're all making such a big deal over Gonzales you've forgotten the fact that your own heroes wrote the ***** book on forgetting details during testimony?
It seems your record breaking hero taught you morons how to forget the past rather well. - UrbanOne, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"At least Bush's folks aren't found DEAD in the wreckage of an airplane with a bullet-hole in their skulls."
Hmmm...
Paul Wellstone:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wellstone - kolobcreek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Breaking News: this post'er a under cloud
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Look, BOTH the Dems and the GOP are corrupt and have been for a long time. it's not just one side or the other, the rotten stink coming from Washington for a long time has been caused by money. Somehow we need to sweep everything clean, stop the corporate lobbyists, stop the foreign powers lobbyists blackmailing our politicians into compliance with their goals, just clean all the pus and cancer and filth out of the entire mess. Get back to a government that cares about the people and not itself, because the people should be first and foremost. Not a bunch of 'I've got mine, screw you" career criminals. If anyone has a problem with that, they should consider that the proper punishment for treason is hanging, or being forced to watch FOX.
- edm1950, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0These Bush guys are crooks stories are getting old. It's pretty much common knowledge and most rational people understand that the Bush administration was put in place by the Texas inc to raid the national treasury. Why keep flogging a dead horse. I mean sheesh people, there's more important stuff out there, heck the iphone is coming soon.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Rolling a guillotine into the Capital rotunda and ordering all members from both parties to go under the blade - that's the only progress worth a damn.
- Rawrpow, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7Had enough? Vote libertarian! (shameless plug) But i am really tired of this guy. We need some progress.
- irsmert, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Am I the only one who assumed that the adminsistration realized that everyone hates them so they decided to smoke some pot?
- c0ckr0ach, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5What about starting a war in Iraq that most of the world was against, causing the death of over 3000 Americans and the severe injury of more than 10,000 (not to mention the non-American civilian and military causalities)? What about never finishing the war in Afghanistan which may be worse off now and more of a danger to the world? What about the empowerment of Iran by the Mid-East power vacuum created? Who is actually defending this man???
- CourtesyFlush, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Even Moonies can read a deposition and count.
Post something that disputes the stats above or STFU.
Those of us who have lived through several different administrations know the shiat you puppies are whining over is chump change compared to some of our earlier great American Presidents.
Read some history and get a grip.
And digging someone down for answering an honest question is too funny. Some of you must not like the honest answer given. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1There you go, Urban - since you agree with Clinton's politics he had to be the moral authority. I've seen people on this website talking about "how was Clinton corrupt other than the Lewinsky scandal?" - that's in the same avenue as people not understanding how the Attorney Firings is wrong. Those of us that sway a bit to the right, understand that Clinton did MANY illegal things. Unfortunately, great, balanced, websites like Digg weren't up back then to judge his behavior or to shed light on his wrong-doings.
For as much ***** that's talked on this website, there are plenty of people who come here and sing to the choir. I guess reigning in praises with Diggs are your only real justification for thinking what you must.
Remember this - 4 years ago, over 60% of this nation thought the war in Iraq was justified. My how things change, and my how easily the ignorant put their confidence in the eyes of the majority. - misohorny13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0yea but i bet he has a umbrella so its all good
- laserblazer, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Quoting the Moonie rag, "The Washington Times", is an instant loss of credibility - they are self-admittedly a propaganda engine and not a news source.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4At least Bush's folks aren't found DEAD in the wreckage of an airplane with a bullet-hole in their skulls.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/CRASH/BROWN/bullet.html - behn1220, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1@littlebylittle
You are correct by saying that those three are not on the list. However, the list does contain some appropriately placed commas. Do you see what they did there? I think you can learn something from them.
(I'm sure I will be called something followed by "Nazi" now but I don't care. Written communication skills are important enough to care about and there aren't nearly enough people that possess these incredibly basic skills.) -
Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is