What is Digg?176 Comments
- pleiadianagenda, on 05/28/2008, -5/+88This belongs in the "No *****, Sherlock" section.
Of course Bush used propaganda. Him along with the rest of the dictators and thugs throughout history. - inactive, on 05/28/2008, -7/+68this greasy, lying sack of ***** finally grew a conscious...or maybe just credit card bills he has to pay off
- kemp34, on 05/28/2008, -3/+54Even long term insiders are turning on Bush. Good. At what point do impeachment proceedings commence? I don't even care if it's just symbolic, ***** DO SOMETHING Congress.
- oldhick, on 05/28/2008, -3/+38Its funny to watch everyone here digg each other up for comments like "no *****" and "really". The reality is that we need more people to come forward. Instead of being cynical and mocking these people we need to support them and encourage more administration officials to come forward.
We want to see this administration held accountable. The only way that is going to happen is if enough people come forward and talk about what happened. We need folks like Armitage and Powell to start talking. We need the Libbies and anyone who was on Wolfiwitz or Rummy's staff.
I personally would like to thank Scott McClellan. No one can change what he did in the past and why he did it, but we can support what he is doing NOW which is more than anyone else from this administration. - mrcoderga, on 05/28/2008, -14/+50On a related note, little Johnnies across America learn there really is no Santa.
Wow.
I wonder what it means for the Easter Bunny. - Depthfunction, on 05/28/2008, -1/+30The reaction to this guy's book has been a bit disturbing. I'm not surprised to hear the White House bash this guy and slander him--that's what they do to anyone who challenges them. What I'm disturbed about his how the MSM seems to be covering their own asses by, once again, denying that they were ever complicit in the Bush administration's propaganda campaign. Everyone knows that they failed in their responsibility to investigate Bush and his neocon puppetmasters' rationale for the war. McClellan's book brings that dark period of American journalism back to the forefront, yet here I sit listening to Chris Matthews and David Gregory denying that they were in any way to blame. Gregory even said it the war was the American public's fault ("Just look at the opinion polls at the time!"). I thought that the press was the conduit between which information passed from the government to the public. If Americans were consumed by war fever 6 years ago (and, yes, we were) I wonder who stoked those flames? Any ideas on that, Chris and David?
- TheLastProphet, on 05/28/2008, -2/+29of course, but is it enough (for this Congress) to Impeach.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 05/28/2008, -0/+21Fox News is on high alert today to sweep this under the rug.
- inactive, on 05/28/2008, -5/+26Good job Scott, you willfully lied to people and now you're going to profit off of it for a second time.
- loggia, on 05/28/2008, -0/+12So now a guy who worked for Bush for like 15 years is... a liar? Why are you attacking liberals? Did THEY write the book?
Sorry, no. - woody168, on 05/28/2008, -2/+12I want my effing gas prices to come down as it's related to this stupid war. If we did not participate in this stupid war, our gas prices could be at (sigh) maybe $2.50/gallon right now, instead of $4. You, GB, is useless. You are this nation's failure, you are the reason why foreigners are openly laughing at us. You are a joke, and you had to fulfill your "look daddy, be proud of me" fantasy by making some lame excuse to fight this war. And those who elected him for the second time, I blame all of you!
- PATSCRU, on 05/28/2008, -1/+10Yeah you can say "OF COURSE HE DID" all day long, but all you're admitting is your inability to do anything about it. Here we have a former member of the Bush presidency saying this which is a great step in the right direction, since it's not coming from an anti-bush source (this makes it all the more likely to convince bush supporters of his wrongdoings). Spread the news.
- inactive, on 05/28/2008, -1/+10Why start now, they haven't done anything in so long I'm beginning to think they forgot how to work at all. Non-binding resolutions don't count.
- robdiggity, on 05/28/2008, -2/+10conscience
- NotAChickenHawk, on 05/28/2008, -1/+9Bush could be caught on tape helping Bin Laden to plan 9/11, and it still wouldn't get him impeached. Pelosi has no backbone, and the Republicans would NEVER, EVER vote for it no matter what Bush does.
- smek2, on 05/28/2008, -0/+7And that makes pro-war propaganda tolerable why?
- IIAmusedII, on 05/28/2008, -0/+7Bush really was one hell of a bad president, wasn't he?
- smek2, on 05/28/2008, -0/+7He could be caught in the act eating babies, it still wouldn't be enough.
- EtherGnat, on 05/28/2008, -2/+7To be fair propaganda has been used to help sell every war throughout history--unjust or otherwise. It's just more critical for ***** wars like Iraq.
- lazerus9, on 05/28/2008, -3/+8Everything in this book was vetted long before one word was ever published! If McClellan was really exposing some deep dark secret that could cause the ruling elite any problems, Scott would have been found hanging by a rope in his mothers garage leaving only a bogus suicide note!
- swrostmore, on 05/28/2008, -2/+7Scotty is pulling of a hell of a marketing campaign, I'll grant him that. But I think David Barstowes NY Times report "MESSAGE MACHINE; Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon's Hidden Hand " is much more convincing proof that Bush used propaganda to sell the war than the word of an admitted professional liar like Scott McClellan.
- kingUssop, on 05/28/2008, -1/+6This man may have been a puppet of evil, but give him credit for owning up to it. It must be a lot on his conscience to have had a complicit role in the Bush administration.
- swrostmore, on 05/28/2008, -1/+6Full disclosure: You are a moron.
It has been ILLEGAL to use gov't money for domestic propaganda since the 50's. So when you apologize for it by saying it just has "negative connotation," you're actually just spewing gibberish with no bearing on the facts. - jamshid, on 05/28/2008, -1/+5Anybody read the book? Does he say anything about "Jeff Gannon" (real name James Guckert), a "reporter" and ex(?) prostitute that McClellan would call on when he needed a friendly question? That whole scandal was too weird and too quickly dismissed, there has got to be a story there.
Also, rumor at the time was that McClellan was gay and closeted, but he's reported to still live in DC with his wife -- surprised he didn't come clean with everything if he were writing a tell-all book like this.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/feb/11/usa.su ...
" The White House spokesman, Scott McLellan, has dismissed charges that Gannon was part of an underground propaganda effort as 'just a wild conspiracy theory'.
But questions remained yesterday about why the White House suspended the normally rigorous vetting process to issue daily passes to an organisation rejected by the Senate last year for not being a legitimate media outlet.
The extent of Gannon's links to an earlier White House scandal - the leaking of the name of the CIA agent Valerie Plame - also remained unclear yesterday. Gannon has been targeted for questioning in that case." - reugeneg, on 05/29/2008, -0/+4Do not forget that the citizens of the United States that stood up against this war on the streets, on the internet and anywhere else where their words could be heard were branded as traitors and unpatriotic to their country. Countries that would not join the coalition were called enemies. This goes farther than lies. The next administration should bring BushCo to trial as war criminals. Starting to sound reasonable now eh?
- savagesteve13, on 05/28/2008, -1/+5Obviously Bush is telling the truth and Scott is just a liar, like Ari Fleischer. All those ex-generals, heads of state, and diplomats are also liars. Why do they all turn on Bush? He's an honest man, thats what it is.
- ChildofDestiny, on 05/28/2008, -1/+5Even worse.
The system is corrupted. - loggia, on 05/28/2008, -0/+4Amen. Brian Williams has become particularly deaf to criticism. And I always kind of liked the guy. Disappointing...
- DangerCollie, on 05/29/2008, -0/+4If we don't impeach Mr. Chimpy and people like Rove end up behind bars, then there's nothing that would keep another pair like Bush/Cheney from popping up again sometime in the future. Sure, Obama is going to be more responsible. But when the president sets himself above accountability and just declares whatever he wants to do legal and appoints political lackeys to the Justice Department to not enforce anything, and Rove uses the FBI to gather background on political opponents, then how does this not happen again?
We have to dig out all of these bozos and find out how far it goes. And if that means we come out with a country that's 1/3 smaller than it is today, that's a good thing. - inactive, on 05/29/2008, -0/+4 That is all Con's know is to attack. When your doing comedy, and getting heckled that's all you can do.
- loggia, on 05/28/2008, -1/+5Colin Powell, Richard Clarke, Scott McClellan... why do all these close Bush insiders keep making up all these lies! It is so much easier to believe that Bush is exactly what I pretend he is and his closest aides and officials are insane.
- jpete71chevmal, on 05/28/2008, -0/+4Add Brokaw to the list. He and Williams were just stroking each other off and telling themselves they are in no way culpable in any of this. Douche nozzles.
- gadgetlust, on 05/29/2008, -0/+4Either you've posted that to be ironic, or you're one of these idiots who posts entire songs because you think they'll help other people stave off the side of cognitive dissonance that would make them question the decisions the US has made in the last 8 years.
It's OK to be proud of your country, provided it does things worth being proud of. By promoting the notion that everything is all OK (through song, no less), you sir, are not helping.
Unless you're being ironic... In which case, I salute you. - Hangly, on 05/28/2008, -0/+4Impeach? Now? Isn't it a bit late for that?
You need to impeach dangerous people BEFORE they completely wreck the country, not during the last six lame-duck months of their term. - dn11, on 05/28/2008, -1/+4What he is saying is pretty much common knowledge Go watch the PBS documentary "Bush's War" for starters. After Bush is out of office I imagine the flood gates will open on a variety of scandals, cover ups and lies - this is only the beginning.
- shutaro, on 05/28/2008, -2/+5There is no Easter Bunny! It's a guy in a suit!
- Shaman760, on 05/28/2008, -4/+7Steal that piece of ***** book. Don't allow that bag of excrement to profit one bit. And if you do happen to buy it, scan it so that we may all download the manuscript.
This ***** should not get one ***** DIME for the lies he helped spread and the people who died because of them. - inactive, on 05/28/2008, -1/+4Propaganda and war? You mean like the Propaganda Kennedy used to sell the Vietnam war..."the domino effect", or his publicizing of the Green Berets.
Propaganda has been used in every war, propaganda does not = lies. - Digger1218, on 05/28/2008, -0/+3*yawn*
- smek2, on 05/28/2008, -1/+4As opposed to non-biased blog sites? Such as....?
- Cedargrove, on 05/29/2008, -0/+3logic ftw
- BlacklabelSAR, on 05/28/2008, -0/+3Propaganda has a negative connotation because it is dishonest by definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
Propaganda is a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behaviors of large numbers of people. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense presents information in order to influence its audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the cognitive narrative of the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda.
Propaganda is the deliberate, systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behavior to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist.
—Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell, Propaganda and Persuasion - DestroyFascism, on 05/29/2008, -0/+3I have seen a woman, they look nice....
- jeffiek, on 05/28/2008, -1/+4Worse.
They vote. - chukd, on 05/29/2008, -0/+3The United States has used propaganda. The first example is the USS Maine explosion/sinking in Havana Harbor. The explosion was caused by coal but shown as Spanish attack. The result was the Spanish American War. Look at the Korean and Viet Nam wars. This was all propaganda, it was anti-communist propaganda. Not to mention the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was a wonderful use of propaganda in Viet Nam. These are some examples off the top of my head. One should note that these all weren't done by G. W. Bush nor were they done by all Republicans. Propaganda is used to throw support behind the movement in every war. Get a freaking grip on reality people.
- dn11, on 05/28/2008, -0/+3hey who cares. if cash is an incentive for telling the truth I hope more ex Bushies are waiting for their pay day in the near future
- udahlen, on 05/28/2008, -1/+4This is, of course, not news. This was in fact known to everyone except Americans long before the 2004 election. It's really totally amazing you re-elected Bush, the most incompetent idiot you ever had as a President.
- rmmcclay, on 05/29/2008, -0/+2What's next: that George Bush stole two elections and should never have held the office of US President?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 177 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is