digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

See the original image at timesonline.co.uk —

President Bush regrets his legacy

timesonline.co.uk — President Bush has admitted to The Times that his gun-slinging rhetoric made the world believe that he was a “guy really anxious for war” in Iraq.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • DonWigler, on 06/10/2008, -31/+589This is nice to know George, because almost the entire U.S. regrets electing you.
    • mentallyinhell, on 06/11/2008, -22/+208Who says he was elected?
      • chrisk9, on 06/11/2008, -10/+52The election would have been harder to cheat if it wasn't so close.
        • overtoke, on 06/11/2008, -9/+38The closeness is a myth, a fabrication. The majority of this country hates Bush (and McCain). The majority of this country does not want to attack Iran.

          But the media would lead us to believe that we are 50/50 (and it has remained 50/50 for 8 years.) That is a lie.

          Their goal is to fool us into thinking it is 50/50 so they can cheat.
        • CrazedLeper, on 06/11/2008, -3/+13Yup. When you have total control and can fake a victory, you don't go beyond what is necessary to win. The faker will always seek to appear "inconspicuous" so he will only "win" by a little. We'll see this again in November.
        • heliox, on 06/11/2008, -16/+35You guys are causing a tin foil shortage.
        • staticneuron, on 06/11/2008, -3/+12heliox, I live in south florida, you are damn right his election was a fabrication. No one seemed to care when ballot boxes fell of trucks? Or when regular hardworking people where suddendly identified as criminal so they couldn't vote? That and much more blatant signs of foul play was happening in south florida yet the only news that seemed to get out to the rest of the nation was hanging chads? You honestly think the race was that close?

          I am not even sure what happened in other states but i wouldn't find it hard to believe if the same type of dirt was happening nation wide at the time.
        • Melodik, on 06/11/2008, -16/+9You guys are sad stereotypes of internet conspiracy theorists. Seriously, examine yourselves.
        • HonestAbe, on 06/11/2008, -2/+8Blame Nader.
        • MWeather, on 06/11/2008, -8/+25Seriously, only a conspiracy theorist would think an election was fixed. That can't happen in America. Not even if the results are certified the by the winner's campaign manager in the state governed by his brother after a Supreme Court with justices who were appointed by his father stops the recount.

          That's just silly talk.
      • whatthefu, on 06/11/2008, -19/+7He was the second time.
        • overtoke, on 06/11/2008, -2/+15sorry, no.
        • CrazedLeper, on 06/11/2008, -3/+11He was not "elected" either time; google: "caging list".
        • caferrell, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5The fact that he was elected the second time (or almost reelected with the assistance of illegal caging) is a commentary on the American electorate. It is also a commentary on the brainwashing power of the television set.
          People don't think, they don't learn they just recieve inane messages into their semifunctional cerebral cortexes. We don't deserve to vote and we should return to the Constitution.
          The citizenry should vote for regional electors and the electors should vote for President. I don't think that a moron like Bush could have been elected in that system
      • Chassit, on 06/11/2008, -5/+7The SCOTUS.
      • Me1000, on 06/11/2008, -0/+15diebold...
      • JettaMan, on 06/11/2008, -9/+3You people are nuts. He won both elections fair and square. Even his enemies admit that.
        • happyhacker09, on 06/12/2008, -2/+4HAHAHAHAHA Good one!
        • biotch, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2You are entitled to your opinion but his enemies are the ones you are talking to claiming he didnt win.
      • Papajohn56, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2you have got to be kidding, still stuck on something from 2000, move the ***** on
    • gn0stik, on 06/11/2008, -5/+97He who sleeps with the dogs gets fleas.

      Now quit your whining rectify your record of ignoring domestic issues, and get us out of Iraq. Your approval rating might go up a percent or 5.

      ps. Punch Cheney for me.
      • drlha, on 06/11/2008, -1/+21Dugg for that last line.
      • bluntphallus, on 06/11/2008, -1/+4Dugg for the whole comment; the closing statement was just the icing on the cake.
    • ColorBlind, on 06/11/2008, -4/+42I wonder what it feels like to be hated by the entire world...well for the most part anyway.
      • kithogan, on 06/11/2008, -25/+7Who gives a rat's ass what the rest of the world thinks?
        • FeloniusMonkey, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8Just wanted you to know I appreciate the satirical comment. Sucks being dugg down for clever humor.
        • andersan, on 06/11/2008, -3/+6Are you serious? Let me give you an example of why the rest of the world at least needs to NOT hate us:

          You walk into a gay bar, yell "go to hell you *****!" and the order up a drink. Instead of the drink, you get a punch in the testicles and are violated in the anus by 30 burly pissed off men wearing and fishnets.

          See, if we don't treat the rest of the world with respect, and become a nation that they look up to, we're going to end up in that very situation, and *I* don't want my anus violated. We have to deal with Europe, Asia, Africa, and everyone else in the world. Let's try not to piss them off. Ok?
        • nblsavage, on 06/11/2008, -4/+4"You walk into a gay bar, yell "go to hell you *****!" and the order up a drink. Instead of the drink, you get a punch in the testicles and are violated in the anus by 30 burly pissed off men wearing and fishnets. "

          Sounds like kithogan's idea of a good time to me.
        • Endemoniada, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Not you, obviously, but maybe you should?
        • makeitloud, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Because it's dangerous to be alone in the world with terrorist zealots trying to kill you.
      • BoonTobias, on 06/11/2008, -2/+13ask jack thompson, or o'reily for that matter
        • bjs3171, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8you think the entire world hates jack thompson because he doesn't like video games? really?
        • WallnutBoy, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Wah? Digg isn't representable of the whole world? Since when!?
        • Frustian, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2It's quite clear JT FELT LIKE the whole world was against him, apparently he got angry at people in the audience during his disbarment hearing(?), especially Mr. Mim.

          It would be safe to assume for at least a period of time he genuinely thought the whole world was out to get him.
      • dmoore764, on 06/12/2008, -6/+3I like him.

        Not as a president, no. God no. But he seems like a nice guy.
        • sugarazor, on 06/12/2008, -0/+10That's the mindset that got us into this entire mess in the first place. The president you want to have a beer with. I know the guys I drink beer with and they shouldn't even be allowed at a city council meeting.

          Now, the guys I smoke pot with...
      • xike, on 06/12/2008, -0/+7Terrorists like him. He did more damage to us than they ever could.
    • kithogan, on 06/11/2008, -44/+8You don't speak for all Americans. We haven't been attacked since

      9-11 thanks to this brave President. Thanks Pres Bush.
      • StaticThunder, on 06/11/2008, -3/+48I have this rock in my pocket that keeps tigers away. It must be working because I haven't been attacked by a tiger since I started carrying it.
      • nblsavage, on 06/11/2008, -2/+35Bush doesn't deserve the credit. It was my magic anti-terrorist rock. You fail at logic.
      • snds, on 06/11/2008, -2/+28Just because there is a lack of attacks on our soil does not mean that Mr. Bush's policies have helped secure that.

        And secondly, the main goal of the terrorists was to visibly and drastically distrupt the American global economic power. They did just that. Oil and food prices have sky rocketed. Unemployment rate has been higher than it has been since the end of the depression. Our economy is in shambles. The attack worked. Deny it all you'd like but it worked, and sadly we all have to pay for it.

        The effects of the war has single-handedly crippled American fiscal resolve and economic prudence.

        Enjoy your high gas prices. Your vote made it all possible.
      • praisethelard, on 06/11/2008, -0/+12Something tells me if it were a Democrat in office when the attacks occurred your line would read more like: "You speak for all Americans. We were attacked on his watch."
      • catkillcurious, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Successful troll is successful.
      • StaticThunder, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2All politics is trolling.
    • deathfix, on 06/11/2008, -1/+29The best thing he can do is nothing between now and January.
      • HonestAbe, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6He *could* do good things. Just likely won't.
      • jezsik, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8Oh, I can think of a few things. He could man up and admit what he did was hurt the country. He could fire Cheney. He could resign. I just hope he lives to be a very, very old man - so he can see how history treats his "legacy."
        • du4l1ty, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1He could become the president of Africa.
      • diggingaround, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2.... besides announcing marshal law after some false flag attack...
    • afterlife23, on 06/11/2008, -11/+11don't you mean re-elected? blame yourselves ppl
    • ProxyContin, on 06/11/2008, -1/+56And there are still people out there that think he's done a swell job. They'd elect him again if they could.

      Churchill said it: "The best argument against Democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."
    • mweflen, on 06/11/2008, -5/+26I voted against him twice. I will not blame myself for the douchebaggery of our current administration. Go ***** yourself for telling me to.
      • JK1150, on 06/11/2008, -19/+5i have a feeling that someone who uses the word douchebaggery was not 18 in 2000...
        • mweflen, on 06/11/2008, -3/+7Let's put it this way. I voted for Clinton twice and against Bush twice.

          Douchebag.
        • JK1150, on 06/11/2008, -7/+1you must have a lot of friends!
      • willywong, on 06/11/2008, -3/+2You vote for the other person, not against bush. Putting an x beside his name didn't mean you didn't want him in.
        • Bith8654, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2So what your saying is mweflen was some sort of closet bush fan all along, voting for someone else for no reason at all? I don't usually call people stupid but that's just plain ridiculous.
        • mweflen, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2I voted *for* the democratic candidate in four straight elections. I voted for Gore because I believe he has the right ideas about environmental policy (i.e. doing something about it) and foreign relations (i.e. coalition-building and openness). I voted for Kerry because, well, he wasn't Bush.

          He was a pretty weak-ass candidate and the dems ***** themselves that year by putting such a lamewad up against the Bush money/reality distortion machine. Had Kerry shown any balls in the debates and against the "swiftboating," he could have simply called Bush out for what he is: a lying, military duty-dodging, cokehead amateur who lets feelings and faith dictate his policy decisions instead of rationality and experienced advice. Had there been a credible alternative candidate, I might have considered them, but given the illegality of the administration's actions by 2004, I felt it incumbent upon me to vote for the candidate with the best chance of unseating Bush.
      • afterlife23, on 06/12/2008, -4/+1you go ***** yourself and your cat while ure at it cause its obvious i was referring to ppl who voted for bush. ure just pissed ure country sucks ass
        • Bith8654, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Cmon man, your Canadian, your not supposed to be that hostile...unless your a phony!
        • darkciti2, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Since Bush has taken control, yes, the USA has sucked.

          Fortunately, we're hopeful for our future.
    • JK1150, on 06/11/2008, -12/+2i don't :)
      • eltrev, on 06/11/2008, -1/+8Anyone that doesn't have some major regrets about the Bush administration, right or left, is a tool.

        If you have no regrets, it's probably because you are still happy that "your side won" when he was elected for each of his 2 disastrous terms, and that's all you need to be satisfied.

        My golden retriever is more analytical than you.
    • relic180, on 06/11/2008, -11/+5I don't regret *****, I stopped voting for major party candidates over a decade ago.
      All the party cheerleaders that can thank themselves for single handedly building this political system that produces candidates like Dubya.
      • Twee, on 06/11/2008, -3/+5I hope you didn't vote for Ralph Nader. He's just in a pact with the republicans to take away votes from the democrats.
        • relic180, on 06/11/2008, -2/+1And I hope your reply was meant to imply ANYTHING accept that you hope I voted Democrat.
          ***** the Democratic party and their corporate owned line of *****.
          One day, a hundred years from now, people will look back and have pity on the mindless seas of retards clinging to their symbol of political affiliation, being raped of their country for a few bucks and loving every cheer-leading second of it.

          If you ever try suggesting to me that I should have voted for one of the major parties, for ANY reason, I'll hunt you down and remove you from my planet as a public service.
      • HonestAbe, on 06/11/2008, -3/+3Thanks for allowing Bush to win, apathetic drone.
        • relic180, on 06/11/2008, -3/+1I won't even waste my time trying to argue with a somebody who has completely rejected all forms of logic. Sling mud all you want, just because you've duped yourself into feeling that somehow the democrats are good, or even better, I can only feel sorry for you.

          Sometimes I'm glad Bush won, not because he deserved it, or has done anything good for this country ever, but because you Democrats are just as much self-righteous pricks as the Republicans are.

          Call me a drone... but keep on waving that blue team pennant. Go team GO!!
        • WiseWeasel, on 06/11/2008, -1/+2It's those who vote for the lesser of evils who are apathetic drones, and the cause of this whole mess we're in. If people voted for the individual they wanted as president, regardless of the political party, or the names printed on their ballot, then you'd see two things, voter turnout would be above our relatively low rates, and the main party candidates couldn't claim an overwhelming mandate for their power, and would have to tone down their hubris. We need a much better distribution of votes than 49%, 48% and 3% other if we want to bring some balance to politics, instead of this polarizing libs vs. conservatives ***** marketing.
        • HonestAbe, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1"If people voted for the individual they wanted as president, regardless of the political party..."

          Not going to happen. The sooner you accept this, the better. The two-party system is a direct result of the election itself. A plurality-rule vote with only one winner will always tend towards a two-party system. This is called Duverger's Law, related to game theory. The only way to change this is to change the voting system itself, which isn't going to happen on a national scale any time soon. Get local offices changed to proportional rule and preferential voting, and maybe it will spread upwards from there. In the meantime, working within the inevitable system and voting for the lesser of two evils is the best thing you can do.

          Voting for a third party does not "send a message", it just wastes a vote and helps the major party that's most opposed to your views.

          Sitting at home whining about how neither party is good enough for you doesn't help. It doesn't send a message, it doesn't bring about any change. You are primarily responsible for perpetuating the problem and letting poor leaders into power through negligence.
    • yngtimmy, on 06/11/2008, -3/+2not quite true - about 2/3....just sayin...
    • 1033, on 06/11/2008, -18/+1No, only the loud left wing idiots think that. Oil Companies, Small business owners, and Patriotic Americans are behind Bush. School teachers, Minorities, and Ecoterrorists (and diggr's) are the ones making up all this anti-Bush *****, and electing people that will raise the taxes (that they hardly pay, only affecting the middle class and up), DOUBLE capital gains in Obama's case (and remove the 2 year exemption that Bush set), And create more health care plans (im sorry, I should not have to pay for everyones weekly doctor visits begging for drugs). If only America would realize who is really running This world; America and the Corporations. We make them happy and they will return the favor. (the opposite of idea that the left have: they beg, then bitch when things are grim)
      • SocialPoison, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8Yeah... that capital gains tax... woo just clobbering the middle class.

        Moron.
      • whahaa, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5i'd rather pay for folks' unnecessary doctor's visits than pay for illegal domestic surveillance programs, the war on 'terror' and the dismantling of governmental checks and balances. by the way, in the time it took you to read this you were taxed $1 towards getting more troops needlessly killed.
    • Calcularius, on 06/11/2008, -4/+16If he commits suicide I'm OK with it.
      • omenmedia, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1I'm not, because if he does, then he gets off easy. Sadly though, if he ever was brought up on charges for the crap he's pulled (HA HA HA, like that's ever going to happen), I think that suicide would be the option he would take rather than face the music.
    • mcrobles, on 06/11/2008, -9/+4That's ***** up...he's still the leader of our country regardless of the fact that many people don't think he should have been in office in the first place.
    • Darkside2984, on 06/11/2008, -10/+1We elected him twice. Al "lockbox" Gore-LOSER! John "throws like a girl" Kerry - LOSER! My prediction for 2008 NObama-LOSER!
      • tracer9, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3hehe. You fail.
      • Darkside2984, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1Rly? I think we (GOP) won the past two elections and don't have an impeachment this century. kthxbai
    • AWBoy666, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8No, about 30% of the country would still elect him. Liberals and people on Digg like to pretend these people don't exist. Sorry, they do!
    • diggingaround, on 06/12/2008, -0/+7I heard you loud and clear - saying"...If you are not with us, your are against us...."
    • blipblipbeep, on 06/12/2008, -2/+4Burn in hell bush you dick.
    • mostfynest, on 06/12/2008, -3/+2Please Americans, do yourselves and the rest of the world a favour and spread the good word.... INVESTIGATE, IMPEACH, ARREST, CONVICT AND EXECUTE, Bush and his cronnies. Tell 10 People and get them to tell 10 more, diggers have the power to change public opinion (being special and all!) DO IT! It has to be done and it has to start somewhere, no better time than the present! His crimes well surpass treason, EXECUTE EXECUTE EXECUTE!!! Spread the word! This is how revolutions start. This ploy of his to apologise in code takes advantage of the natural human emotional response of empathy and forgiveness! Or even better, why don't one of you fanatics take him out? I would if I had half a chance.

      Thank You on behalf of the world.
      • why3th, on 06/12/2008, -1/+0You would be executing merely the puppet.
        • mostfynest, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Thats very true, however it would set a precedent to all those future presidents who'll think twice about destroying the western world.
    • shoyou, on 06/12/2008, -1/+0at least those of us who aren't entirely deluded
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -1/+0I sure as ***** never voted for this imbecile. I regret that the majority of Americans were too dumb to not see through his ***** and that they're so easily led in any direction they're lured to, but yeah. I have no regrets because I would never be dumb enough to help put this man in office. My regrets lie in the reality of what we're dealing with in regards to a country of fools who will follow wherever they're led; even when they're led by the king retard himself.
    • Eezyville, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1He should regret it. But its not like its all his fault. As president he was lied to by some members of his administration but he is the president, he takes the blame. I, however, would never ever trust a man named Dick.
  • Carthagefield, on 06/11/2008, -93/+66"He said that his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran. I think that in retrospect I could have used a different tone, a different rhetoric.”

    Wow George, you're really something aintcha? You, who has been complicit in dragging your country along with half the "civilised world" into an illegal and unnecessary war. You, who has conspired with your fellow Neoconservative Zionist ideologues to asset-strip the mineral and economic wealth of a sovereign nation, to kill it's citizens and provoke civil war amongst it's partisanry. The corruption, the embezzlement, the PATRIOT Act, habeas corpus, Haliburton, Custer Battles, invisible WMD's, Blackwater, abu-ghraib, waterboarding, torture, "Extraordinary rendition", NORAD's big day off, New Orleans, the Kyoto protocol, Scooter Libby, Valerie Plame, "Now watch this drive", No Child Left Behind, Rigged Florida elections, "pregnant chads", the 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt, the $4 gas gallon, the sub-prime housing crisis, Guantanamo Bay and a lovely little story about 'A Pet Goat'. And for all your crimes and transgressions, all you have to say in your defence is "I think that in retrospect I could have used a different tone, a different rhetoric." Ohhh I see, well then it's all ok then. Everything is just hunky-dory, top-notch, first-class, and dandy. Since you said you're sorry, well, that's all right, then, George. Sit down. Have a scone. Make yourself at home. You klutz! You stupid, bird-brained, flat-headed sanctimonious cretin! TOO ***** LATE ASSHAT!

    Oh, did I mention that 9/11 was an inside job? ***** YOU BUSH!!!
    • marksmayo, on 06/11/2008, -18/+7"kill its citizens" not "kill it's citizens"

      ;)
      • dvicklund, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2I literally can not believe you pulled that out. Of all the grammar nazi moves, you had to pull that one. That is the single most insignificant grammatical error that a person can commit. It's about equal to getting a ticket for going exactly one mile per hour over the speed limit. It's ridiculous. No one cares that he added an unnecessary yet perfectly logical apostrophe.

        Now, if he spelled ridiculous "rediculous" or whose (that's possessive, mind you) "who's". Those things are crimes against humanity which should be attacked without mercy.
    • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -5/+22They also raided all of the gold out of the Iraq central bank. Who knows where that gold went...
    • chanop, on 06/11/2008, -11/+70You had me until "9/11 was an inside job"
      • GhostyBoy, on 06/11/2008, -31/+10They had the motive and the means, man.

        False flag attacks are historical precedent, and buildings collapsing from fire at nearly free fall speed has never happened before except for on 9/11.

        Do you really believe that 19 muslim ninjas bypassed the entire U.S. defense network and leveled those buildings with absolutely no inside help whatsoever?

        Meanwhile neocons reap billions and billions and use 9/11 as their excuse to commit every crime in the book? Bush is the incredibly stupid puppet of some very evil masters, and yeah, 9/11 was an inside job.
        • thedogfatherx, on 06/11/2008, -5/+4It looks like your the incredibly stupid person here sorry. You people are just freakin nuts, wacky, and probably borderline psycho.
        • 471776, on 06/11/2008, -3/+6"Muslim ninjas"? Seriously?

          "Bypassed the entire U.S. defense network" - hyperbole much? They bypassed a metal detector without any metal items.

          I used to believe the conspiracies too. But at the end of the day, the main proponents of such theories lie and distort facts themselves - you are a prime example. I haven't seen any real hard evidence to support them. In terms of the two stories - what's easier to believe? There was major conspiracy involving hundreds of people, and it's yet to leak from anyone? Or that maybe we aren't quite as invincible as we'd like to think, and a few extremists got through the net and onto the planes?

          Not to mention the massive technical problems with the conspiracy theory version of events. You have problems with the physics and engineering according to the official version? I have a problem with some of the arguments put forward by the conspiracy theorists, which I'm not going to bother listing now 'cause it'd result in a massive text wall.

          I know it's easy to get carried away in the sensational story - it's shocking, and the way the conspiracy view is presented is very convincing at first. But getting caught up in the Bush-hating, 'neo-cons are the cause of all evils' view can sometimes make you oblivious to ideas that have a greater grounding in reality. I'm not saying the Bush administration did not exploit 9/11, but that doesn't automatically mean they planned it.

          I've seen Loose Change, I've studied the TV footage, I've obsessed over the questions. Still can't say 100% either way, but my analysis tends to favor the official version. I'd still like further investigation, but the official story is the most plausible I've seen so far.

          9/11 was a terrorist attack. There are thousands of people who absolutely, flat-out hate the US. A few of them finally managed to hit us. It was inevitable. I don't claim to know that as a fact, but as far as I can tell, the official story is the truth.
        • qbp54321, on 06/12/2008, -2/+0"Do you really believe that 19 muslim ninjas bypassed the entire U.S. defense network and leveled those buildings with absolutely no inside help whatsoever?"

          Yes.
      • overtoke, on 06/11/2008, -23/+6It was an inside job simply due to the fact that the perpetrators took advantage of and had full knowledge of the wargames that were occurring on that day.

        Who tipped them off? Someone on the inside.
      • chanop, on 06/11/2008, -13/+13Please Review, truthers. The 9/11 Comission failed to address everything, but it wasn't an inside job:

        http://www.loosechangeguide.com

        http://www.911mysteriesguide.com

        http://www.911myths.com

        http://www.debunking911.com
        • GhostyBoy, on 06/11/2008, -7/+11Those have all been debunked.

          Read "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" by David Ray Griffin.

          The claims on those websites are based on little to no evidence, and are predominantly straw man arguments.

          Watch 9/11: Press for Truth to learn how the government blocked any kind of meaningful investigation.
        • inkyblue2, on 06/11/2008, -4/+21i debunk your debunking debunkings. no debunkbacks.
        • tkstock, on 06/11/2008, -1/+9The directors of the firm hired to
          continue the credits after the other
          people had been sacked, wish it to
          be known that they have just been
          sacked.
        • richbleak, on 06/11/2008, -2/+6I would suggest reading "Debunking Debunking Debunking Debunking 9/11 Debunking". Best book on the subject since "Additional Musings on Debunking Debunking 9/11 Debunking".
        • jessehadden, on 06/11/2008, -7/+4Sorry, GhostyBoy. You may be able to convince yourself that steel buildings fall at the rate of gravity (with some minor wind resistance) after being hit by an airplane. I am afraid my scientific & historical literacies prevent me from the "suspension of disbelief" required to accept what the debunkers are selling. Isn't that a little ironic? It doesn't mean that any particular conspiracy theory is true, but it does mean our government is deliberately deceiving us about what happened.
        • theright, on 06/11/2008, -3/+8All of David Ray Griffin's claims in "Debunking 9/11 Debunking" have been debunked by Ryan Mackey in "On Debunking 9/11 Debunking" (unfortunately he didn't call it "Debunking Debunking 9/11 Debunking")

          David Ray Griffin's NIST critique is available to purchase for $20. Ryan Mackey's critique of that is available online, for free: http://911guide.googlepages.com/ryanmackey

          Make of that what you will...
        • IphtashuFitz, on 06/11/2008, -7/+7"Debunking 9/11 Debunking" is more garbage put forth by somebody who doesn't understand science, refuses to accept the statements by people who were actually at ground zero during and after the attacks, and selectively accepts the statements by fire fighters who were there when those statements help his cause and rejects statements from those same firefighters when they go counter to his arguments.

          For example, he makes the claim that the steel in the building should have acted like a huge heat sink, dissipating the heat from the fires. That's not true since steel isn't a very good conductor of heat. He also makes dubious claims about the causes, color, etc. of smoke.

          With regards to ignoring the firefighters, those firefighters saw substantial bulging between floors 10 & 13 fairly early in the day, well before the building collapsed. These are professionals who have dealt with fires & building collapses numerous times who could see the building was losing structural integrity as early as 2:00 even though the building didn't ultimately collapse until 5:00. The author claims the building was structurally sound at 3:30, which is entirely counter to the reports from the professionals who were actually there. Who are you more likely to believe?
      • 1gunners4, on 06/11/2008, -14/+6The "ZIONIST" comments didn't tip you off before?
      • 4degrees, on 06/11/2008, -12/+2technically it was perpetrated INSIDE this country... so it could be seen as an inside job... :-P
      • geddon, on 06/11/2008, -4/+8Dugg regardless of the 9/11 comment.
      • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -6/+5come on.... after all that do you think 9/11 being an inside job would really be that far-fetched? 85,000 innocent Iraqis are dead (at least), 3,000 Americans is a small price to pay - not that they care anyway.
      • geddon, on 06/12/2008, -0/+4The whole idea of an inside job is waaaaaay outside of your average American's field of vision. Most people have a hard time accepting that OUR Government destroyed three countries, and is hinging on a fourth, in a Global War on Terror. They fail to see the number of Americans imprisoned by the system, and have been lulled into a false sense of security -- down the whole "I did not speak up when they came for them" path that we all know from the fairy tales. It bores them. They would rather suck on the teats of entertainment than rock the cradle with some 9/11 inside job theory.
    • mlvassallo, on 06/11/2008, -4/+7How does it feel to type all of that just to get dugg down because of your last phrase?
      • Herkimer56, on 06/11/2008, -9/+3There's a lot more than the 9/11 comment in that skreed to justify burying that comment.
        • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -2/+3I get the feeling that you are not really a nice person in the real world. Care to comment?
        • Herkimer56, on 06/12/2008, -2/+2I am a nice person but more importantly I am an educated person who understands what Carthagefield is trying to do in his posting.
        • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Skreed? That's not even a word.
          Honestly. What are you really trying to say and why are you posing a republican Apple fan?
    • adeadfaerie, on 06/11/2008, -9/+3this is the single best rant i have read in a long time!

      Stands up and CLAPS!!!
    • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -4/+5I agree with everything apart from the 'zionism' part. People should reconsider their digg downs.
  • dwxp, on 06/11/2008, -15/+187"Phrases such as “bring them on” or “dead or alive”, he said, “indicated to people that I was, you know, not a man of peace”."

    • philostrato, on 06/11/2008, -12/+4shoot. i didn't realize you'd clued in on the same quote before i posted my comment below. touche.
      • benecere, on 06/11/2008, -1/+1Hey," touche" used correctly is enough of an event for my digg.
    • SpankyBojangles, on 06/11/2008, -4/+57And let's not forget "shock and awe". Yeah...he tossed around that gun-slinging rhetoric like a monkey throwing his own *****.
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 06/11/2008, -1/+11"Attack of Opportunity"
        "Enhanced Interrogation"
        "Sharp Shooter"
        "Smoking Gun"
        "Dead or Alive"
        "Mission Accomplished"
        "Stay The Course"
        "Bring them on"
        "Nu-Q-Lar Weapons"
        "Shock and Awe"
        "Mushroom Cloud"
        "Smoke 'Em Outta Their Hole"
        "War Time President"
      • texpundit, on 06/11/2008, -5/+4Actually, the whole idea of "shock and awe" was thought up by Harlan Ullman.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harlan_Ullman
    • lewscroo, on 06/11/2008, -3/+79...and it only took 5 years to admit that some of his words were probably wrong. How much longer till he realizes that his actions were a bit worse?
      • theaceoffire, on 06/11/2008, -2/+18After Jail.
      • benecere, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5And after 71/2 years of total destruction, warmongering, borrowing and spending with abandon -- he wants to "fix" the legacy he leaves by saying "Oops, sorry; but, you know, Iran is still really, really bad" for the next six months.

        If Bush is remembered as a "man of Peace" then I guess we can re-write the history texts to describe Hitler as "the man who unified Germany and endorsed timely public transportation". Stalin can be a "Soviet leader who built a multitude of facilities to initiate progress in mental health"" Mussolini might be"an art lover with a penchant for sculpture."

    • jstohler, on 06/11/2008, -5/+68The other thing that indicates you weren't a man of peace? Declaring war.
      • itspuddingtime, on 06/11/2008, -0/+12To be fair:
        1. Bush did not and does not have the authority to declare war. Congress alone can do this.
        2. Congress did NOT declare war. They authorized the use of force. So the US is technically not "at war" right now.
        However, I agree with the essence of your comment. Bush can suck a fat one.
        • narcofiche, on 06/11/2008, -2/+33. PROFIT!
        • Dustmuffins, on 06/11/2008, -0/+7Keep your fairness off my Digg.
        • publiclurker, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2Strangely enough, if he did suck a fat one, there was a chance we could get the SOB impeached.
    • GTanaka, on 06/11/2008, -1/+11O RLY, Mr. Bush!?
    • monoa, on 06/11/2008, -1/+6"I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan.' And I did, and then God would tell me, 'George go and end the tyranny in Iraq,' and I did."

      Now that was a phrase that made me think "What a ***** sucker".
    • WiseWeasel, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3To be fair, he was addressing the British press, and those Brits just can't get enough understatement. He followed by describing himself as "not the brightest bulb in the bunch", "not the most articulate speaker" and "not the greatest humanitarian around"...
  • Minarchian, on 06/11/2008, -31/+158Now that Articles Of Impeachment have been formally introduced on the floor this tyrant is going to try to pull on the People heart strings.

    He's pathetic.
    • gregsamsa222, on 06/11/2008, -8/+17Sadly, the impeachment won't happen. Some think that the country doesn't have the stomach for it, and that's why we won't impeach. I think, though, that the reason we'll never see an impeachment of GWB is because he's not the only guilty party. To impeach the bastard, we'd also have to go after most Democrats and the media.

      The best thing to do is to vote for change, and insist the media report rather than support.
      • Carthagefield, on 06/11/2008, -6/+8Impeachment proceedings may well happen, although there are a great many obstacles that must be overcome. The question is, if a trial were to be convened, would we get a conviction? In all likelihood, I think not. Still, the pleasure to be gleaned from watching the belligerent bastard squirm would make it all so worthwhile.
        • gregsamsa222, on 06/11/2008, -7/+4No conviction...? Hadn't thought of that. Why no conviction? A lack of the same in the prosecution?
      • KevinRWright, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6100% right. I don't think Dennis had any misconceptions that he may actually get Bush impeached, he did it just to have an official congressional record of his crimes. People on Digg like to over simplify things. He won't be impeached.

        The Dems are too spineless and won't do this right before the election. They think they would be committing political suicide if they went through with it. Do I agree with that, no, but I guarantee you that's what the majority of them are thinking.
      • ElectroBot, on 06/11/2008, -1/+9I find it interesting that the US impeached (not convicted) Bill Clinton for receiving a blow job, but is okay with all the crimes that George W. Bush committed.
        • HonestAbe, on 06/11/2008, -0/+8You and everyone else on the internet.
        • Bith8654, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Don't you watch TV?
          Violence, blood, and gore = Sure, why not?
          Sex = NO!!
        • gh0st3000, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1It wasn't the blowjob, it was lying about it to a grand jury (perjury, a felony)
    • jayscot, on 06/11/2008, -12/+6They are lacking something...EVIDENCE.
      • AnarkeIncarnate, on 06/11/2008, -2/+1Hi Ray Finkle. Laces out, see.........
  • mrbradg, on 06/11/2008, -21/+84What a ***** douche. It reads: his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran. War monger to the end.
    • Qong, on 06/11/2008, -1/+1Here's the actual quote:

      "He said that his focus for his final six months in office was to secure agreement on issues such as establishing a Palestinian state and to “leave behind a series of structures that makes it easier for the next president'."

      Yeah man, you're absolutely right...
    • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -1/+1hahaha The Times is so full of rubbish. Under the direction of Rupert Murdoch of course. Diplomacy... good one.
  • philostrato, on 06/11/2008, -18/+75Phrases such as “bring them on” or “dead or alive”, he said, “indicated to people that I was, you know, not a man of peace”.

    REALLY? YOU DON'T SAY...
    • milobennett, on 06/11/2008, -1/+1We did not need peace at the time; nor do we need it now. We need to continue to hold those who perpetrated and approved of the atrocity of 911 to account. We need to stay right exactly where we are. Poised to prevent Iran from succeeding at their stated goal of destroying the state of Israel. It is clear to anyone with access to a map and a history book what will happen if we pull out. Anyone suggesting that we do so is showing what they really think of the Jewish State and people.
      • WiseWeasel, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Israel has over 200 nuclear warheads, and the most well-equipped army in the Gulf; they can protect themselves. The US does not need to have anything to do with Iran, and is not threatened by Iran. Just because we don't think we should be spending our resources putting ourselves in harm's way for another country's interests doesn't mean we have anything against the people of that country. I wouldn't fight for Britain's interests, and I wouldn't fight for Israel's. They want to have their non-muslim country in the Middle East, while actively antagonizing their Palestinian neighbors, let them manage the consequences with their own blood and resources. The US shouldn't be the world's police, nor can we afford to act like it much longer.
      • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Awesome. You sound as ***** dumb as the man himself. Someone get an IP address from that post. I'm almost positive it's coming from somewhere in DC.
    • rentmitchum, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1Actually he did say.
  • gregsamsa222, on 06/11/2008, -15/+54This is the most pathetic interview I've ever read. Four years ago, this would be seen as useful; now, this is just depressing. He should have listened more to his critics and less to his supporters.

    Wow. I didn't think the man could piss me off anymore. But he just did.
    • MysticSavage, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2He had supporters?
    • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2He wasn't listening then, he isn't listening now and his successor won't listen neither....mark my words.
    • digitronix, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1"He said that his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran"

      That sounds like a complete contradiction to what he said just a couple weeks ago, when 'diplomacy to Iran' corresponded to 'appeasement to terrorism' in his opinion.
  • ShellShock11, on 06/11/2008, -13/+52Couple months left, time to start healing my reputation!
  • voodoosteve84, on 06/11/2008, -6/+165He only regrets his choice of words leading up to the war, according to the article.
    • barkus, on 06/11/2008, -1/+14Pathetic. But at the same time, hearing Bush actually admit he was wrong on anything is remarkable.
      • arplayer2k, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3Its a BS PR stunt. He is more worried about how history will remember him than anything else at this point. Don't get all sentimental on us.
    • KyjL, on 06/11/2008, -3/+8In other words, every word that he uttered to the public?
    • billyfalconer, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2Right, he doesn't say he regrets the invasion. He still says he'd invade Iraq again. That shows his real valuation of the people he's sent to die.
    • digitronix, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Do you mean, he only regrets his choice of words leading up to THREE WEEKS AGO, when he suggested that 'diplomacy to Iran' corresponded to 'appeasement to terrorism' in his opinion?

      And now he's saying the complete opposite. According to the article: "He said that his aim now was to leave his successor a legacy of international diplomacy for tackling Iran."
  • yellowcakewalk, on 06/11/2008, -28/+55The criminal must pay the price. The most lenient sentence possible is life imprisonment.
    • statuescrumble, on 06/11/2008, -13/+1Hes not a bad man, hes just made bad choices.
      • duniyadnd, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5He still hasn't admitted he made bad choices. He's talking about his choice of words here, not his actions/decisions. In that case, no one is a bad person, just make bad choices.
      • jezsik, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1Evil is what evil does.
      • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3I don't think he is a bad man. I think he is a puppet of bad men.
        • kingnothing1, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3A little of column A, a little of column B. To be a puppet you have to go along with what they are making you do.
      • diggrnumber1, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1you could say that about anybody.
    • Demener, on 06/11/2008, -2/+5You actually believe that?
    • CrazedLeper, on 06/11/2008, -0/+9Yes, but imprisonment it is too lenient. I was thinking something more like shooting him out of a cannon--into another cannon.
  • alexnexus, on 06/11/2008, -11/+5Bush is just realizing that he's precidency was or will be at least incompetent and negligent. But he will do it again...
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -1/+0"he will do it again."
      Do WHAT again? Send this country down the *****? How do you propose he'll do that since he's ineligible to ever be president again?
      Man, these are some ***** dumb comments in this thread. Really, really dumb.
  • retr0grade, on 06/11/2008, -17/+166I'd pay $10 and stand in line for three hours to have a chance to kick him in the balls.
    • davidamerland, on 06/11/2008, -5/+14And then the head, though one kick might accomplish both goals equally.
    • Kizilbash, on 06/11/2008, -4/+42Well, that's one way of earning back the billions he spent on that bogus war. Did I say billions? I meant trillions.
      • HonestAbe, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5We aren't at war. We're liberating Iraq, damn it! LIBERATING
      • diggrnumber1, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1$540 billion spent so far. you should have meant billions.
    • Snap65, on 06/11/2008, -9/+75I'd rather kick every American who voted for Bush in the balls.
      • mentallyinhell, on 06/11/2008, -22/+9Not that I'm for Bush, but Kerry and Gore were about as useless as the alternative.
        • Snap65, on 06/11/2008, -5/+19Man this makes me want to kick every American who was going to vote for Kerry or Gore but decided to vote for Bush in balls even harder.
      • StaticThunder, on 06/11/2008, -6/+3Ow! My balls!

        /didn't vote for the deciderer.
      • Demener, on 06/11/2008, -4/+6I'd guess about half the people who voted for him sincerely regret it now.

        The other half of the country that didn't has been screwed over because of them though.
        • mweflen, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3They could still use a good swift kick in the nuts. Operant conditioning might help them make better decisions in the future.
      • NihilFist, on 06/11/2008, -1/+11Texas would be in pain.
      • ninjacob, on 06/11/2008, -9/+2Bring it on, *****!
      • cambob76, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2Don't forget the boxes!
      • happyhacker09, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2Dugg!
      • diggrnumber1, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3both of my parents voted for bush twice, but i don't know why. i'm not sure they know why either.
      • darkciti2, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1The voting machines don't have balls.
    • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -2/+31I'd pay $100.
    • kithogan, on 06/11/2008, -18/+4Wow, aren't you the tough guy! You don't even have the cojones to run for office. Just blah blah blah
      • brutalentropy, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6Running for office doesn't require cojones. It requires money. Lots and LOTS of money.
      • mweflen, on 06/11/2008, -0/+7By "cojones", do you perhaps mean "millions of dollars?"
    • Donboy2k, on 06/11/2008, -1/+14In the balls? Man, I'd pay $500 and I'd camp out overnight.
    • cryptomystic, on 06/11/2008, -0/+14I'd give back my stimilus check and wait in line for 10 hours just to spit in Cheney's face.
    • vind, on 06/11/2008, -1/+5President Bush may have been a pretty bad president, but I think it's funny how so many irrationally place all the blame on him; he's become a scapegoat for anything that goes wrong. All one needs to do is find any kind of connection between a problem and President Bush, despite how tenuous, and shazaam! it's all his fault.

      I also think the complete lack of respect for political leaders is troubling. There is a big difference between respect and support, but it's sad that nobody acknowledges it anymore. People complain that we can't have civilized dialogue, but how can we have dialogue if there is no respect?
      • publiclurker, on 06/11/2008, -1/+3Respect is earned. The lack of civilized dialog occurs when people who have not earned it act like it's owed to them.
      • vind, on 06/11/2008, -3/+2You may disagree, but I feel that being elected President does earn one respect.

      • ynggrsshppr, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Bush did have some respect, you just have to realize that he just gradually squandered it. Look at his approval ratings over time for some indication.
      • diggrnumber1, on 06/12/2008, -1/+2politics is lies, and lies alone. you can't construct a winning campaign without lying. why should i respect any of them? politicians have lied so much that i automatically assume that everything that comes out of their mouth is a lie, because it is safer that way (skepticism ftw). i will respect a politician when they start citing every fact they use and stop claiming to know everything about every field. they should be consulting experts rather than creating partisan rifts or cults of personality around themselves. ron paul (and now obama to a lesser extent) have become cult leaders, and mccain is probably mentally disabled. why should i trust any of them. we should be looking at the policies, not the personality.
    • jaydoj, on 06/12/2008, -0/+2On the next episode of Ow! My Balls!'
    • sodoh, on 06/12/2008, -0/+0Only a three hour long queue?
  • mathewsjw, on 06/11/2008, -39/+132/3 of America regret the asswipes that hate America, hate G.W. Bush, and blame everything on someone in a tough job.
    • yellowcakewalk, on 06/11/2008, -10/+33It's comfortable to live in a little world where you can just make up "facts" and cling to them as if they were true, isn't it?
    • marksmayo, on 06/11/2008, -7/+16That stat is about as reliable as a report on the existence of WMDs...
    • Chassit, on 06/11/2008, -6/+18"2/3 of America regret the asswipes that hate America"

      Those asswipes are also known as neoconservatives.
    • SoulDrift404, on 06/12/2008, -1/+3Lord I hope I don't actually know you in real life. That'd be embarrassing.
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -1/+0Get an education, take some history and english classes, come back here in 4 years and then rewrite your comment so that it makes some sense, thanks.
  • angusm, on 06/11/2008, -9/+127I don't have the impression that he regrets his legacy, but rather his image. That's like worrying that your hair's a mess when the cops take your mugshot.
    • CrazedLeper, on 06/11/2008, -1/+7He's definitely not worried about his legacy. He didn't care when he was $h!tting on the whole world and that didn't change. He's just trying to keep the impeachment buzz down so that association with him won't hurt McCain anymore than it already is.
  • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -9/+40This stooge needs to be impeached as in years ago. Pelosi should be impeached as well for her wholly irresponsible "Impeachment is off the table" nonsense quote. I'm pulling my hair out with how stupid/evil/corrupt/disgusting these Demopublicans are these days. DAMN.
    • delmar14, on 06/11/2008, -7/+8you can't impeach someone for not impeaching someone...thats just retarded.
      • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -0/+9If it is your responsibility to do something, and you don't do it, to the detriment of the people you are representing, hell yes you should be impeached for not upholding your responsibility.
        • PawnsOfJoshua, on 06/11/2008, -4/+1It is her responsibility to determine if the offenses were impeachable. Since she knows far more than you or any of us diggers for that matter, none of us really has much ground to stand on when making comments about what she should have done. Just shut your hole already.
    • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -2/+4...and that's why there is a finite list of impeachable offenses. Because if there weren't, the very serious impeachment process would be used all the time for political purposes.

      Thank you, have a nice day.
      • Demener, on 06/11/2008, -2/+1I've read about a dozen of your posts today and disagreed with every one of them except this one.
        • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -3/+3That's odd, since I really didn't say anything much different in the other ones.

          Maybe you were viewing the other posts while wearing the "That guy's a conservative so I automatically discount anything he says" glasses?
        • PawnsOfJoshua, on 06/11/2008, -2/+2It is not our fault that conservative jargon is a fat load of bull *****. The only people who support that crap are A) exceedingly wealthy and have no remorse so long as they are becoming even more exceedingly wealthy, or B) people whose entire political perspective is based on the image they convey to their neighbors and coworkers.
      • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -2/+5I would personally like to see impeachment happen much more often than it is now. Our government is rotted with corruption and BS. People need to lose office.
        • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -4/+2umm.... and having impeachment proceedings every other month would change that how?
        • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -2/+4Something called accountability, idiot. Our government clearly needs quite a bit more of it.
        • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -4/+2And you're under the impression that impeaching willy nilly will provide this accountability? Really? How old are you?
        • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2When did I say impeaching people willy nilly? How old are YOU? You impeach people when they fail in their oath of office.
        • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -3/+1Who determines whether they fail in their oath office? Other politicians?

          (Are you seeing how we quickly find ourselves in "impeaching willy nilly" land?)

          I prefer to keep it the way the Constitution has already set it up.
        • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2Please define high crimes and misdemeanors. Thanks.
    • Latimer, on 06/11/2008, -6/+4I love how everyone just tosses around the word "impeach" whenever any political situation comes up. Bush goes to war?!? Impeach! Pelosi doesn't impeach Bush?! Impeach! Rick Santorum dared to wear a seersucker suit??! Impeach!!!
      • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -2/+2I find it disturbing. Somewhere along the line, someone has failed to either teach or learn the importance of having an impeachment process. Do they even teach this in school anymore? I learned this stuff in eight grade!
        • Latimer, on 06/11/2008, -1/+4I also imagine that most diggers believe that impeachment means that the politician is removed from office........
        • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3Definition for any ignorant folks out there:
          http://hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=impe ...
        • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3So, do you believe that impeachment is not warranted in this case?
        • vexingmodstwo, on 06/11/2008, -1/+2Dude, if it isn't fairly obvious by now... correct, until someone comes up with actual grounds for impeachment (according to the guidelines set up by the Constitution), impeachment is not warranted in this case.

          Irrational hatred, accusations without evidence, anger over lost elections, etc just don't cut it with me.
        • kemp34, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3Have you read any of the 35 articles presented by Kucinich?
        • vexingmodstwo, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Yes.
        • kemp34, on 06/12/2008, -0/+3So you would say each of those 35 Articles is "Irrational hatred, accusations without evidence, anger over lost elections, etc"? Or are YOU just a partisan hack supporting Bush and going down with his idiotic ship? I am a libertarian/conservative independent BTW, so this is no partisan BS on my part. I believe to be true that Bush is a president who deserves impeachment for numerous misdeeds and abuse of power.
  • Ruler4you, on 06/11/2008, -14/+6If it looks like a turd and smells like a turd and tastes like a .. it's a turd.

    Changing the description is used to fool people or change their beliefs. This is classic and is exactly how they have changed the meaning of the Constitution and what's left of what at one time were our common Rights given by God Himself to all of us.
  • rufusdog, on 06/11/2008, -8/+25The post title should read: "President Bush regrets his LUNACY"
  • LimeParrot, on 06/11/2008, -14/+54***** you Bush.
    • kithogan, on 06/11/2008, -15/+5liberals have no class, low rent vulgar language shows such a lack of education and couth.
      • bagelmaster, on 06/11/2008, -2/+3No, it shows anger and contempt. Get off your high horse.
      • Edrick, on 06/11/2008, -2/+3I thought liberals were the ones with TOO much education? Sorry, I can never keep my ***** straight.
      • xGuerrillaRadio, on 06/11/2008, -2/+6It's not a partisan thing. Liberals aren't the only ones cursing the Bush Administration.
    • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/11/2008, -1/+7"Go ***** Yourself" - Richard Bruce Cheney
  • MJDub, on 06/11/2008, -13/+200Worst. President. Ever.
    • Gauthic, on 07/09/2008, -4/+30Worst. President. *Yet*.

      You'll get the hang of observing the downward spiral with age and experience, Grasshopper.
      • MJDub, on 06/11/2008, -3/+6This is assuming McCain wins, which I refuse to do.
      • Drewnami, on 06/11/2008, -5/+5No matter who wins, we lose.
        • xeomage, on 06/11/2008, -7/+1Hahaha! Oh gosh, that's funny! That's really funny. Do you write your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh, "no matter who wins, we lose". You know I've never heard anyone reference, reference that outside the movie poster before, because that's what it says on the poster, right? "No matter who wins, we lose"? And yet you've taken it and used it out of context in this everyday situation. God, what a clever smart person you must be, to come up with that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any titanic jokes you want to throw at me too as long as we're hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're sooo funny!

          (Yes, irony ackowledged)
        • dmoore764, on 06/12/2008, -5/+1xeomage, did you have to look that up, or did you memorize it? Either way.............. awesome!
        • Drewnami, on 06/13/2008, -0/+1It's relevant and I was thinking of the actual idiom, not AVP.

          [/straightmanning the joke]
    • ninjacob, on 06/11/2008, -15/+3Not even close. Read some history douchasaurus.
    • redslash, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Umm, at the very least he didn't start a civil war through his incompetence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Buchanan
    • heresy_fnord, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1@MJDub...

      I think you meant EVAR!!!!111!!

      No? :-)
  • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -12/+19I really only have three regrets about his term in office: Afghanistan, Iraq, and the complete over-the-top reaction (Patriot Act, Homeland Security, etc.) in the rush to respond to 9/11. If you take away those three things, we'd have more money in the coffers, less unsatisfied citizens, and Iraq would still be a stable country which would have aided in keeping oil prices under control. That all equates to a healthier economy.

    Beefing up the intelligence community from the chaos it devolved to under Clinton was really the only reaction needed to 9/11.
    • futureb, on 06/11/2008, -2/+8well, ok, in that sense I really only have 1 regret, and that is George W Bush's birth.
    • jaxcs, on 06/11/2008, -0/+10In other words nearly everything about the Bush admin.
      • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -3/+1Nope, just those 3.
        • KevinRWright, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1(Facepalm)
        • jaxcs, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1take away those 3 and there is almost nothing left for people to get excited about. The old saws like abortion, environment and immigration don't even show on the radar any longer. Those 3 issues will completely define the Bush legacy.
        • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1Without those three coming into the picture, do you not think that the government would have been concerned with other things like abortion, the environment, and immigration? Privatization of Social Security? Health care reform? More attention given to education?

          Those three points I stated have basically taken away all the attention that would usually be paid to issues that are actually important to the country. Just look at the 100's of hours wasted by Congress on the Patriot Act alone. Our government basically gave up on every other policy area for the sake of planning and arguing over the fighting two meaningless wars, and figuring out how to make us more safe from the boogeyman. I don't know about you, but I'm no more worried about a terrorist attack in the post-9/11 era than I was prior to 9/11.
    • 1longtime, on 06/11/2008, -1/+7Hold on buckaroo, Afghanistan is a pretty important endeavor. I could have done without Iraq and the Patriot Act though.
      • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1Important how? Opium trade is back to pre-invasion levels, some areas that were cleared of the Taliban influence have become hotbeds again. All Al Qaeda did was pack up and move to another cave. So in 6 years, what remarkable improvements have we really accomplished? It's been pretty marginal in the grand scheme of things, in my opinion, and certainly not worth the effort in terms of cost vs. reward.
        • asskicker32, on 06/11/2008, -0/+3Afghanistan, though, has been an extremely oppresive regime and is/was harboring "terrorists". In Afghanistan, people actually WANTED the US to come in as liberators. Countries surrounding Afghanistan (except Russia) wanted the US to come in and bring stability to that nation. The UN supported it. NATO supported it. And save for a few costly mistakes, it could have been taken with few casualties...

          Now, its getting a bit out of control again... But it is actually a war that was farily well supported by the US and the rest of the world.
        • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1At the risk of sounding cruel, I really could care less about a country having an oppressive regime. As for harboring terrorists, they can join the club of dozens of other nations that do the same.

          "Countries surrounding Afghanistan (except Russia) wanted the US to come in and bring stability to that nation."

          To those countries: what do you bring to the table in all this?

          "The UN supported it. NATO supported it."
          Did they support us getting a little payback, or did they support it as a purely humanitarian endeavor? I'd argue it was the former, in which case that's of little consequence.

          The Soviets showed the world how well a war waged in Afghanistan works. We're reinforcing that lesson.

          That's not a criticism of the troops over there. They're doing their job as best they can, it just so happens that the job itself is flawed at the core.
        • wolfzbane, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1"Countries surrounding Afghanistan (except Russia) wanted the US to come in and bring stability to that nation."

          To those countries: what do you bring to the table in all this?

          I've spent many months in Afghanistan and there are over 14 nations in Afghanistan, Including Korea, France, Egypt and Poland and they aren't just there for show.
    • lordtyros, on 06/11/2008, -0/+4I really only have one regret about the Holocaust: All the dead people.
    • asskicker32, on 06/11/2008, -0/+7I could have done wihtout the fiscal negligence, the complete disregard of Kyoto, the cronyism, Iraq, the tortures, "secret prisons", spying, Halliburton, the outing of Plame (and the millions he put in harms way or killed), the raping of natural resources in Texas and other parts of the country, having no healthcare plan, cutting health coverage aid for children and the people who need it, increasing tax breaks for the upper 5%, increasing subsidies for oil companies, decreasing governance of the financial markets and public companies in general, the mismanagement of our military forces, turning his back on the UN, saber rattling over Iran, saber rattling with Russia over NATO and Georgia, turning his back on France and Germany, doing nothing about Pakistan or Sudan or Somalia, or Ethiopia or Zimbabwe or Palestine, selling weapons to Pakistan that are being sold to Afghansitan, giving nuclear fuel and secrets to Iran, getting mad at Iran for having said fuel and secrets, ignoring net neutrality, vetoing every bill that was sponsered or cosponsored by a democrat, raising the deficit to record highs, causing the price of oil to octouple, hiring Greenspan, Hiring Bernanke, making Cheney his VP, playing golf after he said he was giving up golf in honor of our veterans and destroying the country's image in the world.

      Yeah, except for those few things, he was really a great president.
      • Takfam, on 06/11/2008, -0/+4I believe you forgot Poland.
      • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -3/+2Oh where to begin....

        "the tortures, "secret prisons", spying,"
        A constant in US policy for decades. Not a creation of Bush's by any stretch of the imagination.

        "Pakistan or Sudan or Somalia, or Ethiopia or Zimbabwe or Palestine"
        We'd probably just end up with people griping about disregarding sovereignty as they've done in the case of Iraq. Either that or we'd go in and accomplish nothing in the long run. You'll never help people that don't want to help themselves.

        "selling weapons to Pakistan that are being sold to Afghansitan"
        Might as well cut off all weapons trade to any nation then. Of course, you'll then have to be prepared to make up the cash difference out of our own wallets.

        "hiring Greenspan"
        Actually Reagan hired him, Bush just continued his stay. I don't remember hearing complaints during the Clinton years about his job performance.

        "playing golf after he said he was giving up golf in honor of our veterans"
        This, much like most of the other points I left out of this response, is trivial at best.

        Although I will say, in terms of taxes, that I'd be more than happy to see the tax code reformed in favor of a flat percentage across the board as well as drastically reform tax breaks and write-offs both on the personal and business side. That way the rich aren't punished for being successful, and it would help tighten the funds the government had at their disposal, which would hopefully lead to scaling back (or scrapping altogether) some programs that are nothing more than pointless money pits such as:

        Federal Employee Credit Card programs
        Medicare in it's current form
        EITC overpayments
        Redundant programs (there are 27 different teen pregnancy programs & 72 federal programs dedicated to assuring safe water alone)
        • asskicker32, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1I dont know why youre trying to dictate to me what my opinion is.
        • PolishLogic, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1I wasn't dictating your opinion to you. I was offering my commentary on the points you brought up.
        • asskicker32, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1well its obvious our opinions differ. Lets agree to disagree!
  • Michas, on 06/11/2008, -9/+26What legacy?
    • defwheezer, on 06/11/2008, -1/+10I believe Kucinich has noted at least 35 of Bush's "legacy's"
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -0/+0You know... destroying America from the inside out, making the dollar all but worthless currency compared to the rest of the world, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, thousands of american soldiers, etc. Is that the legacy you're confused about? 'Legacy' isn't always a positive term; it's a word that describes how a person is remembered and for what he or she is remembered in regards to history and events.
  • Hilda21, on 06/11/2008, -7/+17I read this story in the Times and the very next news story I noticed, on another site, was the increasing attempt to have Bush impeached. This made his false remorse make sense.
  • fishbeef33, on 06/11/2008, -5/+7I don't know, I might have to report this article as inaccurate. I thought Bush was physically incapable of admitting mistakes.
  • FukUrCouch, on 06/11/2008, -7/+15Isn't this a little too damn late!!! . These comments won't win any sympathy from me...
  • GhostyBoy, on 06/11/2008, -10/+10The real good news here is the shift in attitude towards Iran.

    Bush's puppet masters may finally have given up (for the most part) on a very stupid idea, and now they have their little bitch-boy fake President spewing empty rhetoric about diplomacy.

    Hopefully this means Iran is off the table, for a while at least.
  • Homerr, on 06/11/2008, -6/+60I regret his legacy too.
  • Gustomucho, on 06/11/2008, -6/+16We all do.
  • akrondude, on 06/11/2008, -9/+38so do 3 billion other people
    • mweflen, on 06/11/2008, -1/+9Just 3? More like 7 billion minus 25% of our goddamned imbecile electorate.
  • painhertz, on 06/11/2008, -12/+32God....what a lying sack of *****.
  • gotyourqueen, on 06/11/2008, -13/+7boo-*****-hoo
  • wynja, on 06/11/2008, -6/+45You don't get to regret your ineptitude. You get to hang for it.
  • shootdashit, on 06/11/2008, -10/+3how about the cindy vs. michelle ad. cindy is smiling and they put up a pic of michelle looking all pissed off. *****' ***** reporting.
  • defwheezer, on 06/11/2008, -7/+12Dear Mr Bush, Please go away.
  • xwizard, on 06/11/2008, -7/+13"He regret his legacy"! Why should I start believe him now?!
  • DetpackJump, on 06/11/2008, -6/+7It was nothing he said, but it was falsifying evidence and actually GOING TO WAR WITH IRAQ which made me think he was a “guy really anxious for war” in Iraq
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -0/+0What? I don't even understand what you just typed. It was nothing he said?
      Surely you're jesting. Did you ever listen to those endless speeches where he used the word 'terr'rists' 900 times in a half hour? Or 'Iraq' over and over and over to try to drill it into American minds that he had single handedly discovered the enemy and he was going to single handedly launch an entire war (that would pay for itself and be over in 2 months)?
      This man mad America the laughing stock of the entire world.
      "Nothing he said?"
      Am I to assume you're as dumb as he has or something? Is that what you're trying to say? Because it's totally unclear.
  • TheWriteGuy, on 06/11/2008, -10/+26W = Worst
  • Lafftermath, on 06/11/2008, -6/+40Thats not the president...

    It's just an old person trying to get into heaven now...
  • prleet, on 06/11/2008, -10/+4Bush redefines what the defination of president is. However, I couldn't help but laugh what google defined
    "President (also popularly known as Presidents and Assholes, *****, Scum, Bastard, P's and A's, Presidents and Eejits, Rich man, Poor man, El Presidente, Sheep, Dictator, Gummybears or Revolution) is a card game for 3 or more in which players race to get rid of all their cards. .." Google.

    lmao...link below.


    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+pre ...
    • arplayer2k, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1I don't see why you got dug down so much.
  • Coolone84, on 06/11/2008, -3/+24Too little too late.
  • PantsB, on 06/11/2008, -5/+14Turns out sometimes things are as they appear.

    Worst Ever.
  • mrgreenjeans9, on 06/11/2008, -7/+13i'm betting george h.w. bush regrets fathering this *****
  • phydeaux70, on 06/11/2008, -21/+7You all talk about the man and you have NO IDEA of what it is like to be him. You say he's dumb, he's smarter than you are. And he has more responsibility in his daily life than you will have all of your entire lives.

    Think of the mistakes that you have made in your life and whether or not you've 'manned' up for it, or had the scrutiny associated with them as he has.

    So....while I might not agree with everything he has done, I don't expect him to be perfect, nor should you. He is the President of the country I love and will support him, and when his time is done we as a people will elect a new one and we should give him the respect that the President does.

    You idiots are the biggest bunch of self righteous bigots, haters, and miscreants the world has ever seen and I just hope most of you aren't American, cause you are not at all what this country stands for.
    • mweflen, on 06/11/2008, -4/+5Unless you personally know Bush and the commenters who say he is dumb, you're just as misguided as they are in saying "he's smarter than you are."

      Blah blah blah, love it or leave it... NEXT!
    • BryanG412, on 06/11/2008, -3/+4Sheep.
    • StaticThunder, on 06/11/2008, -3/+9I WOULDN'T RUN FOR PRESIDENT BECAUSE I'M SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW I WOULD ***** IT UP. I wouldn't be stupid enough to want the responsibility in the first place. I'm not a right-wing ideologue who believes that if only I get my way, everything will turn out alright.

      But if somehow I became president, doing NOTHING would be better than appointing freinds and supporters and yes-men with no experience to run major government agencies, and running my yap off about "bring it on" when we have soldiers in the field.

      Quit apologizing for this *****. I know 1000 people who are better managers than this idiot, any one of them could do the job smarter, and with more humility, than the decider. This isn't arrogance. Its pointing out obvious incompetence.

      Bush ran every one of his companies into the ground, so we give him the country and he does the same. And now the idiots come out to defend their mistake.
    • timrob, on 06/11/2008, -3/+9What the hell are you talking about? Bush has done more to ruin the US's international reputation that any other President before him. Respect has to be earned, and George W has done absolutely nothing to earn anyone's respect. Whilst I commend your patriotism, surely enough is enough as far as respecting this President. If only G W had half the patriotism that you obviously do have. Calling people idiots and self righteous bigots, haters and miscreants doesn't help your arguement, people here obviously have just had enough of what G W has done to this country.
    • 007age, on 06/11/2008, -2/+7I am an American and I feel it is my civil duty - no responsibility - to hold this man and his administration accountable for their actions. It is by far more American to impeach Bush than it is to let him ride free through the end of his term.

      You seem to forget - this guy CHOSE to run for President, and he also CHOSE to use the language he used, and he CHOSE to mislead us all to his CHOSEN war, and he CHOSE to leave Osama Bin Laden free to attack us another day.

      He is the CHOOSER after all...
      • thedogfatherx, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1You also forgot people CHOOSE to vote for him. Twice!
    • Orsenfelt, on 06/11/2008, -3/+6Congrats on being yet another blind sheep patriot who's ruining this ***** world.

      It's all well and good to love your country, however to love the abismal idiot in charge purely because he leads the country is sheer ignorance.
      Wake up, It's ok to love your country and hate moron in charge, It won't ***** kill you.
    • 1longtime, on 06/11/2008, -4/+4hahahahahaahahahahaahahahahhhaahaaa!!!

      dude, this ***** war claimed almost a million lives... not quite the same as forgetting your grandmother's birthday.
      • forgottenhope, on 06/11/2008, -1/+2what a dick. george bush hides behind words he cant even read or speak properly.
    • Demener, on 06/11/2008, -2/+5No we don't expect a leader to be perfect. We expect them to be competent. (At more than swindling us.)
    • Delphium226, on 06/11/2008, -2/+2Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -0/+0You sound like a typical, uneducated American. There are a lot of those these days and if you want proof, just look at how many were stupid enough to vote for this man.
      Smarter than me?
      That's a ***** laugh and a half. I've seen goats on the side of the road with more common sense and a higher IQ.
      Move out of the country, dick. We're taking it back over and we're not going to be too kind to people like you who are happily ignorant and perpetuate the idea of abuses of power, infinite war and stabbing this country in the neck with the worst guidance in the history of America.
  • KaivenTor, on 06/11/2008, -3/+4I don't think it was the rhetoric at all, I think it's because he actually ****** did it. Bush, you bought into your own hype and you deserve everything bad that comes from it.
  • shoopdawoop, on 06/11/2008, -12/+3FORE MOAR YEERZ
  • statuescrumble, on 06/11/2008, -17/+8I honestly think that everybody is jumping the bandwagon on this. For 8 years Ive disagreed with this guy. He has a ridiculous foriegn policy and has ridiculous political views, but he is still a fine person. We forget that, and we hate him for being the man he is, while what we really need to focus on is what he does, because that does not make him a bad person.

    Take for example, LBJ, who was said to have been a horrible president for initiating the Vietnam fiasco. Yet, he was said to have gone to a local chapel and cried and prayed every night in private.
    • StaticThunder, on 06/11/2008, -0/+11He was never a fine person. I knew he was an arrogant ass when he was governor of Texas. And all his tears won't bring back the dead.

      /Now watch this drive.
    • jessehadden, on 06/11/2008, -1/+7Not to sound insensitive, but frankly, time spent praying & crying is time wasted on self-indulgent self-pity. I feel a lot sorrier for the victims -- in Iraq, in Viet Nam, in the United States.

      I always did feel that time spent praying was time wasted on not finding a solution to the problem.
    • Clerg, on 06/11/2008, -0/+5George W. Bush has spent his entire life as a rich, arrogant, smug elitist from the Northeast who hides behind a phony Christian/Cowboy/Texan persona. He believes that because he is rich, he and his kind deserve to be not only running the country, but the entire world. He displays a complete disdain for the very foundations of democracy and has pushed this country ever closer to a fascist police state.
      It will take years to undo the damage this man, and his zealots, have done to the country. How anyone can call this man a decent human being is beyond comprehension. I hope his "legacy" haunts him the rest of his days.
    • siszam, on 06/11/2008, -1/+1A fine person and a true Christian would turn away from his sins, repent for the trail of dead bodies and stop the killing. Bush carries on as usual. He's like the people who say pretend to be decent while excusing the lack of health care for Americans. You can say you are decent all you want, but ACTIONS speak louder than words.
  • DeePsix501, on 06/11/2008, -8/+10I regret giving him the command of our country and his misleading 4,062 of our brave soldiers to their deaths.
    • charlietuna, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1The free war that would pay for itself?
    • zebco, on 06/12/2008, -0/+0I regret you did that too. I sleep easily at night knowing that I did everything possible to keep this guy from getting the reins of the country. Unfortunately, people like you seemed hellbent on ***** this country in the ass.
  • Chestnut3499, on 06/11/2008, -3/+75I hated Bush before it was cool
    • 1longtime, on 06/11/2008, -2/+6I'm already starting early on Jeb.
      • redslash, on 06/12/2008, -1/+1Gotcha... so, just because one person sucks means his brother must suck too.

        *_*

        FYI, Jeb Bush was an amazing governor.
    • tracer9, on 06/11/2008, -3/+9I know your comment was meant to be funny, but I do want to add:

      It's not cool to hate bush. It's a terrible feeling to hate my own president, and be ashamed that he is the leader of my country.

      Unfortunately though, this inept "decider" has caused great harm to our country, not just through stupidity, but also through deliberate manipulation. I can't help but hate this scumbag...

      ...But there is nothing "cool" about that.
      • bobfrancis, on 06/11/2008, -0/+6Exactly how I feel, especially when conservatives say things along the lines like "ooh, you are just on the Bush hating bandwagon." As if Bush is hated because it's somehow ***** "cool" and trendy.

        It sucks. It's not cool, but that is just the way it is. I hate George Bush for logical, unemotional reasons - and that's how I know my hatred is real.
      • skyz, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1it's not cool to hate but bush makes it tough not to
      • ciaran036, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1oh good you just made the comment I was going to make!
      • ChristianMagic, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1That "there is nothing "cool" about that." sounds like an anti-drug campaign.
    • bjs3171, on 06/11/2008, -2/+4i didn't realize it ever WASN'T cool. i mean, i bought the nofx "not my president" shirt after his first election.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 06/11/2008, -0/+1I just wish we could get all the Bush supporters on the record, all the anti-global warming shills, the anti-truthers and such. So when the truth comes out, we can point to these Trogs and say; "Why should anyone listen to you? You were like the Tobacco apologists before you -- always supporting the powerful over the honest."
  • enantiodromia, on 06/11/2008, -5/+31wow big surprise. a war hawk Republican spends 7 years taunting terrorists to "bring it on", wastes half a trillion dollars, then suddenly has an epiphany conveniently at the end of his time in office in order to start the history revision campaign.

    the nice thing about this Innerweb thingy is that unlike previous administrations, every quote, video, and decision he has ever made, has been recorded, and will be available to anyone at any time.

    all the new marine sanctuaries, national parks, and pretty words cant erase that, nor will it fix the economy, repair our reputation with the rest of the world, or bring back our dead soldiers and marines.
    • darkciti2, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Until they conveniently erase it all. Afterall, the internet is electronic and a major nuclear disaster would wipe out the internet and 90% of humanity.

      All that would remain would be Bush/Cheney/House of Saud/ Saudi Arabia Co and their extravagant palaces in the desert. Then they could carve out new marble structures, statues, etc and re-define history as the world knows it.

      Why do you think the pyramids are on the most actively traded currency in the world?

      Why do you think the secret societies are housed in structures with marble columns and other "weather proof / legacy furthering" establishments?

      The Romans? The Greeks? Grandiose marble memorials in DC? The Washington Monument and the Egyptian pyramid at the top (the same one seen on our dollar bill)...
      Things that make you go "hmm.."?
    • darkciti2, on 06/12/2008, -0/+1Ok, granted that's some serious conspiracy *****, but I thought I should mention it none-the-less.
  • x00x, on 06/11/2008, -4/+16Add Bush's legacy as the next installment of the History Channel's "Greatest Blunders in History".
  • lasVegas702, on 06/11/2008, -11/+6Anyone else find the use of "Mr Bush" more than "President Bush" funny? I remembe