digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

VIDEO: Former President Bush Blames ‘Bloggers’ for ‘Ugly’ Political Climate

thinkprogress.org — Last night on Fox News, former President George H.W. Bush said the current political climate has “gotten so adversarial that it’s ugly.” Asked to offer an explanation for why there is this “incivility,” Bush pinned the blame on bloggers. “It’s probably a little worse now given electronic media and the bloggers and all these kinds of things.”

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • CableCarrier, on 10/12/2007, -3/+70I wouldn't say it's the bloggers. It's just the over all feeling of "You're a tax-and-spend, cut-and-run, flip-flopping liberal moonbat!" "You're a short-sighted, bible-humping fundamentalist conservative nutjob!"

    There's very little tolerance for the beliefs of others.
    • gamasutra, on 10/12/2007, -7/+22Next you know, he'll be blaming digg.
    • trghpy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+27Yea, Damn you people for speaking your mind.
      DAAAMNN you to hell!!
      Only us true christians can damn you to hell so watch out!
    • kettlechips, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19I doubt he even knows what a blog is.

      Hell I don't even know what a blog is.
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -24/+4Digg is technically considered a blog.
    • consonance, on 10/12/2007, -4/+30I hope you mean "Bible-thumping," because Bible humping is something very few Christians would endorse.
    • jaydj, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23@consonance

      Love thy bible
    • baxtermadux, on 10/12/2007, -5/+30i hear there are rumors on the Diggs
    • EmileVictor, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12I use the email too.
    • nonpareil, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19What?! Has he been on the Internets again?
    • bbnkstr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4this is why bloggers are using the email on the uhh... Internets

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKTH6f1JfX8
    • takeda, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4"i hear there are rumors on the Diggs"
      It might be funny, but if you would had some internetworking knowledge, then term "internets" wouldn't really make you laugh.

      Internet is actually a mother of all networks. In other words is a big network made of smaller networks called internetworks (or shorter internets).

      In technical documentation, this term is used, although currently they starting to avoid it, since might be confusing for some people, but here is one example:
      http://www.rfcsearch.org/rfcview/RFC/1918.html

      So Bush technically didn't made a mistake.
      Although most likely he didn't said it intentionally... but you never know...
    • orientis, on 10/12/2007, -3/+19I don't think it's the bloggers either. For some strange reason I blame politicians for the current political climate.
    • gharding, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Honestly, I think Bush is right. I certainly pay more attention to politics now than I would if blogs and online news sites weren't around. I don't have time to sit down a read the paper. I'm sure I'm not alone in that as well. Bloggers give more open opinions about politics that journalists can't quite pull off and still remain employed, so it certainly leaves the floodgates open for higher tensions when you're not worried about offending readers.
    • Pstonie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14"Yea, Damn you people for speaking your mind. DAAAMNN you to hell!!"

      "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." -Kierkegaard
    • robbiedo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Never done the Bible humping thing. Sounds painful!
    • crweaks23, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@gharding

      O'Reilly seems to be able to keep his job, even after the coke and hookers messages were released. It's not just bloggers who are able to give open opinions... but they do seem a bit more "sane" for the most part.
    • takeda, on 10/12/2007, -14/+8It's funny how people are digging me down just because, I said that Bush wasn't really far from the truth.

      What are you doing in real life, if somebody says something that you don't agree with it?
      Cover your ears and start signing to yourself?

      That's so childish.
    • CandidateZero, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9On Fox News last night, Herbert Walker Bush said, quote, "It's unfair how difficult it is to control information nowadays. Why, in my day, we didn't even need to worry about these intertubes and whatnot. We'd just focus our energy on controlling the mainstream media and that was that. But now we've got any ol' person with a computer speaking their mind to the whole world and we can't POSSIBLY control them all! It ain't fair, doggonit, it ain't fair!"
    • takeda, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2Here is cover of a technical book, maybe it's more beliveable:
      http://ftp.cs.purdue.edu/homes/dec/cnai.cover.jpg
      Here's more:
      http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&client=opera&rls=en&q=%2Binternets+internetworking&btnG=Search
    • bbnkstr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@takeda

      the term, internets, is used when referring to the uber-secret internet used only by government and bush cronies, thus plural.
    • crweaks23, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6@takeda

      You are being dugg down because it is painfully obvious that the knowledge of the existence of the word "internets" does not (at all) take away from the stupidity of Bush's statement. He was without a doubt talking about people using the world wide web, which is commonly referred to as "The Internet." Bush was NOT talking about the interconnected network of "internets" that make up "The Internet."

      It's like saying "The Bear killed the Giant last Sunday night!!!!" referring to the Sunday night football game. Sure, both "Bear" and "Giant" are words, but you're still a moron for referring to the "Bears" and "Giants" like that.
    • jonesin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7@takeda:

      How would you know the reason people are digging you down? I think you're reading into being dugg down just a bit much dude.
    • kingatrock, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Quick uh.. blame the internets!
    • henriquemaia, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@takeda

      There are people (like me) that use the up/down digg buttons as a way of saying that we agree/disagree of what is being stated. It's like a poll, with people voting your idea with approval or disapproval. Not to hide it from sight or from others sight. This is an indirect way of participating in the debate.
    • Nachoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3All the blogs are stuck in the tubes, so the natural flow of the tubes is broken resulting in a bad smell and an overall bad climate.
    • takeda, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2@henriquemaia:
      What's there to agree? It's like 2+2=4.
      The term "internets" shows actually who is true ignorant.
    • ilyag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4And now, the REAL reason:

      Karl Rove and the GOP have based their election-winning strategy on specifically targeting their base voters in levels never before seen. The base of the GOP is comprised of highly religious, southern and Midwestern fundamentalists. As such, the GOP platform no longer appeals to moderates who make up the bulk of the electorate.

      With both liberals and moderates making up about two-thirds of the population, people look at the far-right GOP platform and start thinking of them as the fringe political party.

      Conservatives, on the other hand, are quite opposed to being labeled the "enemy" and turn around and label liberals as the enemy. This sometimes appeals to some moderates, but usually does not (as explained by Bush's low ratings).

      When the GOP starts targeting moderate voters again in 2008 (with Guilliani and McCane), you will see return to some civility in politics... unless they retain the services of Karl Rove.
    • takeda, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1"It's like saying "The Bear killed the Giant last Sunday night!!!!" referring to the Sunday night football game. Sure, both "Bear" and "Giant" are words, but you're still a moron for referring to the "Bears" and "Giants" like that."

      The thing with Internet and internets is that calling an "Internet" "internets" is maybe awkward, but is still technically correct.
      "The Bear killed the Giant last Sunday night!!!!" means something else than Bears won with Giants, so this comparision is not good.
  • BluePearl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Wow, dubya looks much older in his clip than he is used to. And his wife- wow she looks like she is 90 or something
    • edifus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Dubya is that guys son.
      This is daddy Bush and his wife.
    • NewChar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8LMAO
    • ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Wife? That's a MAN BAABYY!!! /powers... I would like to see her wig ripped off though.
    • gharding, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I'm digging you up for the sheer idiocy of your comment.
    • unknownsoldierX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Isn't it scary, to think that this person probably voted?
  • soarin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+43A large part of the blame goes to people like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, who spew negativity and hate as part of their everyday existence. Ann Coulter says liberals are traitors and must be hanged (and gets to say it on most networks) while Rush is spewing his stuff for 3 hours a day for the last 10 years or so.

    The conservatives even have their own network, Fox News. CNN does not even come close to balancing out FOX. (What liberal counterparts are there to Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Joe Scarborough, and the rest of the conservative talking heads?) Don't say Olbermann, because he's a very pissed-off moderate, not a liberal.

    The neo-cons were all about making the word "liberal" a bad word in the '80s and '90s. The new media has nothing to do with the phenomenon. But it's the only place that liberals get to have a voice, so that's why he's saying it.
    • CopperFalcon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+27CNN does not even come close to balancing out FOX because CNN is also extremely conservative. Sorry Limbaugh fans, but being an angstrom to the left of FOX does not make CNN a "liberal" station.
    • killinger777, on 10/12/2007, -17/+7Media bias study:
      http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664
    • infopro, on 10/12/2007, -5/+21Per soarin: "The conservatives even have their own network, Fox News."

      Fox isn't a conservative network, it's a neo-con one. No honest conservative would trust it for the time of day in terms of credibility.
    • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Does anybody else cringe when you see that Fox News bitch open her mouth?

      edit: sorry, the bitch's name is 'Greta'.
    • bigdavediode, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Killinger:

      >Media bias study:

      If you want to see how retarded Killinger's fake study about "liberal bias" in media -- is, read it. Here's where various groups rank in Killinger's faked study:

      # RAND Corporation, a nonprofit research organization (motto: "OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS. EFFECTIVE SOLUTIONS.") with strong ties to the Defense Department, scored a 60.4, making it a "liberal" group.

      # Council on Foreign Relations, whose tagline is "A Nonpartisan Resource for Information and Analysis" (its current president is a former Bush administration official; its board includes prominent Democrats and Republicans from the foreign policy establishment) scored a 60.2, making it a "liberal" group.

      # American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), bête noire of the right, scored a 49.8, putting it just on the "conservative" side of the ledger.

      Debunking of Killinger's fake "media bias" study:

      http://mediamatters.org/items/200512220003?offset=20&show=1

      The study is so bad, so "riddled with flaws" that anyone can see for themselves that it's broken.
    • ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Nice try at looking like you're not one of the trolls killinger777, but the paper you link to takes ***** statistics to... well, not a new level, but a pretty damned low one.

      Coward, as if slyly pointing to a flawed statistic makes Bush's evil crap any less crapulent. He just said that "the email" could be subpoenaed to prove his widdle boy was a ***** liar, which anyone in their right mind knows already.

      Honestly, they pay you too much to spew your *****, but ya gotta make it look like there's another side to the story don't you? For fairness and balance right? Please die?

      edit: my god, someone dugg him up for that.
    • baxtermadux, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5"Does anybody else cringe when you see that Fox News bitch open her mouth?

      edit: sorry, the bitch's name is 'Greta'."



      Greta is a Transexual you fool. Shes a Bastard, not a Bitch. and she will armwrestle your ass to the ground!!
    • pabster, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3@soarin

      OK, I'll give you Fox. Now what about the fact that 90% of the mainstream media is liberal (read: Democrat) owned and controlled?

      A recent study of mid-term election coverage found (this is just on the 'big 3') 88% of stories were NEGATIVE towards Republicans, only 12% positive. I think that speaks for itself. (Naturally, stories toward Democrats were nearly 80% or better POSITIVE.)

      Quit blaming Coulter and other perceived "right wing shills".
    • orientis, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8@pabster

      A recent study has shown your mum likes donkeys. No, I have no link. Do you?
    • ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8A recent study of pabster's comment history reveals that he is clearly a troll.

      1 - Diggs random articles, but never comments on those except to flame...

      2 - 9/10 comments, usually containing the word "wacko-lib" or "sheeple", are on political posts.

      3 - 1/10 comments are flames.

      It's really that easy to find the wank-stains out, now block the *****-sucker who's getting paid to mess with public opinion. That's the best thing to do with the clown.
    • ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Greta van Susteren's the closest thing Fox has to a liberal next to Alan Colmes. She doesn't even cover the news, so I don't see why she was singled out instead of the triumvirate of neo-broads Coulter, Malkin, and whatever crazy old chick wrote that book American Mourning and decided, literally, that Iraqi lives aren't a consideration in the Iraqi occupation and that we should have gone in and razed the place.
  • shawnfassett, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25Of course you can blame some bloggers...Drudge, Pajamas Media, Michelle Malkin, Townhall, CNSNews.com, WorldNetDaily, Newsmax, Free Republic, Weekly Standard, etc...

    Plus, when have the Bushs ever been considered nice people? They have always kept the tone ugly. They just can't stand it when the light is turned on their ugliness.
    • ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9from a report by factcheck.org (truly non-partisan)...
      http://www.factcheck.org/article460.html
      Summary
      Both political parties are functioning in the 2006 House races as factories for attack ads, but the National Republican Campaign Committee's work stands out this year for the sheer volume of assaults on the personal character of Democratic House challengers.
  • Azur2, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Dubya himself and the people he surrounds himself with is the reason for the present political climate. It wasn't until he took power that bipartisanship died.
  • Hellman109, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10did you guys read and watch what I did?

    He said electronic media aswell, and said they were uncivily...

    The definition of that word is:
    An uncivil or discourteous act.

    Many bloggers are discourteous, they go off on their view (which they are allowed to have, Ive never expected them to be inpartial) and often flame and attack people over one bit of information they found.

    I have to agree with him.

    But that does not mean that Bloggers or Electronic media should be stopped or slowed at all.
    • Coded1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Notice how shocked he feels about this type of 'climate' evident on the Net?
      He mentions throughout about history and the peoples climate has just begun to be hostile since electronic communication. I think what he may have discovered is history is really one sided. There have been monarchies and political parties that gladly killed those contrary to their opinion. As a result only the ones educated and with power to preserve and stand behind the words would stand time.

      A question to Mr. Bush Sr., "if each citizen of all the historic political regimes were able to record their opinion along with those of the people in power, would it be similar to what you see on this very page?"
    • orientis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@Coded1 Excellent point and a damn good question.
  • bradym80, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17boo hoo, we didnt let you take over the world uncontested
  • borninda818, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I think...in general...the internet is to blame...or...um...to be credited. Before, Americans were getting all their information from the TV and Newspapers...which often get their info from the gov. The government, in that way, could influence the way we think, making situations seem good or bad. Now, many people, get their news online, which offers the same amount of factual information + user comments. Also...they got a lot more news to choose from.
  • AmishRefugee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5it couldn't be due to the fact that i saw one positive commercial out of 100 in the Talent-McCaskill race here in Missouri.... oh wait, yeah it could
  • maehem, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"There aught to be limits to freedom." - George W Bush
    • tvhwy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3I agree with Bush. There ought to be laws.
    • ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4maehem: Unless you have a signing statement of course.
  • kevinkrejci, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Free speech is such a threat to politicians. If only they had could have one channel and they could control all the press releases, and the rest of us just stick to being consumers, this kind of ugly political climate wouldn't be. They could call it the Pravda Channel, brought to us by the Ministry of Truth. Ignorance is bliss.
  • Yage2006, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's a good thing I'm sure many officials "especially the bad ones" are quite threatened by them seeing as they cant conceal there ***** so easily and it provided a great way for people to communicate on such matters.
    • WallyAnti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Also, Bush revealed that he enjoys using “the email” but lamented that his son, President George W. Bush, cannot for fear that the emails would get subpoenaed. Bush worried that presidents who used email would be forced to prove “that you were telling the truth and all this stuff.”

      Spoken like a true ex spook. I find it incredibly troubling that he thinks his son cannot use email for fear of his lies getting out. The fact that he can even say something like that is insulting and damn near an admission of guilt. Booooo Hisssss
  • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3HE USES THE E MALE!
  • ulyssesyt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9the irony of POLITICIANS blaming the PEOPLE for the current state of "political incivility" is astounding.

    and, as if political partisanship were something new, or recent.

  • muvment256, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3idiot doesn't even know what a blogger is.
  • acceleriter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Yeah, it's a bitch being held accountable by the little people in media he can't (easily) control (yet).
  • Blunty, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I don't think he was "blaming" bloggers. He stated his point very well, and bloggers happened to make it in there.

    I think this kind of thing is exactly what he's talking about...
  • Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Satan's biggest lie is convincing people that liberals are the opposite of conservatives.

    The opposite of a conservative is a good man. Liberals are just idiots.
  • yocheo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Wow...I watched the video and was amazed at how literate former president Bush is, compared to the younger one.

    ...and they say each generation progresses in intelligence.
    • geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Alcoholism throws a kink into the equation. GWB is a living example for kids everywhere to not drink alcohol.

      "Don't drink that stuff, do you want to be like the president?"
    • Reziarfg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I wondered if I was the only one to notice that. Well, I guess it's not like father like son.
  • mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8It was funny when he said that his son doesn't use email because he didn't "want to worry about having to tell the truth"
    • ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why wasn't I laughing?

      Oh yeah... He hasn't been done for war crimes yet.
  • Dundasbro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"The Email".... It appears that "Like father like son" is a very true saying...
  • rachman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"Former President Bush Blames ‘Bloggers’ for ‘Ugly’ Political Climate"

    yeah, that's a pretty accurate headline.. /sarcasm

    ..he said electronic media and bloggers have contributed to a more adversarial political climate.. he didn't say 'liberal' or 'conservative'.

    lots of news blogs and specialized media outlets in our whacked-out george-w'd america are basically tribal gathering places where members of one tribe can get together and throw poo at an opposing one. it's really lame.
  • thinksage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I guess unchallenged free speech scares the hell out of Christo-Fascist, Neo-Con wannabe dictatorships.
  • vitaminbmeister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4He has a very nice library.
  • zekt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I love that word "blame" - it is so frequently used as an euphemism for 'realised the completely *&^*nig obvious'.
  • aks123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The distinction between blogs and websites is unnecessary. Websites are updated daily by people and contain opinions. Blogs are updated daily by people and contain opinions. It's just a useless terminology.
  • Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, since bloggers = people, I wonder what he's really saying here...

    There's nothing inherently "special" about bloggers, and they come from all corners of the political spectrum. US bloggers represents the American people, just the group that's online and blogging. He could just as well be directly blaming the people, but I guess it feels better to narrow down it to a group on the web, as then it makes more sense to blame something on it.
  • graizur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I wonder. When people see you use the word politics. Does that make you a villian? Is that why ke covered his mouth when he said "politics"?

    I may be paranoid but it's common knowledge that brushing your face is a visual cue.
  • VolatileWhimsy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I swear you people are so obsessed with the stupidist things.. If anythign real happens you simply ignore it..
    ie http://digg.com/world_news/Rape_as_a_Weapon_of_War#c3836074
  • ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The funniest thing about George Herbert Walker Bush complaining about blogs is that, when he battled Dan Rather on television and denied facts that were easily verifiable, the existence of blogs would have slaughtered that old bastard.
  • inchrnt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3in other words ...

    all this truth is adversarial to our lies
  • baricrazi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Dugg down as inaccurate! The quote was taken out of context. He stated in the next sentence that he doesn't despair about it. He was not pointing fingers just stating different things that contribute to political climate.

    This was obviously posted by yet another democrat fan-boy and Bush hater as most of the current Digg readers. Truly sad! And for those of you who say that FOX news is biased then what do you have to say about all of the other networks being biased towards the democrats for the last 30 years! At least the republicans have 1 news media in the camp.
  • mofotronimus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I'm sure he'll find some way to pin it on the democrats (as usual): "it's all Al Gore's Fault- HE created the Internet"
  • Koosebane, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1The political climate on the internet IS suppressive, insulting and close minded to different ideas.

    All you have to do to see it is look at the front page of digg and witness all the opposing viewpoints being suppressed.

    When diggers purposely prevent other readers from seeing information outside of the cubical monkey action committee's approved agenda, it's censorship and suppression.

    We're forced to look at this out of context crap on our desktops instead.
  • clyde2801, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This just in: clyde2801 blames Fox News for today's ugly political climate...
  • kibbled, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I haven't watched the video yet however if George H W Bush takes part of the blame. The Willy Horton ads against Dukakis is the standard for attack ads. Lee Atwater the strategist who made those ads apologized for it on his death bed.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater
  • knomevol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2yes! very strange what "THE PEOPLE" will say and discuss when "THE PEOPLE" have a voice.

    never mind putting the blame squarely where it deserves to be - on the forehead of whomever rips the Constitution of the United States up bit by bit.
  • jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Apparently Bush didn't quite get the memo that bloggers were in fact a _response_ to the current ugly political climate. It started waaaaay before, the moment the Republicans started attacking Clinton for being a drug dealer and what not.
  • Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The apple doesn't fall far from the tree, wanting to take away our rights.
  • jiggleflop, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Bush is a cockbite.
  • polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Next up, Liberal bloggers support terrorism!! Seal off the Internet!! Call Rupert!!! I can just feel some nice new internet laws comming.
  • bshock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Right. George Bush 41 is an expert on technology.

    Try to remember that this is the aristocratic halfwit who acted astonished when he finally saw a barcode scanner in a grocery store for the first time.

    The only thing honest about George Bush 43 is the origin of his stupidity, ignorance, and arrogance. He's daddy's boy.
  • afterpartyboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5LOAD OF *****!

    Don't ***** go to Washington claiming to be a "uniter, not a divider" and then disregard and deride everyone who has a differing opinion than you.

    YOU BROUGHT THIS ON YOURSELF, AND HAVE NO ONE ELSE TO BLAME FOR IT.
  • iching, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2As his so caring wife said:

    "Why should we hear about body bags and deaths,"
    (That we see on the blogs and internets)
    Barbara Bush said on ABC's "Good Morning America" on March 18, 2003.

    "Oh, I mean, it's not relevant".
    (just like blogs that showed the picture of the caskets that the MSM do not show )
    " So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?"

    The internet is where many informed intelligent people get their news.
    The ugliness is only when the real truth is revealed and not the spoon fed crap we get on our national televised news.
  • solfood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2sort of like when they outed a CIA operative, saying she was fair game. Bloggers are the new treasonous administration member.
  • diggnatious, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bush's behavior has been: "Deny Everything; Admit Nothing; Blame Everybody Else"!
  • PeppermintPig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Don't kill the messenger just because the news is bad...

    ...Especially if you're supporting people responsible for putting others in danger, or appropriating money from people who are opposed to the situation.

    "Those darn kids with their internets..."

    Politicians: You make news, which often wastes our time and pisses us off. We have to put up with your 'ugly' behavior, so people are obviously going to complain about it.
  • siszam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11. Bush never takes responsibility for anything. He needs to be impeached so he will have to for once in his life.
    2. Turning everything into a Christian bashing fest doesn't make you look intelligent. It makes you look as smart as Hitler killing Jews or the KKK talking about killing some *****.
  • mrebus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Bloggers have contributed to the polarization of politics, but they have also expanded the size of the "media". I now have access to more information on government abuses, corruption, and wasteful spending. Back in the day the old media use to herald it self as the Fourth Estate. But as President after President continues to expand governments size and power, old media couldn't keep up. If Bush Sr. wants a less hostile political environment maybe he should advocate for less government.
  • dracostimpy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1First they ignore, then they ridicule, then they attack, then they accept.

    Looks like they've moved to the attack phase. Excellent... that means we've almost won. Burn in hell, mainstream media!
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.