Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on No Shame

1

they don't have swords to fall on.

Posted by bill | March 6, 2007 1:39 PM
2

Silly Charles.

Are you just now coming to the realization that nobody in the Bush White House has any semblance of shame whatsoever? I thought that had been obvious for years.

Posted by SDA in SEA | March 6, 2007 1:50 PM
3

So far they've been able to let scapegoats take the fall.

I think (hope) the days of roosting chickens is near.

Posted by monkey | March 6, 2007 1:53 PM
4

Watching Republicans, and Republican wives, suffer after all these years does a body good.

Posted by Fnarf | March 6, 2007 2:10 PM
5

Would you act guilty if you knew that your pardon was in Jan '08? What's missing is the outrage from the public. All these yellow ribbons, and people are content to watch talking heads yimmer about it. I realize that everyone's expectations for this administration are low, but Walter Reed is the tip of the iceberg and, even if it were limited to that one facility, people have to demonstrate their outrage soon. Once again, we have a complete derelection of duty, extreme indifference to basic human needs, outsourcing to KBR execs and a refusal to take action and responsibility.

Posted by dwb | March 6, 2007 2:13 PM
6

shame is so last millenia, chuck.

post more ass pictures!

Posted by Max Solomon | March 6, 2007 2:14 PM
7

Remember the Supreme Court Justice's wife who wore the dress that made her look like a couch from the 1974 Sear's Catalog and weeped at her husband's confirmation hearing?

A cloth coat Republican is one thing. An orlon sofa republican is quite another.

Posted by catalina vel-duray | March 6, 2007 2:19 PM
8

If they had shame, the Bush twins and Cheney's non-gay daughter would be serving in combat units over in Iraq.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 6, 2007 2:22 PM
9

Yeah, no resulting suicides except for the hundreds of Iraq War veterans who have killed themselves.

Posted by DOUG. | March 6, 2007 2:52 PM
10

Andrew Sullivan is on to something, it's time for an impeachment of Cheney:

Something is rotten in the heart of Washington; and it lies in the vice-president's office. The salience of this case is obvious. What it is really about - what it has always been about - is whether this administration deliberately misled the American people about WMD intelligence before the war. The risks Cheney took to attack Wilson, the insane over-reaction that otherwise very smart men in this administration engaged in to rebut a relatively trivial issue: all this strongly implies the fact they were terrified that the full details of their pre-war WMD knowledge would come out. Fitzgerald could smell this. He was right to pursue it, and to prove that a brilliant, intelligent, sane man like Libby would risk jail to protect his bosses. What was he really trying to hide? We now need a Congressional investigation to find out more, to subpoena Cheney and, if he won't cooperate, consider impeaching him.

Posted by dwb | March 6, 2007 3:51 PM
11

I'm in DC right now, and I was able to question Harvey on why exactly they did not know about it. He claimed, first, that it is not his problem. And then, second, that he did know about it and he had told building 18 to fix it a couple years back. He has been quoted as saying, "if we would of known about this, we would of fixed it. Unfortunately, we didn't know about it." (CNN, March 1st).

He is full of bull shit. The whole time.

Posted by Vivian McKechnie | March 6, 2007 4:00 PM
12

You know, I heard Cheney bitching about how this was all because of the "federal beurocracy", and I wanted to pinch him really hard on the arm and call him a big storyteller.

The US has been in business for 200+ years, and we had a lot of wounded soldiers. Our buerocracy has always (more or less) effectively dealt with wounded before. The difference this time is he had his little friends in there doing the work that used to be done by the government employees, and he had his big friends in charge of departments that needed capable people running them.

The truth of it is that in previous years, building 18 and those like it probably would have been overly maintained: The carpeting, mattresses, plumbing, etc would have been changed every five years or so - whether it needed it or not. Efficient? Not in the truest sense, but cheaper for the taxpayer in the long run, much better for the soldiers housed in those facilities, and good for the vendors who did that sort of work.

I've been around the block enough times to know that the government CAN do things quite effectively. It lumbers along, not unlike a huge corporation, but the beurocracy is quite competent.

Posted by catalina vel-duray | March 6, 2007 4:59 PM
13

It's not that they are incompetent. It's that they are extremist, inept, un-American, and incompetent.

And Traitors.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 6, 2007 5:40 PM
14

685 days to go.

Posted by truthseeker | March 7, 2007 8:11 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).