DiggJoin DiggAbout
See the original image at huffingtonpost.com —

1999: McCain says Bush is "as dumb as a stump."

huffingtonpost.com — "I could not help but ask his views about then candidate George W. Bush. "He's as dumb as a stump" McCain offered."

made popular 241 days ago

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community.Take the Tour to learn more.

Remove

Discover breaking news from Macworld 2009
Digg your favorite stories in Upcoming or check out the most popular ones in the Apple topic.

Related by Keyword BETA!

McDumb As Bush thumb

  • 1439 diggs
  • Made popular 173 days ago
  • 289
  • www.youtube.com

President Bush to protect ocean reefs, fish and volcanoes

  • 604 diggs
  • Made popular 9 hr 57 min ago
  • 199
  • www.telegraph.co.uk

Q: Do Condoms Help Stop HIV? McCain: "You've stumped me"

  • 2724 diggs
  • Made popular 283 days ago
  • 424
  • thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com

How are these related stories? Tell us!

show profanity settings
expand all
  • 12DHutch, on 05/10/2008, -8/+66Funny. Politics can be so entertaining sometimes.
    • JlmAWP, on 05/10/2008, -11/+8Sometimes? I'd say Hillary has made it a more regular occurrence.
    • GOPOperative, on 05/10/2008, -41/+6
      • moletimer, on 05/10/2008, -3/+20What the *****? What has race got to do with this? Looking through your comments, it's easy to sea your a racist dick. Get off Digg.
        • GOPOperative, on 05/10/2008, -23/+5
          • chicofaraby, on 05/10/2008, -1/+11Are you really a leftist? Because that is a damn nice job of illustrating just how stupid the American right wing is.
          • ayyyyy, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1hypocritical much?
      • elipabst, on 05/10/2008, -1/+18In January it's going to be President Black Man to you.
      • GunDownCCL, on 05/10/2008, -2/+9Burried and reported.
        • po43292, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1off topic: Are you subliminally trying to get me to buy a burrito?
          on topic: Obama '08!
    • Pinkertinkle, on 05/10/2008, -3/+13A stump wouldn't have sent our soldiers to die for oil.
      • spawnfree, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2i think a stump is the ideal candidate for evil selfish manipulative *****, if he cant understand he cant get all guilty or try and pass the blame.
        the only thing they trained bush to do was never admit to anything. that is the only thing that will be his undoing.
      • LeeSoong, on 05/19/2008, -0/+1Federal Law should ban the purchase or use of
        foreign oil and foreign gasoline.

        That will teach 'em!
    • Herostratos, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Yeah... Until you realise that all the clowns running the show aren't actually joking - they really are going to impose their sick jokes on you.
    • sassip, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Comedians are the only ones that will be sad to see Bush go. Maher said something like, i love it when bush gives one of his incoherent, language-mangling speeches about how "OBGYN's can't practice their love with women." and bush wears that infamous smirk that says, "Damn, I nailed that one!"
      Bush doesn't even know how funny he is and how many people are truly laughing-out-loud at him! Anyone with a nickel upstairs would be rightfully ashamed...
    • paradexes, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2So how is this a big deal? He knew then what we know now. If not for his temper, his flip-flopping, his apparently shady dealings via his wife, the fact that he called his wife a trollop and a whore, ect. I would consider him a Visionary and a potential leader...but well....
    • CryRightardCry, on 05/12/2008, -1/+29 years and that statement is still as true as the day he said it.
  • Wundur, on 05/10/2008, -26/+63Pot Kettle Black
    • B1663r, on 05/10/2008, -23/+9Well that particular Pot, for all its flaws, doesn't want to raise taxes by a ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, so thats the Pot I am going with.
      • Wartyboskfapped, on 05/10/2008, -4/+19did you put your pinky to your mouth when you typed 'one trillion dollars'?
      • pedo, on 05/10/2008, -6/+24yeah who cares if the republicans raise spending by TRILLIONS of dollars, destroy the planet, and start unnecessary wars, as long as they don't raise MY taxes. thats all i care about. me and my money.
        • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -14/+13It's not only the Reps. The Dems also enjoy spending AND voted for the war. Nice try but you're no better than any other party hack. And nothing will change until you and all the other lemmings like you quit blindly following your party of choice.
          • pedo, on 05/10/2008, -1/+7if by "also enjoy spending" you mean spend less and balanced the budget, you'd be right.

            and i didn't know the commander in chief that lied and told everyone that saddam was going to nuke the planet and was working with al qaeda was a democrat...
          • HotSaucePanCake, on 05/10/2008, -12/+2Actually pedo you are wrong. Traditionally Dems spend more money as well as extract more out of the people. Read a history book.

            And last time i checked no one ever said Saddam had nuclear weapons... But then again you are good at arguing aren't you?
          • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -1/+7Actually HotSauce you're wrong. Traditionally the deficit increases more under Republican Presidents, and I can prove it. http://www.lafn.org/politics/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart. ...

            You can try and blame that on Democratic congresses etc, but we're just talking about Presidents here. If you have any evidence of your claim that Democratic Presidents increase the deficit or spending I'd love to see it.
          • Malacandra95, on 05/10/2008, -0/+5HotSauce, no one may have said that Saddam had nuclear weapons. Just that he had been working aggressively to develop them, and would have them within a matter of months. Which was a lie.

            http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/08/ira ...
          • HotSaucePanCake, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2I mean't traditionally when a democrat is in control tax's are higher
          • db0255, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1*TAXES
      • elipabst, on 05/10/2008, -1/+12Better than going into debt a trillion dollars a year and owing interest on it to the Chinese. You can either have that trillion dollars going to Iraq to nation build or keep it here and use it for building our own nation.
        • HotSaucePanCake, on 05/10/2008, -1/+5Either wait it is financed by people that have the money... IE the Chinese
          • elipabst, on 05/11/2008, -0/+4Except if you raise taxes to pay for it, which was the whole point of this conversation.
    • 1timeuser, on 05/10/2008, -1/+11In 1999 McCain was a totally different person. Today I agree though.
    • boonesfarm, on 05/10/2008, -6/+4If a Ron Paul drone wittingly submits the "pot/kettle" zinger, it must be true.
  • thebradmiskell, on 05/10/2008, -14/+60Dumber.
    • kc8ukw, on 05/10/2008, -4/+8
      • cplusplus, on 05/10/2008, -1/+6I watched that ad. It sounded like a bunch of jingoist slogans to me. Also, I have to point out that there are many non-military ways to serve your country while relying on others as they rely on you. We need to move past war. As you might have noticed our adventure in Iraq was a huge waste of money, lives, respect.
        • culbeda, on 05/10/2008, -1/+3Kc8ukw was supporting Tancredo. So you're wasting your time arguing about jingoism with him. For those of you who don't remember, Tancredo was the one who compared Miami to a "Third World country" and one of the Republicans who didn't believe in evolution.
      • willynilly, on 05/10/2008, -2/+2"really wishes Tancredo was still running"

        WERE still running
  • muymalgal, on 05/10/2008, -16/+15i love the first comment after the article on the huff post page. (claiming the Americans are dumber for "voting" him into office twice)
    ??? Voting him in twice??? Who's the stump?
    • B1663r, on 05/10/2008, -19/+6The Huffingtonpost, supporting ONE TRILLION DOLLAR tax increases since 2003!
    • spacedog800, on 05/10/2008, -12/+3The Dems somehow thought Kerry was the best opponent....its their fault!
      • DonKarnage25, on 05/10/2008, -0/+7You know.. Republicans weren't forced to accept Bush as their 2004 candidate.
    • acephreak, on 05/11/2008, -2/+0Stump the Schwab
  • Kent4jmj, on 05/10/2008, -9/+20The GOP at the RNC may want to take a serious look at its support of McCain. Republicans do not like him and the Democrats will have a field day.
    • GOPOperative, on 05/10/2008, -22/+9
      • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -2/+12Remember when McCain was loudly booed at CPAC? Remember when conservative public figures claimed they would vote for Hillary rather than McCain? People say things they don't mean during contested primary elections. Just like the GOP has lined up in lockstep behind McCain, Hillary voters will come around once the Dems have a candidate.
        • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -0/+4Very true. It will ultimately be won by whichever party has the largest number of members willing to vote for a candidate that they don't like. Half of the Dems don't like Obama and half of the Reps don't like McCain. It's sad and pathetic that it's come to that but it should be interesting.
      • Wartyboskfapped, on 05/10/2008, -2/+6Then why are you here?
      • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -8/+5http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1413547/p ...

        As a Nam Vet who worked diligently to help expose John (THE SNAKE) Kerry for who and what he was and did when he returned from Vietnam, McCain--in his "defending" his "bud" Kerry as well as "advising" ALL to refrain from speaking out on Vietnam (after giving his friend Kerry a free pass for a year while Kerry was making his Vietnam service the focal point of his primary campaign)once the Swifties and others began having an impact on Kerry, as well as McCain "condemning" the Swifties, their ads, Unfit for Command (before it was even released)--lost me FOREVER.

        Moreover, I won't even begin to rant as to McCain (and Kerry's) sham POW/MIA coverup as well as "their" rush to normalize relations with Vietnam, all the while, blocking ANY attempts at holding Vietnam responsible for the accounting of ALL POW's/MIA's or their horrible human rights record.

        As a full-fledged RINO (second ONLY to the "all-time" worst ever, RINO, Jumpin Jim Jeffords) McCain must be delusional if he thinks he could EVEN get through the primaries.

        I know many, many, Vets who would vote against him and/or (myself included) would look for another party or sit the next one out, should he somehow, prevail in the primaries and get the nomination.
        26 posted on 5/31/2005 6:40:24 AM by An American Patriot ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME"-- the opportunity to get the Hell out of here! Bye Bye VT- Hello, VA)
        • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -3/+3Is there a point in there or do I need to visit the link to see what you're talking about?
          • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2You definitely need to visit the link.
      • elipabst, on 05/10/2008, -1/+12Remember when Rush Limbaugh said he'd rather see a liberal in office than McCain? Didn't last long did it? Neither will this when people realize by choosing McCain they are getting more war, lost civil liberties and repealing Roe v Wade
  • tomazkovacic, on 05/10/2008, -8/+14No ***** Sherlock!
  • Farmer77, on 05/10/2008, -7/+101He's right you know.
  • krnldmp, on 05/10/2008, -5/+13That's why they call him Shrub.
  • Rikushix, on 05/10/2008, -7/+34This is a lot more relevant than him holding a mic upside-down for a few seconds.
    • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -7/+11its the same story though, isn't it? He held a mic one way, and then flipped it 180 degrees - much like he does with his political positions on a regular basis. Except in this case his position was correct in the first place, and he flipped it upside down so he could get the GOP to support his run for President.
  • dan222555, on 05/10/2008, -56/+17The Huffington Post: Manufacturing lies to the delight of liberals for years!
    • enki25, on 05/10/2008, -4/+29Good point. If you don't like hearing it, it must be a lie.
      • dan222555, on 05/10/2008, -21/+6Good point. If it's on The Huffington Post and you want it to be true, it must be true.
        • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -2/+3No, if it was posted on The Huffington Post it was done with an agenda. You need to consider their biases and their historical record for accuracy when weighing its impact. If you automatically accept or deny the truth of anything on the site your a fool. The exact same thing can be said about the sites on the right, and truthfully about almost any news site. I frequently find stories on The Huffington Post interesting and/or entertaining, but I don't accept it as fact unless I can verify it elsewhere.
        • dan222555, on 05/10/2008, -5/+2"You need to consider their biases and their historical record for accuracy when weighing its impact."
          Funny because that's exactly what I did. And when I made those considerations there's only one obvious conclusion a fair-minded person could come to: this is complete ***** (much like 90% of what appears on The Huffington Post).
        • rand0mm0nkey, on 05/10/2008, -4/+1because you dont like it.
    • ramunenke, on 05/10/2008, -2/+7everyone thought bush was dumber than a box of rocks, they still do, the gop just had faith in him
    • neogoblin, on 05/10/2008, -2/+5
      • dan222555, on 05/10/2008, -4/+2It's funny how you idiots automatically think any hearsay published on The Huffington Post is true. Do you assume everything everyone says is the automatic truth? You'd be an idiot if you did. Information should always be assumed false until proven true. This is hearsay coming from one of the most despicable, inaccurate, and biased websites on the internet, so I assume it false. Mine is without question the more logical approach.
        • neogoblin, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2
          • dan222555, on 05/10/2008, -3/+1What you want "facts to counter the "lies""? How do you counter hearsay? You don't. No one should be stupid enough to believe it in the first place.
    • diggrnumber1, on 05/10/2008, -2/+1If McCain wasn't smart enough to realize this about Bush, then he definitely isn't smart enough to be president. This is actually a PRO-McCain article.
  • stonewaljacksn, on 05/10/2008, -42/+49Man your comments are all so ***** dumb. You know that deep down in your hearts you LIKE McCain for saying that Bush is an idiot, and here HuffPo, which wouldnt hesitate to call bush an idiot on its own, as well as all you democrat operative sheep, are hating on McCain for this? What a ***** joke.
    The repubs will vote repub, McCain will steal dems. It's insane how much you all underestimate the potential of McCain. Bitch all you want, but the far righters who bitch about how moderate McCain is will STILL vote for him.
    Go ahead though, keep deluding yourselves and act surprised in november.
    huffpo=buried for being propaganda and using digg for hits.
    I'm just a third party supporting vote wasting idiot though...
    • B1663r, on 05/10/2008, -20/+8Im a long time dem. I will hold my nose and vote for McCain because Obamas ONE TRILLION DOLLAR tax increase will be worse for the economy than anything McCain has planned.
      • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -5/+18You're right, we should just keep cutting taxes for the rich and the deficit will pay for itself.
      • enki25, on 05/10/2008, -4/+9You don't understand economics or Obama's positions.
        • B1663r, on 05/10/2008, -2/+3I make about 150k a year. I am not rich by any stretch of the imagination. My current tax liability is about 35k a year (closer to 45 if you include the payroll portion) With the Obama ONE TRILLION DOLLAR tax increase my taxes will go up 30k a year. That means fully 50% of my income will go to taxes.

          What more is there to understand?
          • enki25, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1I got news for you fool, if you make 150k a year, you're rich. That's approximately 5 times the average annual income in this country. But even so, you're wrong about the tax increase. Obama is not proposing to double the tax liability for Americans in your tax bracket.
        • jaxcs, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2If you make 150, you're doing well by most people's standards. And while he does want to increase tax for people, the numbers from Obama hasn't yet been announced. You're using Hillary's numbers.
    • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -8/+56You don't get it - we straight-up liked McCain for saying Bush is an idiot, and nobody denies it. The McCain hate here is all about how McCain went from calling Bush "dangerous" and not voting for him in 2000, and opposing and voting against his tax cuts, to embracing Bush and all his policies. He flip-flopped all his positions just to run for President, and thats not the kind of moral character that needs to be in the White House.
      • MortalynFlux, on 05/10/2008, -2/+6I have to admit McCain was one of the few republicans I liked. Then he came out with his statements on the war and the economy, along with that awkward press conference with GWB. So my short list of Republicans I like is down to Ronald Reagan and.... WELL, I think that's it. There are no good leaders in the Republican party left. They're all either facing federal charges, running from scandal, lining up for jobs at pharmaceudicals and oil companies, or in jail for sex crimes.
      • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -5/+5Since when has McCain embraced ".. Bush and all his policies.." Did you learn that from Huffington comPost too?
        • kleenex1, on 05/10/2008, -1/+4Actually from the old man's mouth. McCain said this himself.
        • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -1/+4It all started after the 2000 primary. McCain was really gaining momentum. Then he was buried by Bush, the Repubican Party, Rove and Co. etc.. McCain had been one of the few mavericks in Congress on either side of the aisle that wasn't afraid to go against his own party and follow his own beliefs. I really respected that.

          Following the 2000 election McCain was a changed man. It seemed he had been broken of his will to dissent. He's changed is view to be in line with the Republican party and Religious fundamentalists (Roe v. Wade, torture, whether Intelligent Design should be taught in Science classes, etc). I've really lost a lot of respect for him for caving in on his beliefs. If you haven't seen a change in McCain from 2000 to present you haven't been paying attention.
        • novenator, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1here here ethergnat. mccain 2000 is WAY different from mccain 2008
    • Wartyboskfapped, on 05/10/2008, -10/+16Why you so stupid, stonewaljacksn? This is about McCain being a flip flopper and brown nosing like a hypocritical little bitch. Engage brain.
    • jessehadden, on 05/10/2008, -8/+3At least you're intelligent enough not to be fooled into voting Democrat, out of fear of the Republicans. (Which is, ironically, the same reason people are fooled into voting for the Republicans.) If the Dems lose, even after 8 years of Bush, that could spell the end of the Democratic party. It would be clear that the Democrats defeat themselves, and couldn't win even if the Republicans were running Satan (and they were running Jesus). That finally, finally, finally would leave room for an opposition party, which is something we haven't had in a couple of generations. That would be a Very Good Thing -- assuming this country could survive 4 more years of a Republican president, which is very doubtful.
      • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -3/+3Actually the beginning of the end of the Dem party was when Gore blew it in 2000. The loss in 2004 was just further verification of the Dems impotence. In the early days of the republic, it was possible for a third party to wedge into the process but that is no longer the case. There's too much money involved in buying the presidency now for a third party to make a serious run for the presidency. The two parties are too entrenched and we'll just have to pick the lesser of two evils which is exactly what everyone has been doing for the last 3 presidential elections. Slick Willy's first election was the last time that voters had (false) hope and with the exception of the Obama-bots, who are being fooled again, true believe in a candidate won't happen again. The candidates are nothing more or less than career politicians.
        • jessehadden, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Gore won in 2000. Then he rolled over, and actively did everything he could to ensure that he would lose the court battle to Bush. He handed Bush the presidency on a silver platter, and shut up everyone who cried foul. Then he grew a pair and started talking... after it had ceased to matter. If the Democrats don't even care to take the office that they win, then they need to get out of the way. They are the best thing the Republicans have going for them.
    • ax8284, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2The implication is he is doing some flip flopping, but the reality is that it doesn't matter, because him distancing himself from Bush or APPEARING distant from Bush is a good thing for his campaign considering the bush administrations approval rating breaking all time record lows. What needs to be pointed out is that Ron Paul is the most conservative candidate of the entire race and he likes Obama over McCain, republicans...pull your ***** together seriously..it's getting old. Also important is that McCain (little known fact) is George W's great great great great great...great grandfather.
    • stonewaljacksn, on 05/10/2008, -6/+2liberals like you people helped drive me away from the democrats. thank you for opening my eyes. your pretentiousness made me question my own blindly liberal views and biases and you know what?...when you stop looking down on people who dont agree with you, when you stop sucking on the ***** of propaganda outlets like huffpo just because its hip...well then you get to see politics for what it really is.
      In my opinion, there is no democrat and no republican that will make REAL progress for our country and for humanity. they both represent the establishment that put us where we are today. I think it's laughable that Obama supporters crying for CHANGE from the pretentious liberal left don't seem to realize that they are supporting a the same. old. party. Thank you though, honestly, if you lefties weren't all such elitist pricks when I agreed with all the left's views I never would've asked myself why I was looking down on people for not agreeing with me...and I never would've tried to understand the views of the right...and never would've realized how ridiculous this "lefty democrat vs righty republican" bickering is. Huffpo supports this shallow bickering, and thus blinds us even more to the REAL issues facing us.
    • IJstickI, on 05/11/2008, -4/+2thank you, digg is full of stupid far left clueless liberals, it is so annoying.
      • novenator, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1liberals are the only ones who seem to know the facts, and not listen to propaganda like your conservative radio talk shows and fox news
    • deadbaby, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3^^ Please don't lump us all into a stereotypical group. I'm a liberal and I have no problem with McCain. I think he's probably one of the better candidates the Republicans have run in the last 30 years. Obviously I prefer my guy (Obama) to win but I won't be heart broken if McCain pulls it off either. Right now he's just trying to solidify his base by cozying up to Bush. If you do the math -- 25-30% of the people in this country still support Bush. If McCain can't convince them to come out and vote it won't even mater how many dems/independents he can pull because he can't win without the base. I don't believe he has any strong love for Bush but he knows he can help him politically. Can't blame the guy for trying to win
      • jaxcs, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1A lot of people do like McCain as the establishment fighter. It's great to have someone tell it like it is. But, his pull to the right to solidify his base is turning me off. I mean he's not sure that condom use will help stop the spread of aids? come on. Which guy are we going to get, the insider who hates other insiders or the insider who is an insider?
        Side question, why do you feel the need to apologize for being a liberal? Do reps apologize for being reps?
  • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -17/+24"I hate the gooks," McCain said yesterday in response to a question from reporters aboard his campaign bus. "I will hate them as long as I live."

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2 ...
    • drgooch, on 05/10/2008, -20/+19Yeah, he might be entitled to saying that to the specific people that tortured him, you lune.
      • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -6/+5The thing is, he said "THE gooks."

        Not SOME gooks.

        Presumably he was not tortured by ALL gooks.
        • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -0/+6So you're saying all Vietnamese are gooks? You're a disgusting racist! He was probably calling the Vietnamese that tortured him gooks (thus the phrase "the gooks") and not the entire country like you are referring to them.
          • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2The fact that McCain's feelings might be understandable does not make it less racist. I'm willing to cut McCain some slack, but using derogatory slurs--particularly in the public light--to refer to people is never acceptable.
          • petrodollar, on 05/11/2008, -1/+1It's funny to hear republicans claim that, even if Obama doesn't agree with everything Jeremiah Wright says, the fact that he attended his church shows a lack of judgement. Yet here's John McCain running for the highest office in the world and he's throwing around racial slurs. Yeah, that's some good judgement there republicans. Run with that.
      • highwebl, on 05/10/2008, -6/+9But he likes torture.
        • drgooch, on 05/10/2008, -2/+4No. He does NOT. Check your facts.
          • chicofaraby, on 05/10/2008, -1/+3He doesn't like it, he only votes for it.
          • drgooch, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1you are lying. plain and simple.
      • evil-doer, on 05/10/2008, -6/+5a small group of people tortured him, not an entire race of people. idiot
      • jessehadden, on 05/10/2008, -4/+6That's quite racist. About as racist as the comment itself.
        • drgooch, on 05/10/2008, -3/+3So is Obama's "typical white people" comment.
      • DonKarnage25, on 05/10/2008, -6/+6I agree drgooch. If I were captured and tortured by Al Qaeda or terrorists or someone... I wouldn't hesitate to call them sandni**ers for the rest of my life.
        Plus, I think everyone that's attacking him for saying "the" instead of "some" need to back off his case. You can't expect him to be perfect with his word choices, can you?
        • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -2/+5Great. So if two black guys mug me and punch me in the face, it shouldn't matter when I run for president that I went around calling them ***** for 30+ years.
        • jessehadden, on 05/11/2008, -1/+3So what you're saying is... it's OK to be a racist if you "know how those people are?"
        • Azunbar, on 05/11/2008, -1/+0How come nobody gets offended when a black person decides to assert their hate for "Whitey" for their actions in American history. It's the same exact issue, it seems that (and I say this at the risk of sounding racist or 'politically incorrect') the only time racism is considered is when the person spewing it is white.
    • B1663r, on 05/10/2008, -13/+5Wow, you need to go read Donna Brazile's blog... She is saying you guys are gonna lose this fall if you don't quit shaking that racist tree.
    • Sogui, on 05/10/2008, -3/+8Funny considering how McCain was at the forefront to lift embargoes and reopen trade with Vietnam, even as he came under fire from other for being "too soon". Also, in response to your "the vs. some", his usage is actually MORE correct.

      If he said said I hate SOME gooks he'd be implying that there is a large population of gooks, but he only hates some of them. But since he said I hate THE gooks, and as he insists he was referring to his captors, it is grammatically correct in this situation for him to refer to his captors as "the gooks". Just like someone else might say "I hate the bastards".
      • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -2/+3http://www.thenation.com/doc/20000103/dreyfuss/3

        "The racist and disparaging term, popularized by GIs during the war, occurs repeatedly in a 1973 U.S. News & World Report account penned by McCain after his release from prison. "The 'gooks' were bombarding us with antiwar quotes from people in high places back in Washington," he wrote, referring to the propaganda that his captors gave him."
      • elipabst, on 05/10/2008, -1/+5Yeah except "gook" is a racial slur that is the asian equivalent of the 'N'-word.
        • Alexandru25, on 05/10/2008, -2/+3No no it isint. It was used non stop by Americans everywhere up until the country became PC. Just like in WWII with Krauts and Japs.
          • chicofaraby, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2Do you understand what "racist slur" means?
          • elipabst, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_slur

            Under 'G'

            American Heritage Dictionary: "a disparaging term for a person of East Asian birth or descent."
            Merriam Webster: "usually offensive : a nonwhite or non-American person; specifically : asian"
      • negativenancy, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2I know what you're saying man. Last year some black people robbed me as I was pumping gas, what the hell was their problem?

        Those *****.
        • petrodollar, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2I just got back from Iraq and let me tell you, those camel sambos are out of control.
  • 75489, on 05/10/2008, -10/+0McCain came in the plane with his cain and said...
  • a1cd, on 05/10/2008, -6/+50As a Stump, I feel offended
  • NightVortez, on 05/10/2008, -7/+41Oh come on, even if you don't like McCain now, you have to give props to his 2000 presidential bid, he was an honorable and respective man, I'm sure if he had won instead of Bush we would be in a much better position, don't know why he ended up making a treaty with Bush though after his losing, sad that his respect for the party outweighed his own positions.
    • eviljolly, on 05/10/2008, -1/+12Sadly I think I agree.

      McCain > Bush

      But that's not saying much!
    • enki25, on 05/10/2008, -3/+25Dude, that's the point. That's why so many people don't like McCain now. He's flipped every position that made him a politician worthy of respect.
      • Pillage, on 05/10/2008, -3/+4I thought it was because he is running against Obama.
        • cquinnd, on 05/11/2008, -0/+5No, even against Obama in 2008 the McCain from 2000 would have been a worthy contender.
    • Hoogs, on 05/10/2008, -1/+3Which is why I think that when he becomes president (yes, when), he will go back to his old values. Right now, he's just doing whatever he can to get elected, and isn't that what all politicians do? I know I will get dugg down for this, but I'm refusing to buy into this Obama hype.
      • BradHAWK, on 05/10/2008, -0/+0So you're banking on the expectation that he will completely reverse course once elected?

        Honestly, I was contemplating the same thing had Hillary won the nomination. A very daunting thought is that I felt similarly about Bush Sr - he seemed much more reasonable when running against Reagan in 1980, so I hoped that once he became president that he would regain some of his prior sensibilities; unfortunately it didn't work out that way.

        You don't have to buY into any hype, but don't think that hoping McCain will be the opposite of who he says he is is any better.
      • sassip, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1The "gooks" must have cut off his testies.
    • submitdig, on 05/19/2008, -0/+1We'd be in a better position? He would've dropped nukes on Afghanistan and Iraq and obliterated all of them. Look at the guy; he's itching to get back at his "enemies" for what "they" did to him in Vietnam.
      The guy's as bright as a burned-out lightbulb. On top of that, he needs some serious therapy for his PTSD.
      He may have just happened to say some of the right things in 2000 - everyone makes a mistake once in a while.
  • drgooch, on 05/10/2008, -16/+7DrGooch says, "bushbush is as dumb as a stamp" for posting anything from Huffington.
  • Skywise, on 05/10/2008, -23/+11"I want to be President of all 57 states" Obama said yesterday in a campaign speech.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/09/obama-i-want ...
    • Nanobe, on 05/10/2008, -4/+5He was tired, tried to do a little mental math while talking, and the numbers came out jumbled. He was trying to say how many states he had been to so far on the campaign trail. His thought process was probably just "50 states, minus Alaska and Hawaii where we won't go, minus the other one remaining", and he spoke the "fifty" part of "50 states" in the math instead of the "47" he intended to say.

      When you're tired, try doing some mental math while giving a speech about other stuff, and see if you don't make a mistake.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -3/+4He just "misspoke".... oh wait that excuse has already been unsuccessfully used.
    • sassip, on 05/11/2008, -1/+2You're not really comparing Bush's IQ with that of Obama are you? Try Bush and an orangoutang and you might be closer...
    • Azunbar, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Why is it that every mistake Obama makes is completely defended while the mistakes of every other candidate are torn apart and analyzed for weeks? Last time I checked, all three of our candidates are human and likely to make mistakes, either defend those mistakes or attack them; but don't defend the errors of some while completely trashing others.
      • sassip, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1Why do you call it a "mistake?" If he thinks Bush is a boob, it's not a mistake unless you don't want people to hear it. In that case, don't say it. KISS
  • lorductape, on 05/10/2008, -3/+11Well he is..
  • krnldmp, on 05/10/2008, -4/+31Seriously folks. If you don't know by now that Bush is snort-when-he-laughs dumb and ignorant you may as well abstain from voting in the future to allow the country to regain some strength.
    • krnldmp, on 05/10/2008, -3/+10and McCain is right up there along with him
    • paradexes, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Hey what the hell is wrong with snorting when you laugh?!! Steve Urkel was smart, he snorted when he laughed. That my friend is ignorant discrimination against snorting laughers. I thought the snorting sterotype was for nerds and geeks?
    • db0255, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1I guess Yale ***** up every now and then...
  • minox, on 05/10/2008, -23/+4What a substantive attack on John McCain. Oh, and the author looks like a kid-toucher.
  • badfrog, on 05/10/2008, -21/+9Dear Huffpost... Please stop filling Digg with your headline spam.
    • B1663r, on 05/10/2008, -12/+7They have to take the offensive because the MSM is staring to understand the implications of Obamas ONE TRILLION DOLLAR tax increase, and as soon as the pundits get a hold of that, its all over for Obama.
      • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -3/+7PAYING for the deficit instead of printing more money and borrowing more from China? HOLY ***** THINK OF THE IMPLICATIONS
        • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -2/+2Raising taxes isn't the answer. That just discourages spending, growth and investment. You reduce the deficit by cutting spending and lowering taxes. The sad part is that no politician has the courage to cut spending. THINK OF THE IMPLICATIONS.
        • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2Cutting spending isn't going to lower the deficit, its will only slow the growth of the deficit. I'm not saying its a bad Idea, but its not a solution.
      • evil-doer, on 05/10/2008, -2/+5im sorry could you please repeat that in caps yet again? its not like you havent spammed it multiple times in multiple threads.
        do you get paid per posting or something?
      • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2The fact that a Democrat is prepared to increase taxes to pay for increased spending isn't exactly a secret. The Dems know it (and embrace it) and the Reps expect it so it won't affect Obama at all.
      • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2Really? How is Obama going to raise taxes even if he wants to? The last time I checked that was the job of Congress.
  • Totz83, on 05/10/2008, -3/+4Well he'll soon be a retired stump so yippeee
  • Caeili, on 05/10/2008, -17/+7Digg REALLY needs more huffingtonpost.com stuff here.
    I can't just go to huffingtonpost.com on my own.
    I need to see it spammed here as well.
    • krnldmp, on 05/10/2008, -3/+10Hey, could I interest you in some anteater pictures?
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -2/+1They should change their url to DiggCrack.com because that's what is seems like. The Diggers are sucking it up like there's no tomorrow. Their postings probably represent 50% of Diggs ad revenues.
  • chicofaraby, on 05/10/2008, -7/+39On one hand it's nice to see that McCain's judgement of Bush was spot on. On the other hand it shows that McCain has no integrity or he wouldn't have embraced Bush once Bush became president.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -4/+6Right, because falling into the party line is wrong..... oh wait, that's exactly what the Obama-bots are begging Hillary to do right now. Never mind.
      • chicofaraby, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Are you saying that McCain should have continued to criticize George Bush or that the Democrats that supported Senator Clinton shouldn't support Senator Obama? Because surely if one is wrong, they both are.
      • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2***** the Democratic Party line. I hate party politics on both sides, and I'd love to see Hillary dissent more. The fact remains though that Hillary and Obamas politics are quite similar. Trying to drag Obama down with her just because she can't win is counterproductive.
  • grey580, on 05/10/2008, -5/+6and this is news? Tell us something we don't know.
  • lamiaconfitor, on 05/10/2008, -3/+28In 99? I would appreciate it allot more if he'd say it out loud today...
  • amightywind, on 05/10/2008, -19/+10After 8 years in the Whitehouse these envious twits are still nipping at your heals. I have never thought of the US Senate as a bastion of intellect. Luvya Dubya!
    • chicofaraby, on 05/10/2008, -2/+12"nipping at your heals"

      A real bastion of intellect.
    • neogoblin, on 05/10/2008, -1/+6
      • Nanite, on 05/10/2008, -2/+2Actually I'd put that more at 33%. The retarded third of America that will lick bush's ass forever, no matter the cost, casualties, or trail of destruction left behind.
    • topace3000, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Please be a troll.
    • celkin, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1You must be new here.
  • mattmollysdad, on 05/10/2008, -2/+8I wonder what he thought of Gore...
  • snyperr2s, on 05/10/2008, -4/+15At least a stump supported a tree, which was helpful at one point in its life, bush is more like a rock.
  • apextek, on 05/10/2008, -3/+11Ok so Mccain and I agree on something
  • Pinkertinkle, on 05/10/2008, -3/+4Mccain shortchanged the stump with that comment.
  • kirakun, on 05/10/2008, -1/+8Stop insulting the stump!
  • Cattywampus, on 05/10/2008, -2/+11Assuming the quote is correct (it's in the Huffington Post, after all--not exactly an unbiased source), is one offhand comment made at a backyard barbecue 9 years ago really all that significant?
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -0/+4You forgot to add it was during a primary election.
    • xedd, on 05/10/2008, -0/+4Well, "one offhand comment made at a backyard barbecue" probably reveals more of what a candidate REALLY thinks than a thousand canned, formulated speeches written by the hired hacks.

  • tehbored, on 05/10/2008, -1/+11Maybe McCain does have some sort of degenerative brain disease. How else could such a drastic change over 9 years be explained?
    • xedd, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Sophisticated, steady and secretive application of medication and fear.
    • Iztikeit, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Is this your first election?
    • topace3000, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Well first there was 9/11, then there was a rejection in his attempt to run with the democratic party with Kerry, then there's the fact he needs to appeal to the Republican base now...
  • Sogui, on 05/10/2008, -1/+7At least in previous months we were getting Ron Paul/Obama spam from a variety of discredited blogs, now Diggs been courteous enough to focus on one.
  • jerrycurley, on 05/10/2008, -7/+1
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Arianna Huffington is the queen of flip-flopping. You have to feel sorry for her though, sh has a LOT to be bitter about. If you don't know her, read her Wikipedia entry.
  • swrostmore, on 05/10/2008, -3/+8It is the totality of positions McCain has flip-flopped on that is significant.
  • sovietamerica, on 05/10/2008, -5/+13
    • kreatre2007, on 05/10/2008, -9/+3I really don't think that serious voters will give one rat's ass about Obama's race. I don't care what race he is. I disagree with his politics and I think he has zero experience. Race has never been an issue for me when considering who to vote for. Why do we even have to keep bringing up race? Why is it still relevant? If we would just let the race issue die, the feelings and attitudes of a lot of voters would change. I resent black politicians who believe that their race is important. That alone creates a negative opinion from the start. I think that Obama is a great politician and, he is less offensive to me than Hillary. His race has never mattered to me. I just don't want to vote for a liberal.
    • Skywise, on 05/10/2008, -4/+3It's funny how PR is beginning to portray Obama in a positive light as McCain is gaining popularity. My prediction: McCain get nominated, but because he's white, racist and stupid [black] America will vote for Obama, giving 4-8 more years of Clinton socialism.

      Oh... I guess when the color's on the other foot...
    • NuclearWookie, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2You know, that sentence could be parsed to mean that you think Obama is black, racists and stupid.
  • kreatre2007, on 05/10/2008, -4/+8I don't see how John McCain's opinion of George W. Bush 9 years ago has any relevance. When I was much much younger, I didn't like Ronald Reagan. However, when I actually started forming my political opinions and values I came to admire Mr. Reagan a great deal. Feelings and attitudes can change. Of course McCain might still think that Bush is "dumb as a stump". Oh well. It's his opinion and he's entitled to it.
    • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -1/+4I find it very difficult to believe that anybody's opinion of Bush could have actually improved over the last 8 years. If it had, I would seriously question the judgment of that person.
    • ravenswing2, on 05/10/2008, -3/+1When I was much much younger, I didn't like Ronald Reagan. However, when I actually started forming my political opinions and values I came to admire Mr. Reagan a great deal. kreatre2007

      You should have stayed young. Reagan was a putz. A nice putz, but a putz none the less.
    • neogoblin, on 05/10/2008, -1/+4
      • kreatre2007, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Well, I'm 37 now. The Summer of 1987 is when I started forming my political opinions. I was 17 at that time. I was quite logical back then just as I am now. Anyone who is logical is compelled to constantly revaluate their ideas and attitudes instead of allowing their emotions to govern everything. In the end, it's like I said in my first post... It is completely irrelevant how John McCain thought of President Bush in 1999. He's allowed to change just as anyone else is. For a time, I was a staunch conservative. However, some of my views have moderated over time as I allowed my own logic to take over and force me to re-evaluate my views. Just because someone is old it does not mean that he cannot change. I didn't like John McCain at all in 1999/2000. Today, I don't think he's all that bad. I wish someone else were going to be the nominee but, I can live with John McCain as President. I don't think I would be very happy with Obama or Clinton.
  • HappyScrappy, on 05/10/2008, -2/+13That was the McCain I liked. Not the new one, "Flipper" McCain.
  • 1timeuser, on 05/10/2008, -3/+14God I miss pre-2000 McCain
    • xedd, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3Yeah, what in God's name ever happened to "Campaign Finance Reform"? THAT had my full support.

      *****. What ***** that turned out to be. Death by a thousand cuts.
  • MikeFallopian, on 05/10/2008, -1/+7McCain compliments Bush these days because it's the politically pragmatic thing to do. When Obama grins and praises Hillary for being a great candidates who's fought hard, do you think that's really his honest assessment?
    • EtherGnat, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3There is a difference between showing respect for your opponents (I suspect Obama will be respectful towards McCain as well) and completely changing your politics because it's politically expedient.
  • jana67, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2They are bad news all of them...http://www.squidoo.com/obamavideoshowcase
    http://best.hopeforamerica.ever.com/
  • turbodan1, on 05/10/2008, -7/+3Why in the world does the Huffington Post get enough diggs to make it on Digg? Why anyone believes the site is a mystery to me after the claim that McCain didn't vote for Bush in 2000, which is clearly false. This site is just as bad as Daily Kos in my opinion and not one word on it should be considered fact.
    • edgedmurasame, on 05/11/2008, -0/+3They dont spam like those that have been cordoned off from the rest of Digg.
    • NuclearWookie, on 05/11/2008, -2/+1Because leftards like leftard propaganda. It makes them feel warm and fuzzy.
  • chrissku, on 05/10/2008, -3/+11Now that Hillary is clearly finished Digg nation can start devouring McCain,
  • SoulDrift404, on 05/10/2008, -5/+2Funny..this gives me more respect for McCain!
    • t0rp, on 05/11/2008, -1/+0yah but now hes saying thats hes in love with bush and wants to have his baby. This is the old mccain, the old republican who thought he could become president by beating bush, now he needs bush and his idiot supporters
  • rheaume, on 05/10/2008, -2/+7Wow that makes him smarter than those of you that voted for Bush. Twice.
    • culbeda, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3*I* didn't vote for him twice, but I think the complicit media played a big part in making the second election close enough to steal and then they overlooked the voting "irregularities".
    • t0rp, on 05/11/2008, -0/+0i think bush is a rich president. But thats just my personal opinion.
  • jboettcher, on 05/10/2008, -1/+6"But if John McCain did end up voting for Bush, then by his own admission he voted for a stump."
  • HellDonut, on 05/10/2008, -2/+7Well, he DOES tell it like it is sometimes.
  • avik42, on 05/10/2008, -1/+0You know, I like him. Of all the Republican candidates, he always had this human quality about him. If you listen to him (when he's not pandering for votes from the religious nut cases), he actually sounds like a descent enough guy.

    I am glad all my friends in US are voting for Obama (well all but one). I think it's a very interesting time to be an American. I wish Obama was Canadian so I could vote for him :) But, if elected, he will have a real chance to make a real difference in the world as US President which I can't say the same for Canadian Prime Minister.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
  •  

    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. 2009 — 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.