Digg - 5 Deeply Disturbing Things About Last Night’s RNC

Remove

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

602 Comments
Who Dugg It?

jbenson2, on 09/05/2008, -103/+49#2: The GOP lacks even a shred respect for the Democratic nominees. WTF - turn the tables around for an accurate representation.

McCain paid for an ad and congratulated Obama on the night Obama spoke in the mile-high stadium.
McCain also withheld the VP nomination until the following day

Obama on the other hand went on O'Reilly the same night of McCain's speech.
- HuskyPuzzle, on 09/05/2008, -12/+43OK, McCain just took a second in his speech tonight, to congratulate Obama on his achievements -- but you can't deny Giuliani was being disrespectful last night, no? And please don't copy/paste another one of your comments in here, as you tend to do elsewhere.
  - slvrbullet87, on 09/06/2008, -10/+10One person doesnt mean the whole party
  - Drahkar, on 09/06/2008, -4/+4I know. So McCain once said something respectful. He has an entire party and campaign that is going out of it's way to be rude, unpleasant, derogatory and mean.
    
    That's another thing I've come to like about Obama. At least he's got class. It'd be really nice to get some class back into the Presidency. Its been a while since we had any.
  - unreg, on 09/06/2008, -3/+3Drahkar:
    
    Obama may have class but that doesn't mean the Democrats have it. Take a quick look at some of their latest efforts.
- deva14, on 09/05/2008, -16/+23Also, McCain's ad was widely viewed as a distraction dressed up as congratulations, rather than pure 'out of the goodness of his heart' move'...
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -15/+12Sure, if you want to spin it that way.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -13/+9I guess you would have preferred a "Obama, SCREW YOU" ad?
    
    Jeez, take out an ad to congratulate your opponent for his success, and get lambasted for being political. You libs don't know how to have a SHRED of respect for the republican nominees.
  - 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -12/+5deva14 -- what the hell does that even mean? go smoke your crack somewhere else
  - cadeucsb, on 09/06/2008, -2/+5Yes, one time it would have been congratulatory...running 5 times = transparent distraction proving its an image play, not congrats.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -3/+3cadeucsb, you don't know how ad blocks are bought, do you?
  - Drahkar, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3Oooo. McCain has one ad where he's respectful of Obama. That must make him a great man.
    
    Except Obama has nothing but respect for McCain. He states it when it comes up. He just explains why he thinks that McCain is wrong. While that is happening most of the GOP including Palin, is saying some of the most vile things and spreading blatantly false comments about Obama. That's not Spin. That's just fact. McCain will have to concentrate really hard and remember that what his campaign does reflects on him. And right now they are making him look like a total ass.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -3/+4What vile things have Palin or McCain said about Obama exactly?
- MelvinSchlubman, on 09/06/2008, -18/+13> McCain paid for an ad and congratulated Obama on the night Obama spoke in the mile-high stadium.
  
  You missed the sarcasm in that ad. McCain was facetiously criticizing Obama for having his acceptance speech on the anniversary of King's "I have a dream". On the surface, it was a congratulation, but only on the surface. Watch McCain's ad again.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -6/+6Spin?
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -5/+7How exactly was he faceitiously criticising Obama for having his acceptance speech on the King anniversary? How can you possibly spin it that way except through an extraordinarily distorted filter?
  - 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -7/+8@melvin -- thats the dumbest most baseless thing I've read in a long time .. a stretch even for digg. LOL you crazy liberals make the heart of America laugh.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -3/+9McCain says: “Senator Obama, this is truly a good day for America. Too often the achievements of our opponents go unnoticed. So I wanted to stop and say, congratulations. How perfect that your nomination would come on this historic day. Tomorrow, we’ll be back at it. But tonight Senator, job well done.”
    
    Yeah, sounds like harsh criticism to me. Damn that evil McCain!!!!
  - unreg, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1You Libtards are funny, now you get upset when somebody says something nice.
  - MelvinSchlubman, on 09/13/2008, -0/+1tkstock (and others): typical literalism. No surprise that you quoted only the text, and let the presentation go right over your head. If you're not perceptive enuf to see all of what's going on then I can't help you.
- CreateSomeNoise, on 09/06/2008, -35/+14What do you expect from the democrats? They're assholes, through and through. That is, TODAY'S, dem..... the dems of my parent's generation were respectable people.
  
  Today's democrat is nothing more than a lazy *****.
  - byronne, on 09/06/2008, -1/+5That's not what you said this morning....
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -4/+9To folks on the other side of issues for whom I have a shred of respect, I speak with at least some courtesy. To you, I say merely "Go ***** yourself."
- gubbie, on 09/06/2008, -16/+14If McCain had any class, he would've given Obama a call to congratulate him, not take out a patronizing ad to get attention.
  
  It's called an AD for a reason.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -5/+8Patronizing by congratulating him? I don't think he was being sarcastic?
- sugarazor, on 09/06/2008, -7/+13"Obama on the other hand went on O'Reilly the same night of McCain's speech. "
  
  McCain went on Leno during the DNC, what the hell are you talking about? The Republicans didn't say ONE positive thing about Obama without following up with sarcasm or smugness. They even had the class to insult his supporters as "followers" and look down on people who come together to help their community.
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -4/+8Of course they looked down on Democrats on every turn. Democrats are ELITISTS who look down on REAL PEOPLE, as if they don't count, which is WRONG. So that's why Republicans look down on Democrats and demean them as not "real" Americans, and treat them as if they don't count. It makes perfect sense.
  - sugarazor, on 09/06/2008, -4/+5You mean like when Republicans demeaned people who participate in faith-based community organizers? The only elitism I hear is coming from the mouths of a bunch of old, rich white men and their woman that won't rock the boat and keep in line.
    
    Republicans have a lock on being the party of "REAL" Americans and they celebrate it through proud ignorance, bigotry, smugness, and meanness.
  - soupdawg30, on 09/06/2008, -3/+3Why wouldn't Republicans look down on Obama. We do not like him.
- mewoot10, on 09/06/2008, -12/+11Everyone who buried this guy is just rude and doesn't actually listen to the media, or is not open to different kinds of media. I'm really starting to get annoyed with all this *****, most of you tweens don't know ***** about politics and just listen to what mommy and daddy have to say for you.
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -6/+4Sorry, I actually paid attention. And sorry again, appearing on TV on the same day as a convention does not compare to repeated spiteful, childish and disrespectful attacks, many of which contained blatant lies.
  - mewoot10, on 09/06/2008, -0/+5Hierophantus,
    
    There's alot of this going both ways, and it's just frustrating to see many digg users un open to ideas of others. Especially because i like alot of the articles on digg, and to see such blatent pereference to one side or the other bothers me because i like seeing both sides of the story, so i rarely visit digg anymore due to this one sidedness.
- paidhima, on 09/06/2008, -4/+4Actually, Obama didn't "go on" O'Reilly the same night as the speech. The interview was pre-recorded, and it was ultimately up to O'Reilly and the show's producers to air it at that time. They could have chosen to air it next week, like the other three parts of the interview.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -2/+1It was in the afternoon of the speech. I think it was a smart, calculated move by Obama. After all, he is a politician. He knew Fox would air it right away.
    
    I don't have a problem with him doing that. It's just politics. I'm looking forward to more of the interview. O'Reilly finally got him to admit the surge was a success, but he wouldn't admit he was wrong about it! Too funny.
- carterartist, on 09/06/2008, -6/+3and now Obama is scheduling the airing of the O'Reilly program? wow that was ignorant. I'm sure Obama has 0 control on when the interview airs. now move along and ignore more of the truth and spread more of the ignorance and lies.
- heliox, on 09/06/2008, -6/+5What you said was 100% correct, yet you are dugg down.
  ***** believable.
- lucutus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2If you notice that all but one comment in your recent history is getting dugg down you might think "Hey maybe I should shut the ***** up and stop repeating myself"
  http://digg.com/users/jbenson2/history/comments
  
  Seriously it seems nobody wants to hear most of what you have to say. Please stop saying everything two or more times with your copy paste madness!
- jbenson2, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1It was great to see the O-man kowtow down to Bill O'Reilly and admit the Surge actually worked.
  
  And it was even greater to see Palin nail Barack the following day on his flip-flop.
- jaxcs, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1McCain paid for an ad and congratulated Obama on the night Obama spoke in the mile-high stadium.
  McCain also withheld the VP nomination until the following day
  
  One ad means I can now trash talk for a few days? Good investment. When McCain withheld the VP nomination until the following day was it to minimize the uplift candidates get following a convention or was it out of respect? spin spin spin.
- cool8man, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1It's a false choice because there's good change and bad change...
  
  Because "CHANGE" is not a destination, just as "HOPE" is not a strategy.
  
  That's a brilliant line. You have to admit the GOP has talented speech writers.
  
  Giuliani seemed to get the best reaction and interaction from the crowd. He was excellent 4 years ago at the RNC too. He may not know how to run a campaign but he definitely knows how to work a crowd.
  
  I also agree that it was rude for Obama to not stay quiet on the night of McCain's nomination. Typically candidates stay silent during the week of their opponent's convention. He did help increase McCain's ratings though.
poprocksandsoda, on 09/05/2008, -62/+16It's not even over yet ... how can you talk about it?
- deva14, on 09/05/2008, -6/+11We should wait til the whole thing is over before we talk about a single speech? Why?
  - CryRightardCry, on 09/05/2008, -11/+10Because it gives the rightards a few more days of not having to lie to defend themselves.
  - poprocksandsoda, on 09/06/2008, -7/+11No because the ***** who wrote this planted the content of this Digg about 5 minutes into the McCain speech.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -4/+4Actually, it was put into Digg BEFORE McCain's speech started.
  - B1663r, on 09/06/2008, -3/+2So someone was prescient about what we would be talking about tonight. He looked at all the possible outcomes, and picked one and editorialized about what it means, and posted it on digg. His reward for doing so correctly is that his website gets exposure.
    
    So basically exactly what newspapers do on election night when they make headlines and stories for all possible outcomes, then print the correct on the morning after.
    
    In other words, you just once again demonstrated that republicans on digg are mentally deficient, and totally misunderstand the medium.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2"So basically exactly what newspapers do on election night when they make headlines and stories for all possible outcomes, then print the correct on the morning after."
    
    Uh... no. Newspapers don't print and release articles about the outcome before the outcome.
    
    Oh, by the way, Obama's speech tomorrow was horrible.
- DavidGX, on 09/06/2008, -1/+6"5 deeply disturbing things about LAST NIGHTS RNC"
  
  LAST NIGHT.
AAK15, on 09/05/2008, -16/+160LOL http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/7480/cantwinocc ...
- obliviousfool, on 09/05/2008, -5/+16Someone got escorted out during Palin's speech too, but the message was lost to the TV cameras.
- CreateSomeNoise, on 09/06/2008, -34/+8kid looks like a typical prick. tell him to get a job.
  - johnnykwest, on 09/06/2008, -8/+6His current job is to annoy people like you. I'd say he's doing quite well at it. Besides that, the sign is correct.
  - johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -3/+6^^^
    
    Great career he's got going for him...
  - defy, on 09/06/2008, -1/+20His previous career was serving in the United States military occupying Iraq. I do believe he has earned the right to state his dissatisfaction after being there for a few years.
    
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Kokesh
    
    Oh snap! Eat crow?
  - 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3Where do you think the Obama's donation money is going?
  - phrenzy, on 09/06/2008, -2/+5Wating for the pathetic fools who were dissing this kid and telling him to "get a job" to come crawling back and try to spin this around or claim he's not a "real soldier"
  - ErickStevenson, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4What Happened? I thought the Republican put anyone down who doesn't "respect" the Troops? oh that's right, if you're against us then you're the enemy... even if you did serve your country... yah typical Repubs... stab you in the back and throw you down a flight of stairs if you say anything bad about them.
  - byronne, on 09/06/2008, -2/+2Be informed before you post, ignoramus.
    http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive? ...
- PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -15/+2He's probably from Berkely.
  - secrity, on 09/06/2008, -1/+10He is an Iraq War vet and former Marine.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -4/+2...who is probably from Berkely.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -6/+1...and he has a right to his opinion. But by saying "you can't win an occupation" he's suggesting that we're just occupying for the sake of occupying and Iraq is not safer than it was before we were there. He is missing the point that we are rooting out terrorism wherever it may be. If all countries took a stand and joined in on the fight against radical Islam and didn't harbor terrorism in any form, the burden would not fall so heavily on our shoulders and we wouldn't have to hold the hand of a country that should have picked up their own slack as long as we have.
  - x181, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2If people like you weren't so ignorant, we wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place.
  - buckrogers1965, on 09/06/2008, -0/+3"He is missing the point"
    
    What is the point this week? I thought the point in going into Iraq was the WMD's? Where are they? Why have not a single one been found? Why didn't we even guard any of these sites during the invasion?
- OfNumbers, on 09/06/2008, -5/+1You plugged that comment a while after you posted it. Whatever sticks, huh?
- anarcurt, on 09/06/2008, -1/+32McCain =Cotton Hill
  Palin = Peggy Hill
  
  http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/Demotivationa ...
  - zdiggler, on 09/06/2008, -0/+4That's who she reminds me of! I was thinking about it all day.
    
    I just saw Gonzo on DVD 15min ago, its like ***** deja vu, wow!
    .. that's a ***** good movie!
- c0mputar, on 09/06/2008, -0/+3I recited that in my head with the No Brick in the Wall soundtrack.... Is it part of the lyrics?
- zdiggler, on 09/06/2008, -1/+3I can't wait for 99 Cent gas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- oldgal, on 09/06/2008, -3/+4Sorry, this is a cheap shot, but the petty little devil in me is making me do it: I find it amusing that the candidate who will keep us safe can't keep a protester out of his convention in spite of hundreds of arrests.
- dstz, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Is it the guy the Reps payed to make Democrats look bad?
Benjamin10, on 09/05/2008, -18/+201Felt like I was watching a high school student council election. Scary that millions of people were impressed by this and will vote for McCain.
- CryRightardCry, on 09/05/2008, -10/+51Stupid people are easily swayed, and greedy people will believe McCain's lies about tax cuts and the economy, when in fact McCain is going to make the tax cuts for the rich PERMANENT, which means you and I will have to pick up the slack for them.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -26/+10Or Obama's lies about taxing big business helping the average working man, right? So by taxing big business, who do you think execs are going to make up their losses from? That's right, their employees, YOU!
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -3/+5CRC, define greedy people for us please.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -13/+4I'm not sure how I could possibly be dugg down. Think about it Liberals. It makes perfect sense.
  - mcquitty, on 09/06/2008, -10/+5PEEN,
    
    They believe that corporations actually pay taxes out of some magical box.
    
    What they don't realize is this: Corporations are simply proxies for doing business. Corporations employ people, sell goods or services, and everything is paid for by customers. If the customer is middle class, the middle class will pay a "hidden" tax.
    
    Of course, that's not a tax on the middle class, right? Because they don't see it out of their paycheck, it's not a tax.
  - khouros, on 09/06/2008, -2/+12I don't know why I'm even acknowledging this Republican stupidity with a response.. but might as well give it a shot. If I pay less in taxes, I get to choose where to spend that money. If corporation X raises the price of product Y (as a result of mitigating higher taxes without cutting the CEO's 40 million dollar salary), I have the choice not to buy, or not to buy as much of, product Y. Of course there are necessities which I will buy regardless, but this does not apply to all the things I spend money on (and I know I DEFINATELY don't need all the things I buy). If product Y becomes more expensive and less people start buying it, then GASP the corporation has to realize that it either needs to cheapen product Y or make it better. It can of course cut jobs or cut the CEO's salary, but that is a choice it has to make itself in the face of a number of possible (and ethical) business models. We know, specifically in the case of the oil companies, that they have not been spending their windfall profits on R&D. Why should we give them tax breaks as a result of their greed?
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -7/+3@khouros
    
    I think you've chosen to glaze over what you said about "It can of course cut jobs" because that's exactly what they would do in the face of falling profits ahead of investing more money that they don't have on research for improvement of their product.
    
    That's my point. People see "lower taxes for the working man!" and immediately are attracted to that without thinking of the implications. What you've stated is a complex web of events that the average person will not see and therefore what you've described is unlikely to happen. What I've said is more like a certainty than a probability of taxing big business.
  - khouros, on 09/06/2008, -2/+8Not only that, but the rich that would have their taxes raised are hardly all business owners. This argument can only apply in the case where we aren't talking about INCOME tax. Of course, the $200000+ club can easily afford to make a campaign contribution of 2300 dollars to the man who will fix (pun intended) the economy in their favor, whereas I can only afford to give 25 dollars to the man whom I know would make the economy better (better than McCain, at least) for the country in general, as opposed to better for my own selfish interests.
  - mcquitty, on 09/06/2008, -6/+3@kouros,
    
    You are missing the point. Every company will have to raise prices or lose margin. It's not like a pick and choose scenario. It's not like the government is saying food companies will not be taxed. They are saying everyone.
    
    Now, I assume you are middle class. So, in essence, it is a tax increase for you as the company will be passing on the expense to you. The only difference is you don't see the taxes directly.
    
    Have you ever taken Econ 101?
    
    As for tax breaks for oil companies, I agree. But, I also say we shouldn't be subsidizing farmers, either. They are paid market prices, why are we paying some farmer not to plant a crop?
  - khouros, on 09/06/2008, -3/+6How the hell is what I said 'missing the point?!' The argument you just presented is SPECIFICALLY what I addressed in my first post, did you even read it? I said clearly that if the costs of higher taxes are mitigated by raising the price of a product, then I can choose to buy less of the product! This does not apply to everything I buy, but then, it does to SOME THINGS. Since I am making the choice whether to buy or not to buy these things, then the ESSENTIALS I can still afford, because I am paying less in taxes!
    
    You don't win an argument by asking someone whether or not they are an expert in their field. You are just parroting lines that have been previously stated, you aren't thinking for yourself.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -6/+3"I don't know why I'm even acknowledging this Republican stupidity with a response.."
    
    Whenever you're trying to make an intelligent argument, never start it off with an insult. You will lose all credability immediately before you make your first point.
    
    As pointed out, Obama wants to raise corporate tax rates, which will raise the prices of goods and services made in America. Guess who that policy favors? China. They won't pay the increased corporate tax, their goods will become even MORE competitive, and more Americans will lose jobs. Impact. Policies have deeper impact than the superficial appearances give you.
  - khouros, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3And government subsidies on corn is not exactly the same thing! These subsidies are coming out of the federal budget specifically because the underpopulated states are in themselves 'special interests' on a massive scale who want a federal payout for providing a service, specifically, growing food as a product. Their welfares are tied into the continued success of Senators from these states and as a result, no reform on agriculture subsidies ever has any hope of making it through congress. It would be good to eliminate them, but this won't happen until individual congressmen put the good of the federal budget (and consequently, the rest of the nation) ahead of the good of their own districts.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -4/+2"And government subsidies on corn is not exactly the same thing!"
    
    Thanks for telling us something we already knew. Way to try and divert the subject away from an argument you've utterly lost.
    
    At least we agree on corn subsidies.
- biogears, on 09/06/2008, -21/+8Have you ever thought that those millions of people might be on to something?
  - churler, on 09/06/2008, -9/+8Nope!
  - QuadZeroRoute, on 09/06/2008, -15/+6HOLY hoop skirts: When did the clock tick back to 1958?
    
    When Joe Biden tragically lost his wife and infant daughter in a car wreck in 1972, not a single colleague, friend or competitor advised him to quit his newly won Senate seat to raise his two little surviving sons.
    
    Rather, he was sworn into office from the injured boys' bedside, and took to commuting an hour and a half each way from Delaware to Washington. And when Biden's second wife gave birth to a daughter, no one thought to ask him to step aside and stay home.
    
    They all do it. John Kennedy did it; so did Barack Obama: Men run for office and serve in elected positions while creating small children without ever being patronized as "super dads" or "multi-taskers."
    
    Nor are they penalized, ridiculed or dismissed for ignoring their kids. They're good dads.
    
    If Sarah Palin, tapped as John McCain's running mate, were a man, it's unlikely we'd even be having this conversation. (A man, or a Democrat.)
    
    Palin is a mother five times over. She also hunts, fishes, coaches hockey, has a day job as the governor of the state of Alaska - and is known to commute home from the state capital of Anchorage daily during session. Just like Biden.
    
    And, until at least four months ago, Palin also had the ability to bear a child, which we've just learned is a talent she shares with her 17-year-old daughter.
    
    But women on the left, who fought long and hard for the ability to raise children simultaneously with election cash, are in spasms. (Some have simply kept silent. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton - where are you?)
    
    The same lefty media that studiously ignored the adolescence of Chelsea Clinton can't wait to dig into Bristol Palin.
    
    The stupendously sexist New York Times printed a front-page article noting that some unnamed women argue over "whether there are enough hours in the day for her to take on the vice presidency, and whether she is right to try."
    
    Which left the field weirdly clear for Phyllis Schlafly, who helped defeat the Equal Right Amendment - and also ran for Congress while raising six children - to tell the Times, "People who don't have children, or who have only one or two, are kind of overwhelmed at the notion of five children."
    
    http://www.nypost.com/seven/09032008/postopinion/o ...
  - bagboyrebel, on 09/06/2008, -2/+6unless McCain is giving secret speeches that only his supporters are allowed to even hear, then nope.
  - acroyear2, on 09/06/2008, -2/+5Considering that they weren't actually talking about the economy, the failures of the past 8 years and how they would be different, and spent so much time sneering, I don't think they're are on to anything at all.
  - staticneuron, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4QuadZeroRoute, are you serious?
    
    "The same lefty media that studiously ignored the adolescence of Chelsea Clinton can't wait to dig into Bristol Palin."
    
    Was Chelsea pregnant at the time? The big hiccup with Palin is not the fact the she's a woman at all. As a matter of fact the majority of comments I have heard about her sidestep the fact.
    
    And the article you posted has no relevance here. It was in response to some idiotic post asking if she had enough time in the day to be a VP. Which is a stupid question to begin with, only to have an equally stupid response. But its ok.... ham it up so you can seem even more victimized.
  - DefaultGirl, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1So if millions of lemmings were running off a cliff I should consider joining them? Surely they know what they are doing, right?
- locojones, on 09/06/2008, -1/+15One of the most frightening aspects of that speech was looking out into the audience of brainwashed zombies just lapping up the Republican rhetoric. And yet, despite all the fear-mongering about Democratic socialism, not a single person questioned McCain when his speech delved into exactly that.
  
  He wants the government to make up the difference in wages between a person's old job and their new temporary one while they're securing more permanent work. Who's going to pay for that? Oh right, my taxes are.
  
  He wants everyone who is unemployed to have access to community colleges, which apparently will now become vocational schools for retraining. I wonder who's money will pay for that. Oh right, mine.
  
  And let's not forget his thinly veiled attempt to sneak school vouchers in there under the guise of "educational freedom of choice for parents." If the government allows a parent to send their kid to private or charter schools, someone has to bear that cost. And guess what, it will be you and I.
  
  All the while he'll be busting unions and removing employees ability to band together for fair wages and benefits.
  
  McCain is terrifying. But only less so than the people who support him, like the guy who can't even spell Maverick. (MAVRICK).
- ykinc, on 09/06/2008, -1/+0Read the book "Mephisto" (1936) by Klaus Mann, and you'll see many many analogies about such people.
tm13lke, on 09/05/2008, -19/+234"...and that could leave us with the Governor of Alaska running the largest military and economy on the planet."

Quite possibly the most terrifying statement I've read in a while.
- johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -16/+9Yeah, it really is. I mean, you never know what you're getting with the candidates. It could be governors from the biggest states, the smallest states, military leaders, senators, community organizers, etc.
  
  But I suppose you know who's the "sure thing", and who isn't, right?
  
  Jesus, you would complain no matter who the VP selection wass, so I concur...
- QuadZeroRoute, on 09/06/2008, -33/+13Palin managed far more territory than Biden and even pulled more votes in her mayoral seat than Biden in his presidential bid. Biden sucks as VP.
  
  Palin is to Alaska
  population 683,478
  
  Biden is to Delaware
  population 864,764
  
  You could fit 250 states the size of Delaware into the state of Alaska, a state with more coastal borders than that of practically all the other states combined.
  
  Alaska has the same number of electoral college votes as Delaware.
  
  130 times the affirmative action candidate voted present because to vote yes or no was too tough. CEO's mayors and governors must make decisions, you cannot vote present. Obama has never managed anything and has never managed in crisis. Obama is the least experienced candidate in the last 100 years.
  
  I agree with Joe Biden that the position of the President of the United States of America is not the time or place for on the job training. In the single most important decision, to increase the number of on the ground troops John McCain made the right call and called for the increase in the number of troops.
  
  When Joe Biden's wife and children were killed in an accident leaving two children injured and in the hospital, nobody asked Joe Biden how he was going to be a Senator and take care of his family. Sarah Palin has a husband that is very capable of taking care of children and between her husband and care takers they will do fine.
  - sugarazor, on 09/06/2008, -7/+16"pulled more votes in her mayoral seat than Biden in his presidential bid. Biden sucks as VP."
    
    Lie. Flat-out ***** huge lie.
    
    Palin's first mayoral run netted 651 votes, Biden got almost 80,000 in his bid. ***** right-wing parrots.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -7/+4I guess they don't have sarchasm on the planet where you're from, sugarazor.
- Brassbud, on 09/06/2008, -15/+10Luckily, and no doubt to the dismay of many at the DNC, we don't live a Communist state, and as such the President should have little to no control over the economy whatsoever.
- johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -3/+8^^^
  Yeah, I guess most people here never heard of Congress...
  - davidron, on 09/06/2008, -0/+6The single most powerful man in the US government has enough bargaining power to control many of the things that aren't under his direct control. The president certainly has more control over the content of a bill than any single congressman. He can use the power of the veto to force certain clauses to be excluded or included to allow a law to pass.
    
    Indeed, the veto over-ride limits the power of the president, but short of that, the fear of a veto can cause many changes to the budget.
- jarretf, on 09/06/2008, -7/+2"tm" - so you would rather have it left up to a senator that has held office not counted in years, but DAYS????
  
  Obama scares the hell out of me. He is in WAY over his head.
- IgnatiusTheKing, on 09/06/2008, -9/+2I'd rather have the Governor of Alaska, with what little experience she has as an executive, running the nation than a guy who has never even bothered to perform his current job. Remind me, what was the last bill he introduced? When was the last time he even voted in the Senate?
  - gnocchi1442, on 09/06/2008, -2/+5When was the last time McWorse even voted in the Senate? He's been running for preztard since 2004.
- oldgal, on 09/06/2008, -2/+6Seems sorta like being in charge of a gas station one day and waking up as CEO of Chevron the next day.
- jcostom, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2Is it as terrifying as electing someone who has never held an executive office to the most prominent executive position in the world?
  
  Puts things in a little perspective, eh?
  
  You want scary? She's got more executive experience than ANY of the other 3 guys.
  
  Neither of these crews impress me. I'm going to wind up voting for the one that doesn't suck the most, rather than the one I believe in, as I believe in neither group.
  - quiksliver, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2George Bush had "executive experience" too
- CandidateZero, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2It's scary because she would be a "fish out of water" as president. That would open her up to even greater puppeteering by money powers whose loyalties lie anywhere but with the US.
  
  That's what I fear -- those having the greatest concentration of control over the global flow of wealth and how far they'll go to further their own power and influence. Nations are mere financial collateral to such men, America included.
skewl, on 09/05/2008, -11/+68The way they forcefully handled the protesters was uncalled for, then again they have been doing it all week.
- QuadZeroRoute, on 09/06/2008, -22/+6Heheheee....I really wanted to have been there. Instead of grabbing the banner and throwing it on the ground I would have broken the cheekbones of the protesters with my boots.
  - cherwilco, on 09/06/2008, -1/+9no you wouldn't have you big softy you!
  - SaperKain, on 09/06/2008, -3/+7That protester was Iraq vet. He would brake you in half with his thumb. Quad you are a ***** waste.
  - Wartyboskfapped, on 09/06/2008, -4/+6Jesus, way to admit you are a ***** fascist. Great work, moron, I'm sure you won over a lot of undecideds, there.
    
    "A boot stamping on a human face, forever" - Orwell
    http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgeo ...
    
    Thanks for doing our job for us, Quad, showing you lot to be exactly what you really are.
    (I guess you must be stressed from having to astroturf the threads 24/7 for the last 7 days of Palin haemorrhaging bad press, and your mask of 'compassionate conservative' slipped)
  - JRW5061, on 09/06/2008, -3/+4You're a ***** retard. People like you are the reason I'm embarrassed to be an American. Breaking the cheekbones of a veteran that has served in Iraq to protect your rights, including the right to free speech that he is exhibiting here, and all you can say is that you want to pound his face in. What life experience do you have to even make a statement like that? What have you done for your country? If McCain wins I swear I'm moving.
  - armyabn1, on 09/06/2008, -5/+4JRW5061 -
    
    While I agree that Quad's statement was idiotic, so is yours. If you are embarrassed to be an American, why not just leave now. There are plenty of immigrants who would kill to take your place - we don't need you here anyway. That Iraq vet who was protesting certainly had a right to do so, but just because he was an Iraq vet doesn't mean he knows ***** about the situation in Iraq, politics, or the military. Take it from someone who "has a life experience (or two) ...to make that statement." I have served multiple combat tours on three continents...so I believe I have done enough for my country to say that most of those whiney-ass vet protesters are F#$cking crybabies who didn't get their way in the military and are taking their distorted view of the world to the one place where the cameras will give them 5 seconds of fame. ***** them - they aren't in this for anyone but themselves. By all means - if McCain wins, move. At least we will still have a strong military - because if Obama wins, I personally know a ton of people who will be getting out of the military ASAP.
  - JRW5061, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3To armyabn1,
    
    I will do my best to respect your opinion even though I can tell our views are very different. I just want you to explain why you feel the way you do. Are you saying that you think the war in Iraq is "working" or benefiting our country in any way? To me the war seems very much like a pride issue. We are embarrassed to say that the war is a mistake feel that a withdrawal is admitting defeat. Our reasons for entering the war have not been justified. We never did find any WMD's. The atrocities of 9/11 were committed by a terrorist group and were not sanctioned by the Iraqi government in any way. What right did we have to declare war on this country? We did EXACTLY what al queda wanted us to do by declaring a war we could not win, and it is bankrupting our country. It is costing us trillions of dollars that we cannot afford and is not benefiting any American civilian in any way. What better way for a terrorist group that despises capitalism to damage our country than to cause our economy to collapse. Think about it.
  - Jelga, on 09/06/2008, -3/+3Well aren't we mister ***** internet tough guy.
  - jarretf, on 09/06/2008, -4/+2armyban1 - you're absolutely right. I was in the corps for the first gulf war and over the following years, I watched Clinton just desimate our military. It was crushing for our morale. He cut funding, support, and threw up so much red tape that it was difficult at times to properly train our men and women.
    
    I KNOW McCain would not do this. He has been there done that (and much more), while, I wonder if they even had the boy scouts in Indonesia...?
    
    JRW5061 - put up or shut up. You can leave our beloved country. I don't want our men and women in the military protecting your sorry ass.
    
    Semper Fi
  - buckrogers1965, on 09/06/2008, -2/+1@jarretf
    
    Decimate?
    
    Clinton killed every 10th man in the military?
    
    What a hard ass.
  - jarretf, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2No and neither did Bush, where do you get your numbers from? Maybe if our military was at full strength, and had the equipment that we should have had UP FRONT, that we LOST in the 90's, maybe we would not have lost the men and women that we did.
    
    Have you ever worn a uniform? Unless you did during this time, maybe you would understand. If that makes me a hard ass, thank you for the compliment
  - withoutamartyr, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2jarretf, I think you misunderstood completely what buckrogers was trying to say.
  - TheTrueHero, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2"...but just because he was an Iraq vet doesn't mean he knows ***** about the situation in Iraq, politics, or the military."
    
    I'm surprised a McCain supporter would say that...
- brycelb, on 09/06/2008, -16/+5It was really disappointing that they didn't march their asses out of there immediately and straight into a waiting cop car. If your going to act like a little ***** then you should deal with the consequences. The liberals are amazing piles of ***** when it comes to acting like teenagers when the adults are talking.
  - Wartyboskfapped, on 09/06/2008, -2/+11Why do you hate our troops?
  - staticneuron, on 09/06/2008, -2/+5Holding up a sign is acting like a *****?
    
    Thanks.... each and every comment in rapid defense of the rights teach me just how many republicans are complete ***** retards.
  - jarretf, on 09/06/2008, -2/+2You idiots. I did my time in the Corps and I did it to protect your rights to protest, but not to act like F&%king imbisils. It is one thing to wave signs and make your voice heard, turning over cars and breaking windows just to get your rocks off makes you a child. Doing it while wearing a bandana over your face just makes you a pu$$y.
    
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" --Voltaire
  - withoutamartyr, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2Woah, who was turning over cars and breaking windows?
    
    And it's ok to say '*****' on here, man. Also, pussy.
  - MissEvans, on 09/06/2008, -1/+0***** you, brycelb. It's obvious you hate our troops.
- tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -5/+8Oh, so we should just let any ***** interrupt speeches whenever they like? Be glad the right wing has more couth and civility than that.
  
  I don't have a problem with protesting, but there is a time and a place for protests, and important speeches on both sides are not the appropriate time to protest. That is impeding the freedom of speech of the speaker.
  - youannoyme, on 09/06/2008, -2/+8Can they walk in and interrupt? No. Can they wreak havoc and force a halt to things? No. Can they assemble near the premise with signs and chants? Hell yes! But are they allowed to... Seems some don't want to let them...
  - JRW5061, on 09/06/2008, -2/+11I get what you're saying. Holding up a sign is different than interrupting a speech though. He wasn't acting like an ass or making loud noises or even acting in any manner that would be considered a distraction really. Is there a rule that says that you can only hold up signs that blindly praise the person speaking? So by your rationale holding up a sign saying "Go McCain" or w/e other signs people were holding up could be considered an interruption (I know this is a stretch but try to look at it from both sides). That's a little one sided isn't it. People should be able to voice their opinions no matter what. This is called censorship IMHO.
  - mcquitty, on 09/06/2008, -3/+3I seem to recall a lot of protests around the DNC. I believe the police also arrested a number of people in Denver. It's not a right or left thing.
    
    However, I wish there was more respect. Around here, it is mostly name calling. I don't mind respectful discourse. However, we also have intellectual dishonesty. For example, the claim that Ms. Palin's son was his grandson. No proof offered.
    
    For others, it is Barrack Hussein Obama. Or calling him a muslim.
    
    But, what I hate the absolute most is burying people for stating facts, simply because you disagree with the facts.
    
    If I state a fact, it does not have a bias. But, because you may not like that fact, you bury it simply because you don't want to believe it.
    
    Think Pink only wants to disrupt. There's a time and place for that. How about if I walked into one of their potlucks with a gun and fatigues and started spouting off at them? Would that be acceptable?
    
    So, why is it acceptable for them to interrupt a political process.
    
    And while we are at it, let's talk about Iraq. Whether you agree with the war or not, you have to deal with it. Simply withdrawing doesn't make any sense. If you withdraw without a stable government, it will only make matters worse. A vacuum needs to be filled and who would you rather fill it? Would you like a stable government or some radical stepping in and making matters worse?
    
    We do need to leave Iraq, but we need to leave it in a stable condition. I don't know what the timeline is.
    
    To put it another way, here's what I see is happening. Someone is stabbed. The knife is in an artery. Some people are complaining about the knife. Others are saying we need to pull the knife out right now, which would kill the victim. And doing the responsible activity is stabilizing the victim, removing the knife at a place and time when everything is ready.
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3Here's my position on protesting (from a previous post):
    
    I think protesting has its place. It has always been a useful tool against totalinarianism and injustice all over the world. But there's a line that shouldn't be crossed when doing so, and the limitations should be (on BOTH sides of the protest):
    
    1) you can't impinge on another person's rights (including their freedom of speech)
    2) you can't put people in danger (on either side of the protest)
    3) you can't impede on free will (such as right of passage)
    
    If the police are trying to get people out of the way (not to squelch the protest, but for right of passage) and the people refuse to move, they do so at their own risk.
  - mcquitty, on 09/06/2008, -1/+3There are differences between censorship and and being asked to leave.
    
    For example, if I host a party at my house and someone is at my house starts yelling at me, do I have the right to have them escorted out?
    
    This is what the conventions are about. It is a gathering of like minded people holding, while televised, a private event.
    
    If they want to stand out in the street or sidewalk and yell at me and my party, so be it. They have that right. I may not agree with what they are saying, but I will stand up for their right to be heard.
    
    The same can be said for the conventions. What if someone interrupted Mr. Obama's speeches with talks of his failures in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge? Or yelled at him for other reasons? Would this be acceptable? No. However, I would still support the protestor on the street saying the same things, whether I agreed with them or not.
  - JRW5061, on 09/06/2008, -2/+2"This is what the conventions are about. It is a gathering of like minded people holding, while televised, a private event."
    
    I believe the fact that it is televised on national television for the entire country, or the public if you will, to see makes the event public. No?
  - tkstock, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3Private = by invitation only, I think. I've never been to a convention, but not just anyone can go, can they? You have to be invited somehow? I don't know how those things work.
- jtinz, on 09/06/2008, -2/+1Well, the police didn't need to hold back, because the Republican party has to bear the legal costs of police misconduct:
  http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/conve ...
- zer0nix, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1not just protesters, but reporters as well. i'd say it's shameful, but somehow that word seems to have lost effect.
  - ncmike73, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1You do remember about the reporter arrested in Denver its wasn't just the RNC the DNC had some disturbing things too.
cybermort, on 09/05/2008, -21/+200"Drill baby drill", gave me chills. I couldn't believe this. I thought we had all agreed on global warming.
They said we're addicted to oil, now they're like junkies asking for one last fix.
- failedpimp, on 09/05/2008, -6/+76I thought they were talking about drilling Palin, that's why joined in the chant.
  - Gooserbaijan, on 09/06/2008, -6/+5hilarious dude!!!!
  - sarixe, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1baZING
- PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -29/+9By "all" do you mean Gore's followers?
  
  So instead of tapping resources that we have, we should just forget about it and pour money into alternative options? We're basically like any Middle Eastern country relying on their natural resources for profit, instead, here, we're hampered by tree-huggers and environmentalists who would rather we deal with foreign dictators and their supply rather than offset it with out own.
  
  And before you get on the "we're going to ruin the environment by drilling in Anwar" kick, the area to be drilled would be the size of LAX airport in Los Angeles.
  
  I'm all for alternative sources of energy and investing in research of it, but if we have the means to alleviate some stress on our economy due to high gas prices, why not take the opportunity?
  - rings035, on 09/06/2008, -4/+11And after the oil has been drilled from the LAX-sized area, it will be teleported to the gas station.
    
    Oh, wait.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -8/+3*sigh* Because the pipeline that would need to be built would be a fraction of the size of the one we ALREADY built in Alaska that would be so incredibly difficult for you to believe that it could be done?
    
    Oh wait, it's not that unbelievable.
  - BitKid, on 09/06/2008, -5/+5Just because the area that would be drilled in is the size of LAX, it doesn't mean that a lot more land isn't going to be torn up and re-purposed for the sake of getting that oil into our vehicles. Not to mention all the carbon emissions from producing the gasoline and then burning it said vehicles.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -12/+3The carbon emissions from car engines pales in comparison to the carbon footprint of volcanoes. And we're not about to start capping volcanoes are we?
    
    But on a more serious note, was this a similar gripe when we built the original pipeline in Alaska?
  - bodisatvah, on 09/06/2008, -3/+10Hey PEENkiller, there is this thing I'd like to let you know about, it is called "addition". X Output from natural sources + Y Output from us > X Output from natural sources.
    
    You're a ***** shill repeating points that you don't really understand. Grow the ***** up or jump off a bridge.
  - 68024, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2McCain on Global warming:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es
    
    'nuff said.
- brycelb, on 09/06/2008, -30/+8Who is this "all" you speak of. If it's all the delusional liberals then maybe.
  - Wartyboskfapped, on 09/06/2008, -3/+19No, this is a different group, they're called "Scientists".
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -12/+3You classify "scientists" as being entirely in Gore's camp, which is wrong.
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -2/+10And your boys pay lip service to it too when they're trying to pretend they aren't beholden to Big Oil.
  - 68024, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1No, we mean people like John McCain:
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es
- 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -20/+6Sorry to tell you there's no consensus about man made global warming. And the reason we even depend on foreign oil is because the Democrats have made it nearly impossible to drill here at home. Obama was like that one nerdy kid who stands up and yells something that no one agrees with and then amends what he meant to say-- First Obama said no-drilling no-drilling, and then realized that 70% of America was for it.. so he reneged on this deep anti-drilling convictions.. Nancy Pelosi did the exact same thing.. how the hell can you trust these people?
  - protodon, on 09/06/2008, -6/+1Sorry to tell you there's no consensus on anything hence elections
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -4/+7You mean kind of like how McCain was totally against drilling in Alaska, and now that his zombies are chanting "drill, baby, drill," he thinks it's a great idea? Cuts both ways, pal.
  - bobbi21, on 09/06/2008, -3/+3All politicians do that. Welcome to the world.
  - BitKid, on 09/06/2008, -3/+2That's why we need to figure out a different solution than ***** destroying the environment just so we can use up every last drop of oil in the ground. Just because there might be no consensus on the matter of global warming, doesn't mean that it isn't yet to be proven. We already have a pretty damn good idea that it is happening, so why not take some preemptive steps to slow the rate of destruction to our ecosystem? Oh, its cuz all the moonbats are getting in the way...that must be the reason.
    
    It doesn't matter if global warming in the state it currently is in is caused by man or not. We know that global warming is happening regardless and we know that we have an effect on it.
  - NeptuneZen, on 09/06/2008, -1/+3And 30 years ago they wanted to take preventative steps to prevent global cooling too. Now where would we be today if we did that? We should make efforts to prevent harming our environment. However we shouldn't make a rash decision and make radical changes to do that. The thing that most environmentalists fail to realize is that some of us want to make rational decision on what or what not to do. A good point is with bio diesal, look at what happened when the government got involved. Food prices go up around the world and later on we find out that maybe a different type of bio diesal might have been a better choice. But we have radicals on the left demanding we do something pushing us into making bad decisions. So next time you advocate something to help the environment take a step back and ask yourself is this really worth it, or would our energy be better spent else ware.
- designer, on 09/06/2008, -21/+3Global warming is *****. Global cooling however is a real possibility with the lack of sun spot activity.
  - BitKid, on 09/06/2008, -2/+7Everyone just keep their fridge open for 6 hours a day and we will save the planet from inevitable doom.
  - 68024, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Tell it to John McCain:
    
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQMxIwpK_es
  - rawheadrex, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1>>with the lack of sun spot activity.
    
    That has to do with an 11-year cycle (Solar Cycle) that the sun's been going through for ever, and we've known about for over a century. Currently, we're at the nadir of sunspot activity. 5 years from now, it'll be at its peak, and we'll see plenty of sunspots.
    
    Not that you'd understand any of that :p
- IgnatiusTheKing, on 09/06/2008, -14/+3Only the sheep have "agreed on global warming." Anyone with an ounce of intelligence and a drop of desire to see through the latest pop culture trend knows global warming is just another way to scare the us into buying a bunch of crap we don't need.
lukak, on 09/05/2008, -20/+162Please, Americans. Please please please: Give yourselves a leader who will lead your country to new prosperity and rebuild your damaged economy, and give us as the rest of the world a leader of your nation whom we can trust not to invade us, intimidate us or destroy the environment we share.

Don't give the yourselves or us another 4 more years. Please.
- massaks, on 09/06/2008, -33/+12
  - 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -5/+3those are some good articles.. I noticed the liberals on digg are completely silent on this.. but digg you down.. what a bunch of hypocrites
  - Jelga, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2Those are some good articles, I'm still voting for Obama though, still don't agree with anything McCain wants to do. Also, rather than continue this bashing, give me some reasons why you'd think McCain could turn this country around? With his record, looks like he's gonna be just like Bush. Go ahead, enlighten me.
  - 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1@jelga -- how about you telling me how he aligns with Bush?
- Tomchei, on 09/06/2008, -21/+6Unfortunately, Obama isn't that leader either.
  There is no one on the slate that is qualified, not Obama, not McCain, not Barr, not McKinney.
  - ModernGeek, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2What is wrong with Barr?
  - Groblisk, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4What he is trying to say is that we just shouldn't vote and have a RON PAUL REVOLUTION!!!11!!1ONEONOEO!11
  - Tomchei, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Barr doesn't have the foreign policy experience. Other than that, he's the most qualified and he gets my vote this season.
    McCain had been around the circles but really doesn't understand domestic issues (he panders - give amnesty but doesn't want to call it that) and the real problems of our foreign policy.
    
    My point of the comment is that Obama really has the least amount of experience and my getting dugg down proves that people don't want to hear bad things (even if it's true) about 'their' candidate.
    
    McKinney has more foreign policy experience than Obama and has ties that the media would spin as a negative because she gets her money from Arab nations. She's also a bit crazy yet the Green party chose her this go round.
- angryfirelord, on 09/06/2008, -19/+5I agree. That's why I'm voting for Bob Barr.
- Groblisk, on 09/06/2008, -6/+1I thought you were going to tell me to wake up half way through but ya' didn't LOL
- userperson, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4You cannot trust our leaders not to invade you. If they believe there is something to be gained. There little we can do to stop them.
  None of them have my support to use violence against you or us.
  - userperson, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1Your writings sucks! Never don't not use double negatives.
- marc1940, on 09/06/2008, -1/+12I most certainly want Obama to win this race but I'm afraid that when he can't immediately turn this economy around that the republican roar will be deafening. I can only hope that Obama will explain in his inauguration speech that Bush crime family got things so fouled up that it will probably take his first term to find the all of the dead bodies.
- IgnatiusTheKing, on 09/06/2008, -7/+1Anyone who thinks a McCain presidency will be anything like a Bush presidency hasn't been paying attention the last eight years. The only thing they really agree is the complete opening up of the southern border. If you don't like McCain, fine, but at least come up with an intelligent argument against him. "Four more years of Bush" just doesn't cut it.
- NeptuneZen, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4Why would we invade Australia?
  - Obliviate, on 09/06/2008, -0/+5Because we have the world's largest reserves of Uranium. And massive reserves of Iron ore and other minerals. Why would you invade Iraq again? No one trusts you anymore.
  - MadMaxMugie, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Because we're allied with New Zealand, Duh.
  - userperson, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Yes we can!
- kinneys, on 09/06/2008, -4/+3WAKE UP PEOPLE OBAMA WILL CONTINUE THE WAR!
  
  WHERE DO YOU COME UP WITH THIS STUFF.
  RP2008
- skyroket, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2I think we should invade Australia and steal their accents.
ddiggit, on 09/05/2008, -16/+101How about the scary fact that the "maverick" who "follows his own values and beliefs" let the most conservative and out-of-touch wing of his party intimidate him away from choosing the running mate he REALLY wanted in Joe Liberman? The right-to-life religious extremists have won the Republican platform and the candidates! EVERY woman in this country should be scared. Sarah brags about her choice to keep her baby and that is totally appropriate - but she fails to acknowledge the privilege and right she HAD to MAKE a choice! She and McCain would now take that away from every other woman.
- IgnatiusTheKing, on 09/06/2008, -8/+2Perhaps you should brush up on your understanding of the Constitution. The Executive Branch can't ban abortion in any way, shape or form. It is protected. Period.
  
  As for being "forced" to choose Palin, perhaps he made that choice because he wants to win.
- stuffradio, on 09/06/2008, -6/+1You should only be able to have an abortion if you were forced to have sex or if you were raped (pretty much the same thing). If you choose to have sex, and become pregnant... that's your own fault. Unless you do the abortion right away... you shouldn't be able to abort what you chose to do.
  
  Even in teen pregnancy, most of the time unless there is a gun or knife pointed at them... you have a choice to say no. If you can't afford to raise the baby then give it up for adoption or have your parents or someone help you raise the baby.
  - MarkOfTheDead, on 09/06/2008, -0/+5It's Not your body to make decisions about, And since you and I are men, we have no right to those decisions. Period.
    
    Do you allow others to decide what you do with your own body?
    
    And what if you can't afford it "right away"? I'm being logical here, I'm not saying rip a developed functioning life out screaming, but as things currently stand, abortions are only done up to a certain point anyway.
  - stuffradio, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1That's true.. I guess it's a catch 22.
- Tyorant, on 09/06/2008, -1/+9I think you mean mavrick.
  - alphaterminus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+5Yeah, morans
- gremlynian, on 09/06/2008, -3/+01) of what crimes are your parents guilty that you should be put to death immediately and without mercy???
  
  2)Any fool can count the seeds in an apple, but only The Almighty can count the apples in a seed.
- wild, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2Lieberman is worse than McCain when it comes to changing his views for political gain. As soon as he saw his good friend John McCain was going to win the nomination, he started attacking Democrats and Obama. Screw them both for sacrificing their principals for a shot at the White House.
  
  I would have voted for McCain in 2000. But I don"t know if I could manage to shake his hand in 2008.
davidmiller72, on 09/05/2008, -28/+9it all comes down to "see what you want to see, hear what you want to hear," and for me, simply put, Obama's message resonates with me more.

but i have to put this out there: some of the best perspective on this election so far though has been from Dan Savage, whose theory is that Conservatives just want to make sure that whoever is in the white house is someone whose penis is totally non-threatening, a non-issue, someone who their women of this country will never fantasize about. Which McCain fits perfectly. Obama on the other hand: potentially threatening penis.
- thegrantman, on 09/06/2008, -2/+13You might want to stop listening to Dan Savage.
  - secrity, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4Dan Savage is alright, he's a gay Ann Landers -- and he bought her old desk.
- johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2Where'd he do that hard hitting analysis, in his ass?
  
  I'm sure there are "better" perspectives on both candidates than that, but oh well...
- wrongonce, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1I have a threatening penis.
  It hasn't hampered my success in the slightest.
MoneyTutor, on 09/05/2008, -17/+76Frankly, Sarah Palin scares the h... out of me. So far she is a crazed mean lunatic that has proven herself power hungry and likes to fire anyone who gets in her way. A total control freak. That is why Alaska is spending $100,000 to see if she has abused her power lol.
- johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -6/+13Yeah, because once you bcome President/Vp, you can do whatever you want with no checks and balances.
  
  It just takes a majority in Congress (pre-2006), or the limp dicks we have in Congress now...
  
  Go figure...
  - Tyr7, on 09/06/2008, -0/+13According to Cheney the VP can. The VP's office in not part of any branch of the government that he recognizes.
  - Terasiel, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2Cheney can do whatever he wants from his secret lair. I mean Hell, they've got future technologies down there - have you seen his new hair since 2002?
- PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -17/+6Did you read about the private jet that she sold and turned the money earned from its selling into a 1200$ check to each Alaskan citizen? Did you read about the 500 million $ bridge that was going to be built that she found about and canceled to re-allocate funds in a more productive manner?
  
  Sounds like good "abuse" of power to me.
  - sugarazor, on 09/06/2008, -2/+13Lies. The private jet was sold at a loss and the bridge to nowhere got $500 mil in federal funding that she never bothered to give back.
  - Wartyboskfapped, on 09/06/2008, -2/+12Did you read about the fact that those are all lies, and she's a ***** corrupt religious maniac? Way to go, fool.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -7/+1Continue your name-calling. Only dem's resort to that, because they have nothing intelligent to say.
    
    But the 1200$ check to each citizen was a lie, right? Even if it was sold at a loss, she gave it back to the people of Alaska. How is anything that is sold after being used sold at a gain besides real-estate?
  - aud24, on 09/06/2008, -8/+2Did you hear that she bites the heads off of live chickens at night too! This is pathetic you are all splitting hairs- and embellishing every step of the way... Face it you have nothing on her- hence the attacks on her f-ing children- how disgusting.
  - johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -3/+2@aud
    
    The party of "freedom, liberty, and free speech" only embraces it when those liberties are on their side of the coin...
  - tumatakuru, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2Yes we've heard those lies. Try some true stories for a change.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -3/+0Tumatakuru, you want to elaborate or just be close-minded and generalize? I guess do whatever's easiest for you.....
  - bodisatvah, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1@PEENkiller
    We're calling you names because you're repeating proven ***** as if it is truth. From this we can come to one of two conclusions.
    
    A) You haven't really researched the topic and are an ignorant piece of ***** who shouldn't interrupt the grown-ups.
    
    B) You're a lying piece of ***** who should be put in a burlap sack and beaten with a hose filled with BBs.
    
    So, which are you, PEENkiller?
  - seltaeb4, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1PEEN, you're completely full of crap.
    
    In order to give each Alaskan $1,200 from the sale of the jet, then the sale price would have to have been $804,000,000.
    (670,000 x 1,200=804,000,000)
    
    From the NY Daily News: Palin's predecessor, Frank Murkowski (R), originally bought the 20-year-old Westwing II for the state of Alaska for $2.7 million. She listed it on eBay for $2.5 million.
    
    When no offers came in, Palin hired a jet broker - Turbo North Aviation in Anchorage - which sold the jet for $2.1 million to an Alaska businessman.
- 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -1/+3@MoneyTutor-- maybe you should read up on the scandal a bit... you know you can't do a whole lot about people trying to sue you.. you just have to see justice through to the end. For example, if you walked up to my house, I could try to sue you.. does that make you guilty?
- spookyttws, on 09/06/2008, -1/+15You mean hell? Because you can say hell on the internet. ***** ***** and ***** too. Crazy internet.
  - aflaks, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2i think he ment heck, thats a bad word
  - ziffel, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I laughed out loud when I saw he/she masked out the word hell.
    
    It's ok to say hell. It's a place God created to torture the naughty folks, after all.
failedpimp, on 09/05/2008, -5/+37We don't need more drilling, we need more oil refining. Refine baby Refine!! - that will make gas prices go down.
- Daniel591992, on 09/06/2008, -4/+12That "Drill Baby, Drill" slogan scares me. Shouldn't Republicans be trying to distance themselves from oil?
  - burritocmdr, on 09/06/2008, -1/+5No, because they have to please their Big Oil contributers.
- 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -1/+2Another really good thing would be to remove the state-by-state regulations put on the of gas as well. Why not just have one standard across all the states and not this grid-lock cluster-f they have now?
- oldgal, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3I have been seriously surprised that no one has raised the refining issue. Before the big push for drill, drill, drill the oil companies were saying the supply problem was due to refining capacity - something they have control over but choose to do nothing about. I personally believe that this is about getting protected areas opened up for drilling before Bush goes out of office. If there were truly shortage we would be seeing lines at the gas station. I notice also that the argument has been changing from a supply problem to a national security problem - which it probably is. The biggest problem I have with the whole deal is that we have the oil companies in charge of a strategic resource (assisted by their purchased politicians). Alternative energy development will ultimately solve a whole lot of problems if we make it a priority. We have just lived through 8 years of leadership from big oil (Bush, Cheney), and now we want a VP from a state whose whole economy is based on oil and natural gas? yup, yup, let's do it again.
  - xenlab, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1Well that was a rouse by Big Oil... After the fall of the housing market speculators drove up the price of Oil and Food by moving their money over. That's why its starting to go back down a bit. The 'day traders' are starting to get out of the market, and hence the market is readjusting.
    
    Refining will help, but is not the solution.
UltramegaOK, on 09/05/2008, -16/+160"Terrorists are trying to blow up the country 'and he's afraid someone won't read them their rights'." - Sara Palin

For all of those who are profiled and singled out as being "supposed terrorists" it's OK........they don't deserve rights. Straight to Gitmo for you.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/20945041@N06/28269038 ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutschlandlied

National Anthem of Germany = Deutschland über alles

Deutschland über alles = Germany above everything
Country First = ??????
- biogears, on 09/06/2008, -17/+7I think your statements just might be a tad bit on the hyperbole side.
  - geekwithsoul, on 09/06/2008, -1/+3Yes, and I'm pretty sure there were assholes like you in Berlin in 1932
- PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -15/+3So you wouldn't put your country first ahead of international interests? Stop trying to allude that "Country First" is somehow related to fascist Germany.
  
  And if you talk to any soldier that's been in Iraq, they'll tell you they can't do their job properly for fear of being prosecuted in the U.S. for warcrimes. Screw reading rights for terrorists. When they decided to strap a bomb on their chest or plant it by the side of the road and blow up our soldiers and innocent people (their own people), they forfeit their rights.
  - BooneFaustus, on 09/06/2008, -1/+11If you believe that soldiers would have to commit war crimes, or anything that could be misconstrued as such in order to properly do their job, than I would never want to see someone like you in power.
  - Murdats, on 09/06/2008, -1/+10and even if they don't do that they apparently forfeit their rights aswell
  - bobbi21, on 09/06/2008, -1/+10I'd be afraid of what they think properly doing their job is, if doing it makes them scared of war crimes...
  - bodisatvah, on 09/06/2008, -1/+6Taking care of our self interest is fine. But the problem is that we don't allow for other countries to act in their own self interest. We demand that they act in our interest (which is in fact just us acting in our interest so that means we're being EXPLOITATIVE).
    
    Yay, we're #1!
    
    USA USA USA OR WE'LL BOMB YOU!
  - JoeVet, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2As one of the soldiers you like to talk for, I can say you are a typical full of ***** Republican chickenhawk. Only when you join us in the occupation and put your own life on the line do you get to talk about what a real soldier thinks or feels.
- whatthefu, on 09/06/2008, -1/+14Nationalism can be detrimental to countries in the long run.
- hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -2/+15Remember when McCain was pretty much the only Republican standing up against torture at Gitmo? Remember how he played off his POW experience as evidence of his deep conviction on the issue?
  
  Yeah, I don't blame you that you don't.
  - ph1sh55, on 09/06/2008, -1/+14And do you remember when he then proceeded to vote to allow torture by the CIA, crapping all over one of his 'deepest convictions'. Yes he did a lot of grandstanding but he didn't back it up. Hard to respect the man whose strongest principle can be pushed over, I don't care what arena you're in.
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -1/+8Exactly. That's what I meant by "I don't blame you that you don't" remember.
- mydigglogin, on 09/06/2008, -2/+8Um, no, not since 1952. These are the words of the official German anthem, which is the third verse of the original:
  
  Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit - Unity and law and freedom
  für das deutsche Vaterland! - For the German Fatherland
  Danach lasst uns alle streben - Let us all strive for that
  Brüderlich mit Herz und Hand! - In brotherhood with heart and hand!
  Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit - Unity and law and freedom
  Sind des Glückes Unterpfand; - Are the foundation for happiness
  Blüh' im Glanze dieses Glückes, - Bloom in the glow of happiness
  Blühe, deutsches Vaterland. - Bloom, German Fatherland.
- LightUrple, on 09/06/2008, -1/+8This was actually the scariest thing I heard at the convention. I couldn't believe my ears. I don't understand how she could say that and be cheered for it. Human/legal rights are supposed to be unconditional. You have them no matter what. If you commit a crime and are convicted in a court your rights change, but until then you must be treated like everyone else.
  
  I'm afraid our society's on a very slippery slope. I'd hate to see us fall now.
- gremlynian, on 09/06/2008, -1/+0WELL SAID!!!
  
  If we are to lead the free world, and I think we MUST (thanks Britain)
  then we must hold to the
  
  "truths to be self-evident" and endow ALL with the rights of either our own national law, or the protections of the geneva convention.
  
  Anybody else glad to see McCain wants to stop the torture, at least??
- Nachoo, on 09/06/2008, -0/+3This is NOT our national anthem. In fact it is banned in Germany, you get in jail if you sing that stanza in public.
  
  But oh well, you probably think that we only listen to David Hasselhoff music in Germany and that Hitler is still in charge. Please, get your facts straight.
  
  Our national anthem starts with "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit" (=Unity, Rights and Freedom).
  - MadMaxMugie, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2I thought David Hasselhoff was your fuhrer?
macballer30, on 09/06/2008, -8/+121there were more than 5 disturbing things about the RNC.
- yojiffyskippy, on 09/06/2008, -14/+4You should start your own blog then because this list of five was a major failure. Surely you could come up with a better list..... you couldn't do any worse.
- 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -3/+4yeah but how many times are you going to repeat I HATE THOSE MOTHER!#@#!S
- miamiflashfan, on 09/06/2008, -2/+7But were they deeply disturbing?
- AmazingA, on 09/06/2008, -2/+10How about them showing the planes crashing!? I was disgusted when I saw that in a commercial for commemorative 9-11 silver plated $20 bills, and now they are showing the same kind of disrespect and they're trying to get elected president.
  - Ferago, on 09/06/2008, -1/+5I didn't realize that Rudy Giuliani was still taken seriously by people after all the "mr 911" *****. Kind of depressing.
- LenBaird, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1You beat me to this comment. I was scanning to make sure no one had said it yet, and there you were :) WAY more than 5 things. I was disgusted, and I am a registered republican.
  "But were they deeply disturbing?"
  I'll toss in one deeply disturbing thing, and pass it off to the rest of you to play :P : The atmosphere of near worship for a bunch of liars and hypocrites who will surely do massive destruction to the way of life that those people who were cheering enjoy. They were cheering their own destruction.
  - macballer30, on 09/08/2008, -0/+1Totally agree. It was shocking to see all those people eating up the lies that were being thrown out. Cheering their own destruction indeed.
EllipsisAeon, on 09/06/2008, -9/+22To be perfectly honest, I think McCain did the best he could when it came to using his POW experience for political purposes. It was overt, sure, but it was also moving and something that very very few of us could even imagine.
That doesn't mean he's getting my vote tho! Frak all that, I want this to be better, not the same.

PS: Anyone catch the statements he made about getting rid of teachers?! (the bad ones). I think this could come back and ***** him in the ass; if anyone actually paid attention to it. I have worked with a couple of PTO's, and none of the teachers I have met are good with the way Bush/Cheney implemented No Child Left Behind. And, as a parent, it pisses me off too. Take some of the money from the Iraq War and fund the damn schools already! Take the troops from Iraq, and those that want to still server, have them hunt down the bastards that attacked us
- QuadZeroRoute, on 09/06/2008, -7/+3Even one of the most powerful Democrat in the United States, Chicago's Mayor Richard Daley is getting rid of public schools and breaking unions. The schools that have been put together are getting rave reviews and the kids are learning. This is also going on in Los Angeles. The schools are working where the union does not exist because non performing teachers can be reprimanded or fired.
- brycelb, on 09/06/2008, -10/+4I'm a parent and a teacher and McCain is completely right. The teachers union has destroyed the quality of education our children are getting. The money from Iraq would never ever go to education nor should it.
- oldgal, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1There are many excellent public schools in this country - generally in prosperous communities where parents take an active interest in their children's schools. My fear is that we will break the good ones without improving the bad ones. Everyone talks about the education problem but I have yet to see anyone define it, and I don't have a clue how you solve a problem without defining it. I do know that schools in poor areas have a serious problem - they are underfunded, they are often dangerous, and they tend to be in communities where students get no support from home. I am surprised they can even get teachers work in them. If we could just solve this problem, it would go a long way towards solving welfare and crime problems.
whitey9, on 09/06/2008, -8/+127God damn it I hate Rudy Giuliani.
- QuadZeroRoute, on 09/06/2008, -31/+2He said what had to be said.
  - Wartyboskfapped, on 09/06/2008, -1/+19It was not necessary to lie.
  - hierophantus, on 09/06/2008, -1/+7Sort of like Goebbles.
    
    /Godwin
- yojiffyskippy, on 09/06/2008, -11/+4Hate is a strong word but I have to agree that I dislike him as much as I do Obama. There's just something creepy about Giuliani.
- Laminarcissus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+12-- ""The first thing on his resume..” he began with his upper lip curled into a sneering smile, “was that he worked as a community organizer.” Then he laughed out loud, provoking the rest of the crowd to join in for a full minute." --
  
  Well let's have a look at what Giuliani was doing right out of school. It looks like he was working pretty hard to stay close to home himself, and not above using connected friends to do it. From his Wikipedia bio, citations are there if you want to track them down:
  
  "Giuliani did not serve in the military during the Vietnam War. He received a student deferment while at Manhattan College and another while at NYU Law. Upon graduation from NYU Law in 1968, he was classified as 1-A, available for military service. He applied for a deferment but was rejected. In 1969, [Judge Lloyd] MacMahon wrote a letter to Giuliani's draft board, asking that he be reclassified as 2-A, civilian occupation deferment, because Giuliani, who was a law clerk for MacMahon, was an essential employee. The deferment was granted. In 1970, Giuliani received a high draft lottery number; he was not called up for service although by then he had been reclassified 1-A."
- inverselogic, on 09/06/2008, -3/+0Dude, can't you just, you know, ***** off?- Stan Marsh
- 223Sniper, on 09/06/2008, -0/+5***** GIULIANI!
- Jelga, on 09/06/2008, -0/+4Gotta love his one track mind though, 9/11!!!! /sarcasm Rudy scares the ***** out of me, using peoples' deaths to promote his own conservative agenda.
- alphaterminus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2Oh yeah, well you must be a big city community organizer. hahahahahhhahahahh. it's funny, get it. hahahahaha. whaaat?
- alais, on 09/06/2008, -1/+1"God damn it I hate Rudy Giuliani."
  
  Freedom, prosperity and personal responsibility just not your thing?
  - Laminarcissus, on 09/06/2008, -0/+1You clearly didn't live in New York when he was mayor.
gubbie, on 09/06/2008, -11/+100Don't forget the obnoxious USA! USA! USA! chants that occured every 2 minutes...
- johndavidjack, on 09/06/2008, -18/+9What would you rather them cheer?
  - Talena, on 09/06/2008, -0/+2what about nothing? it's not a vacation where you sit around a campfire and sing songs, it's about the direction your country is going for the next for years, so instead of screaming, you better shut up and listen to what he has to offer
- PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -20/+8Because being openly supportive of your country is a bad thing....
  - KazamaSmokers, on 09/06/2008, -0/+7What does chanting USA!USA! have to do with being supportive of your country?
- spacerobot, on 09/06/2008, -10/+11It was obnoxious. It was just as obnoxious during the DNC also.
  - PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -4/+4I agree with you that it is a distraction and makes the person speaking pause unnecessarily, but it's just an obvious show of support for both the candidate and the country.
  - spacerobot, on 09/06/2008, -0/+8It goes beyond distraction for me. I'm sure not everyone feels this way, but to me if sounds like an unnecessary symbol of nationalism. It annoys me the same way people say "God bless America" Yes, I do hope our country is blessed... but I hope more than our country is blessed... I hope the world is blessed. Why should we be selfish and claim all the blessings for ourselves? It screams ethnocentrism.
- 5urr3al5am, on 09/06/2008, -14/+5now why would you think that a "USA" chant is obnoxious? commie
  - benplaut, on 09/06/2008, -2/+4In theory, I agree with you, but it also implies that since your opponent is not chanting "USA"... figure it out.
- snowysnowcones, on 09/06/2008, -10/+2Something wrong with patriotism?
  - Anonemousk, on 09/06/2008, -1/+6Yes, patriotism blinds the weak minded. ( Republicans. )
  - spacerobot, on 09/06/2008, -1/+7Nothing wrong with patriotism, but there is something wrong with blind patriotism.
- foofightrs777, on 09/06/2008, -1/+12There's a difference between pride in your country and overt jingoism. Furthermore, there's a difference between wanting what's best for your country and stating that fellow citizens simply with different political views want to destroy it.
- culter, on 09/06/2008, -0/+6When I heard it here in Australia I could have sworn they shouted SIEG HEIL, SIEG HEIL
  - alais, on 09/06/2008, -4/+1No that was your inner ignorance speaking to you.
- DCGaymer, on 09/06/2008, -1/+3When you heard them chanting "USA. USA. USA" - It was to cover up the protesters in the crowd while the were being hauled off. The Protesters did an excellent job of timing. I counted at least 5 specific interruptions to which McCain and his vast sea of white had to stop and deal with.
- KlogereEndGrim, on 09/06/2008, -0/+3Yeah, I thought that was the most scary thing too, just chanting out that name made everyone there look like a pack of sheep.
  
  Maybe they will break out and sing "Amuhhrica ***** YEAH" next time.
- foofightrs777, on 09/07/2008, -0/+1Klogere: with the economic and social policies they're looking to continue we're more likely the get the Bummer version. America.....*****....ya....
baldboy7, on 09/06/2008, -9/+57ONLY 5???!!!
palindrome12, on 09/06/2008, -31/+142. The GOP lacks even a shred respect for the Democratic nominees.

LOL, and does the democratic party even have a shred of respect of the Republican nominees? Didn't I hear Senate Majority Leader Harry "The Body" Reid say that he couldn't stand McCain?
- Lloydinator, on 09/06/2008, -7/+8I can't stand you, palindrome12, you dunce! Oh, I'm sorry for my utter disrespect.
  - B1663r, on 09/06/2008, -2/+3wait, I thought it was palindrone, not palindrome. Oh wait, the ass actually called himself that. LOL.
- biogears, on 09/06/2008, -10/+8But, but, the party of tolerance....
- PEENkiller, on 09/06/2008, -10/+5And you get dugg down for being right. You weren't critical, just pointing out hypocrisy and you get dugg down. Conform or be dugg down is Digg.com's motto.
  - palindrome12, on 09/06/2008, -3/+1Well of course, any point of view tha

5 Deeply Disturbing Things About Last Night’s RNC

submitted by

What is Digg?

5 Deeply Disturbing Things About Last Night’s RNC

submitted by

What is Digg?

Related by Keyword

Obama Offers New Hope for Science in America

The Point: Disturbing line Palin tossed off in address

Alaskans Speak (In A Frightened Whisper): Palin Is “Racist,