digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
See the original image at narconews.com —

Bush wants to give away 1.4 billion dollars to Mexico

narconews.com — The excuse is the war on drugs, but they will really be used to maintain in power another dictator. And then people wonder why Mexicans are running away into the United States. If the neocons stopped supporting corrupt politicians in Mexico then the illegal immigration would be greatly reduced.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Minarchian, on 02/10/2008, -9/+159I think this idiot-in-chief is purposefully destroying our country.

    There's no other explanation of this madman
    • 2trkpony, on 02/10/2008, -15/+65George W Bush is a mere puppet. He runs nothing. He is a fall guy, a face - a voice - a presence to dangle before the idiot consumers of the 9/11 complicit treasonist print and television media. Bush, like all his fellow 'Republicrats', has long ago abandoned even the pretext of acting in the interests and for the well-being of the American citizens.

      If the government has nothing to hide, Why is it hiding *everything* about 9/11. NYC's 9/11 and London's 7/7 were inside job. Blair and Bush opposed, thwarted, limited, blocked, impeded investigation into the false front terror attacks due to this fact. Americas borders remain wide open, unprotected, unsecured over 7 YEARS after 9/11. Some 'terrorist threat' huh. Let's leave the borders wide open! Think about it..

      The "war on terror' (scam) is the most beautiful excuse the authorities ever had to wage war against the entire civil population. Don't think you have any more rights than common people in Iraq. If you are in the military you may have to fight your own fellow Americans in the name of "patriotism".

      Like Hitler..like Bush...its all puppets being run by the so-called 'Illuminati'.

      The mainstream media is owned by the very interests that are vested in the construction of this 'compound'. They also own the pharmaceutical industry, and if this story reached the masses they would be *****.

      The MSM is a filtered selected representation of the wider global media info which is controlled by an executive who purposely and deliberately choose what awful things they want to show us and what things they want unknown, and that's simply by ignoring, refusing to cover important stories from smaller media outlets unless the story fits the plan.

      JFK said back in 1964.''There is a monolithic conspiracy that is affecting the whole world''. He was a new world order front-man who refused to play ball. The rest is history.
      • Ellipsys, on 02/10/2008, -12/+6All right, if you have all the answers, how can I join said Illuminati? This is the one thing that nobody has been able to assert. Things like this could decide where I go to grad school, Harvard, Yale,... Do they have an extension program at NYU?
        • digismack, on 02/10/2008, -5/+10You're born into it, you don't join it. We can only be puppets or "terrorists". Choose wisely.
        • NewGTGuy, on 02/10/2008, -4/+4You can get closer by becoming a Freemason or joining the Order of the Golden Dawn. You choose, Masons or Magicians. Neocons, aka Nazis, might also take you.

          These three groups are in constant battle with each other. All volleying for control of the world.
        • RationalXubrnce, on 02/10/2008, -1/+5 Convert to Judaism, join the Masons, be absolutely brilliant and driven and then go to Yale and hope you get noticed. That would be your best shot. In reality you're pretty much ***** like everyone else.
        • phazon88, on 02/10/2008, -3/+2If you seriously want to join it I hope you die.
        • nycmac247, on 02/10/2008, -2/+2Wow you really don't get it
      • known, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all. --John F. Kennedy

        If Bush himself is ignorant...
      • GhostyBoy, on 02/10/2008, -1/+9If you look at history JFK, Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln all opposed the central banking system and tried to introduce a debt free American controlled money system. They all stood up to the international banking cartels and they were all assassinated, except Jackson, who survived the attempt and actually killed the bank and paid off America's national debt for the last time in history.

        The banking cartels are running the show. If you look at who owns the stock in the federal reserves it is all international bankers like the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. With enough money and power to control the military industrial complex, the CIA, an assload of the media and international drug cartels to boot, these people represent the most dangerous threat to our freedom and the world as a whole.
        • ZxEfR, on 02/10/2008, -1/+4I gotta say I second this very very well stated.....saying it all in such a short space.....telling it like it is comment. Well done sir.........
    • NikoKun, on 02/10/2008, -0/+13Yeah...
      The "War on Drugs" is NOT a good excuse to waste this much money... -_- Not at all... WAY out of proportion...
      • NikoKun, on 02/10/2008, -3/+13And of course, if we just legalized pot, we could solve so many problems, including money wasted on this *****.
      • CrankyHippo, on 02/10/2008, -0/+14the war on drugs is worthless
        • ZxEfR, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Not for the "elite" power addicted scum that's trying to rule the Earth! It's working quite well for them.
    • GregR, on 02/10/2008, -0/+13As I understand it, the US is pretty well broke, so, the only way he's going to get 1.4 billion is to print some more money.
      It's going to help the Canadian $ and others but it will only hurt the US further. Odd that there are no financial advisors that have figured it out or do they just not care?
      • NewGTGuy, on 02/10/2008, -2/+8In 1933 the united States of America was officially bankrupt. Then, with the signing of the Emergency Banking Act of 1933, the United States Corporation took over. This is when we first went off of the gold standard and started using the PRIVATE Federal Reserve Notes.
        • jon_k, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1So a private corporation called the "federal reserve" keeps our economy going. So if the corporation declares bankruptcys, we can file a class action suite... or we can outsource to another company. Looks like we're covered.
      • tgc1, on 02/10/2008, -0/+4Since most of Canadian exports go directly to the States, our dollar being high actually cripples our economy as well. Our manufacturing industry is feeling the heat.
    • skew009, on 02/10/2008, -2/+26Mexico + USA + Canada = North American Union. You will see more and more 'merging' of our governments and economies. This is all planned. People think this is some kind of 'conspiracy' theory, but Vincent Fox talked about it Larry King Live. Lou Dobbs talks about it in segments. It's on it's way people!
      • NewGTGuy, on 02/10/2008, -1/+11Yup, and with it a new Constitution which supersedes the one we already have.
        • brad3378, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2Oh well........We weren't using it anyway.
      • freezeout, on 02/10/2008, -0/+5actually I can't think of any other way to save the dollar from printing itself out of existence. just restart the system, call it something else and everything gets swept under the rug.
        • NewGTGuy, on 02/10/2008, -0/+5Yup, this is exactly why they are destroying the dollar.
          • ZxEfR, on 02/10/2008, -0/+5Yeah.......and somehow during all the confusion a select few come out owning everything........hmmm........wonder how that happens.
      • tgc1, on 02/10/2008, -0/+7Transcontinental highway is already being built. Look at it rip right through Texas. Part of the plan.
        • LeeSoong, on 02/10/2008, -1/+220 Years from now - people will remember they had their chance at freedom with Ron Paul !
    • LeeSoong, on 02/10/2008, -3/+9The funny thing is: Mexico would like paid in 1.4 Million Euros !
      • ZxEfR, on 02/10/2008, -1/+3Actually I think it's Globeros (hey I just coined the global dollar!!!)
    • ApokalypseNow, on 02/10/2008, -3/+5As much as I might agree, I must reference the old phrase, "Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by stupidity."
      • Murdats, on 02/10/2008, -2/+6but this stupidity is so consitantly evil, the first few times maybe it could have been stupidity but after this long...
        its like if someone was to kick you in the shin as they walked past, alright it was probably an accident, but when it starts happening 3 times a day thats when you wonder.
        • ZxEfR, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2Oh.....be careful.....our owners don't like it when their slaves see and speak truth.
    • donfrancisco, on 02/10/2008, -4/+8WHAT THE HELL.. SCREW MEXICO. All what mexico needs is to fix their damn system and fix their problems in chapas including southern regions and give these people some attention.
      • Wangeye, on 02/10/2008, -0/+4this goes wayyyyyy beyond simple economics.
    • jozb, on 02/10/2008, -0/+5If you think that's crazy, wait till McCain becomes the prez. Hopefully we will never see that day.
  • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -27/+35Felipe Calderon, better know in Mexico as Fecal, is just another puppet of the CFR. People in Mexico hate him so much that he goes everywhere surrounded by a small army just to protect him. They put fences in the streets so nobody can get near him, which is unconstitutional, and anybody nearby who they consider a potential troublemaker is automatically arrested.
    Furthermore, he's waging a "war on drugs" using the army. Unlike Bush, who sent the army to kill civilians in Irak, Fecal is using the army in Mexico, so far they have managed to kill about a dozen of innocent civilians.
    If you want to get and idea of what Mexicans think about fecal, just take a look at this picture of him:
    http://photos1.blogger.com/photoInclude/blogger/16 ...
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -8/+8This fecal guy is coming to US next week: http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Mexican_pres ...
      From the article:
      President Felipe Calderon said Wednesday that a shifting political climate in the U.S. could improve the chances that a new administration in Washington will help bring a comprehensive reform law that would legalize the status of Mexican immigrants.
      "My hope is that whoever the next president is, and whoever is in the new [U.S.] Congress, will have a broader and more comprehensive view" of the immigration problem, Calderon said. Speaking at the presidential residence Los Pinos on the morning after the Super Tuesday presidential primaries in the U.S., Calderon said he took heart from the results, though he did not mention specific candidates.
      "It seems to me that the most radical and anti-immigrant candidates have been left behind and have been put in their place by their own electorate," Calderon said.
      He arrives in Sacramento on Feb. 13 on the final leg of a five-day U.S. trip that will also take him to Chicago, Boston and New York to visit local officials and representatives of Mexican immigrant communities.
      In Sacramento, he is scheduled to meet with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Latino legislators. In Los Angeles the following day, he is to meet Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and migrant groups' representatives assembled by the nine Mexican consulates in California.
      He will tell fellow Mexican citizens "that we are actively working to defend their human rights," Calderon said. "No matter their immigration status, they are human beings with dignity and rights that should be respected. We are working, with the full effort of the government, to bring a halt to the campaigns that harass migrants."
      Calderon said one goal of his trip, which will include a talk Monday at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government, was to build public support for an immigration reform law that would allow millions of Mexicans to work in the U.S.
    • smpdigital, on 02/10/2008, -5/+20This article is so inaccurate in so many ways, the source is quite questionable, but after i read the "fecal" name I realised where it is coming from: López Obrador fans that still think that a Chavez-like leader (read, dictator) is good for Mexico and even though he LOST the election by a few votes wanted to take the chair by force, then fabricating pseudo news websites taking advantage of North American liberal news groups to spread their FUD. I'm myself a liberal, that's maybe why I get so disgusted at populist manipulation. The dictator adjective in the article is both shocking and funny.
      • litebox, on 02/10/2008, -2/+10Why you modding down parent, i am Mexican, i live in Mexico he is not doing anything else but telling the truth. You gotta consider something, many leftist ideals in Mexico are considered right wing ideas in the US. Considering Felipe Calderon a dictator, is the same as calling a dictator to the next President of the United States. Both candidates have to comply with certain profile, have to be part of the political class of a 3-party system in Mexico, or 2-party system in the US, and independents have almost zero chance to gain media attention to compete fairly in an election. That is a flawed system, maybe, but in no way describes a dictatorship.
    • SpyDerMann, on 02/10/2008, -3/+18Don't be fooled by parent poster. Felipe Calderon is a legitimate president, he was voted by more than 50% of the voters. There is a group supporting Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who lost the elections and claims there was a conspiracy to alter the voting results. Since he has absolutely no proof of that, he resorts to name calling and violence. Of course, some of his followers are extending his agenda to the internet.
      • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -4/+1"Since he has absolutely no proof of that, he resorts to name calling and violence" That's is trying to spin the facts. Most of the violent people actually are Calderon supporters
        • litebox, on 02/10/2008, -3/+2You gotta be kidding me, show me one proof, only one were Calderon supporters manifested on streets with violence. AMLO is a leader, is a peoples man, he has good ideals, but his movement is filled with pseudoleftist who love to resort to violence just to express a non-constructive rage against the system (Look up: Fernandez Noroña).
          • oscarello, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1AMLO might be a good man, but he didn't got any studies or know anything about mexican history. He was just not prepared to be a president.
          • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3You were fooled by the lies told by German Martinez.
          • oscarello, on 02/10/2008, -2/+0I mean, AMLO could have been president, but he was a complete ignorant, they asked him on tv: "please answer us this 7 questions" that were general knowledge questions as "give us the capital of belize" (which is our neighbor) or "how are words accented in spanish?" ( a very simple and straightforward grammatical rule), or "give us the value of PI" and he couldn't answer any of the questions.
            Also he has a degree in political and social sciences but it took him 14 years to finish it and with an average of 6.2 (7 is pass). I repeat, he wasn't prepared to become a president, I also have good intentions, but you need more than that to guide a country.
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3I know who Fernandez Noroña is. He is a combination of clown/showman. But he isn't violent. Read the news carefully, it has always been the police/military who have used violence against him.
        • litebox, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1There is alot of diferent between saying Calderon supporters are violent and police/military being violent.
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -1/+3"There is alot of diferent between saying Calderon supporters are violent and police/military being violent." I've seen some of them insulting and attacking other people just because they don't agree with them. Unfortunately, the media in Mexico never reports it.
    • metric7, on 02/10/2008, -6/+4Fecal? his name is apt.
    • priegog, on 02/10/2008, -3/+12Stop spreading FUD. Mexico (and the US) dodged a cannon ball when Calderon was elected... Had Lopez Obrador won, you'd have some Chaves wannabe (some would say even worse) just under you. He's also doing pretty damn good with the corrupt government he has inherited from 70+ years of the PRI dominance, and almost all of the senate from the other parties who couldn't care less about the country, but only about their only electoristic purposes.
      • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -2/+3"Had Lopez Obrador won, you'd have some Chaves wannabe (some would say even worse) just under you." that's just more CFR FUD. The person who invented those lies is a guy called Antonio Sola, who works for José Maria Aznar. This José Maria Aznar was the President of Spain and now is, among other things, the President of the Board of Directors of News Corp.
        • priegog, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1I think a tinfoil hat is in order...
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2"I think a tinfoil hat is in order...", why? Those are facts. I'm not claiming that they belong to the Illuminati, or that their boss is David Rockefeller :)
    • ssahagun, on 02/10/2008, -5/+2thats y fecal put away more drug dealers than any other PERSON in the world
    • superyorch, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2It is extremely obvious that this line of thought comes from someone that is not aware of Mexico's situation and reveals complete ignorance about what transpires in the country. Felipe Calderon has become widely accepted by more people in the country everyday because of the actions he has taken against drug lords. He has taken definite steps in a full front war against "narco" that has unleashed a series of attacks from drug people to chiefs of police all around the country. This shows he is not in any agreement with the "narco". On the contrary he is charging against them using the army, which is a lot more reliable than a corruptible police officer, and although it will be a tough war, at least he is determined to face it directly. Also, the opposition thought (even wished) that early this year was going to be a tough economic phase for Mexico, but guess what? it didn't happen. No recession, no big inflation and things are working well. This helped President Calderon gain more acceptance from the people, like it or not.
      • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1Yes, there are some people in Mexico who approve of Calderon's war on drugs, just as there are some people in the US who approve of Bush's war on terror.
  • edstate, on 02/10/2008, -5/+15Hey, they're giving away our money to everyone else... why not give it to the Mexicans twice?
  • SheilaNoya, on 02/10/2008, -3/+38Afghanistan is growing 95% of the world's opium and the terrorists are making a $4 Billion profit/year from it (thanks to Bush screwing things up). Yet Bush is more concerned about some low grade weed coming into the U.S. from Mexico?

    Maybe Bush should focus on the new terrorist funding source he created in Afghanistan, or finding all of the meth labs in rural America (Bush country). Oh, I forgot... That would actually make sense --- Nevermind.
    • Gabberwok, on 02/10/2008, -0/+10In all fairness, about the only way anyone makes money in Afghanistan is opium. Our enemies, our allies, all of them.
      • SheilaNoya, on 02/10/2008, -2/+9I agree, but the opium fields were shut down under the rule of the Taliban. Bush's new puppet government in Afghanistan can't seem to do anything to stop the growing of opium now. Is our military coalition, working with the new Afghan government, more inept than the primitive Taliban in stopping this? Something doesn't add up.
        • Gabberwok, on 02/10/2008, -0/+7Our government has given implicit approval for the farming of opium in Afghanistan. If we shut down their opium farms, all of the warlords would stop cooperating with us, and we need them to hold the Taliban in check. No matter what our "official" policy is on opium, I guarantee you our real policy is to turn a blind eye...
    • litebox, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2It is not marihuana the main export from Mexico, the most profitable drug, is Cocaine, just last year the Army secured 24 tons, in my State. (Im Mexican)
    • metric7, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1So if 95% of the world's opium comes from Afghanistan, where did it come from before? Talk about taking over market share.
  • Napoleone, on 02/10/2008, -0/+33CFR: "Narrow the development gap with Mexico. - While trade and investment flows have increased dramatically, the development gap between Mexico and its two northern neighbors has widened. "Low wages and lack of economic opportunity in parts of Mexico stimulate undocumented immigration, and contribute to human suffering, which sometimes translates into violence." Mexico must increase its rate of economic growth and decide on the steps it will take to attract investment and stimulate growth. As a matter of their own national interests, the United States and Canada should assist Mexico by establishing a North American Investment Fund, designed to channel resources for the purpose of connecting the poorer parts of the country to the markets in the north."

    This next one talks about effectively erasing our borders.

    CFR: "Develop a border pass for North Americans. - The chairs propose a border pass, with biometric indicators, which would allow expedited passage through customs, immigration, and airport security throughout North America. "The governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United States should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically reducing the need for physical scrutiny of traffic, travel, and trade within North America." http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=7914

    Of course, this is all but a "conspiracy theory". It's not as though it's a subversive of sovereinty agenda clearly plotted out on their website.
    • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -11/+1Of course it's such a super secret conspiracy that they publish the articles publicaly on their website and that it took a hard core internet sleuths such as yourself uncovered their dastardly plan.
    • Napoleone, on 02/10/2008, -1/+9There's no need to hide it. If they put it out in the open it's safer than if it were kept in the dark.

      Hitler published Mein Kampf and his plans were out in the open, years before he would unleash his madness on the world. Open secrets are sometimes the best secrets.
    • tehxen3, on 02/10/2008, -5/+2What's the point of building impenetrable walls between 2 fictitious entities? Sounds a lot like West-east Europe division during the cold war.
      You can't even spell 'sovereignty'.
      • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -3/+4The United States and Mexico are fictitious?
        • NewGTGuy, on 02/10/2008, -1/+4Actually they are. Any legally created "entity" is fictitious. We as "Natural" persons are real. We as Sovereign "natural" persons created the fictional state entities. Then, the state entities created the Federal government entity.

          This concept is the basis for Sovereignty and Common Law.
      • Napoleone, on 02/10/2008, -1/+3A spelling error? Really? That's your best refutation?

        I guess I can freely walk into your fictitious yard, or your fictitious living room and you wouldn't mind at all, right? According to you, these are but constructs that mean nothing.

        You should be bitch slapped for your abuse of logic.
  • 2trkpony, on 02/10/2008, -2/+17so nauseatingly typical....

    Anyone who has audacity to declare Dick Cheney as ‘the best vice president in history’ has got to have serious issues http://thinkprogress.org/2008/02/08/bush-cheney-be ...

    What's another 1.4 billion taxpayer dollars to Mexico when the administration already gives Pakistan president Musharraf's government about $200 million annually and his military $100 million monthly in the form of untraceable 'direct cash transfers' http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives ... Once that money leaves the U.S. Treasury, Musharraf can do with it whatever he wants. Stop the money and the dictator falls.

    Yet we're told we never have any money for this country here at home right...

    I wonder what percentage of the $100 million in untraceable cash is going back to the administration as a kick back.

    And to whom.

    And what the administration's been doing with the resulting slush fund...
    • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1If the money is already untraceable, why would they give it to Musharraf just to have him give some back to fund their slush fund? That makes no sense. Why don't they take the untraceable cash and dump it straight into the slush fund?
      • 2trkpony, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2"why would they give it to Musharraf just to have him give some back to fund their slush fund?"

        Reading for comprehension is a skill.

        My statement meant nothing to do with 'giving the complete amount to Musharraf so he could give some of it back.'

        We're talking untraceable cash. That doesn't necessarily mean ALL $100B has to go directly to Musharraf right?

        The administration could keep a percentage for themselves. And claim the complete $100-billion
        went to Pakistan. See how that works. After all, we're talking untraceable cash. Which means
        "100% unaccounted for" aka: "we could do whatever we want with it".
        • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1"I wonder what percentage of the $100 million in untraceable cash is going back to the administration as a kick back."
          I believe the "going back to the administration" part means it's going back to the administration.
          If you had meant skimmed off the top you would've said so. But you didn't. You said "going back to the administration".
  • pateo, on 02/10/2008, -2/+8You mean Ameros?
    • GhostyBoy, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Basically, the central banking system is the weapon with which to control a populace. With the bank lends money to a country at interest it insures that they are eternally indebted to the bank, and the bank controls the money supply, creating recessions or prosperity by manipulating "the business cycle". The Amero would put Canada, America and Mexico in debt (and essentially under control) of the same people.
  • altovolta, on 02/10/2008, -11/+20How can you know so little about what is going on south of your border? Calderon, a dictator?! Wake up, you bigots.
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -6/+4He is what you would call a soft-dictator, in the same way that you can have soft-facism. Just like Alvaro Uribe in Colombia.
      • litebox, on 02/10/2008, -2/+7Could you elaborate? Mexican President has absolutely no power over the Senate and Deputy Congress, even with his own party he has to negotiate, so NO, no Soft-Dictator
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -5/+2He negotiates by "buying" the opposition, that's the reason I called him a soft-dictator.
        • altovolta, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1Lame, totally.
      • Scyla, on 02/10/2008, -2/+4So Uribe is a dictator?
        Las I read he has over 80% approval and is the most well liked president in the continent.
        Felipe Calderon doesnt even control his own party.
        Oh wait.. I guess you consider the FARC, Fidel and Chavez heroes?
        Why dont you move there from your nice lil confy house in the US then?
      • altovolta, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2And from time to time you guys complain about America's standing in the world. Go study, man.
  • ussoldier, on 02/10/2008, -8/+2Aren't the Mexicans running out of the US right now back into Mexico. Along with quite a few Americans fleeing the US and its deteroriating economic situation?
    • tehxen3, on 02/10/2008, -0/+6Let's see...
      California GDP per capita: $50,000
      Mexico GDP per capita: $9,000
      The answer would be no.
      • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1Dude, I knew you were a McCain supporter. You open-borders types are easy to spot.
  • MacintoshXP, on 02/10/2008, -8/+13I hope they pay us back in chicklets
    • santiago1, on 02/10/2008, -3/+10 Heh, that was pretty good!
      I can see in the not too distant future when the Mexican Tourists come to third world Amerika for vacation and are inundated with dirty faced white kids harping on them to "Buy some Tic-Tac, Only ten Euros! Hey Missa, come on, you buy Tic-Tac for my sick Momma!"
  • tastypickles, on 02/10/2008, -7/+11Bush = McCain
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -4/+5McCain > Bush (worse than)
    • NikoKun, on 02/10/2008, -2/+4yeah... McCain winning... only means another bush term... just with a new face... -_-
    • neptunebk, on 02/10/2008, -4/+3Foolish Americans. Maybe third times the charm? After McCain's term ends they'll start actually getting out of their homes and protest against corrupt officials.
      • Randinn, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2Hard to do when both sides are corrupt....
        • Xenufield, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2It's just a shame the founders never thought of such a proble... oh wait.
    • nycmac247, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Huckabee as VP!
  • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -17/+10I wish Bush would give back to Mexico the 20M+ illegals that are taking a ***** on this great country of ours.
    • tehxen3, on 02/10/2008, -7/+8How exactly are they "taking a *****" on this country? They are productive and among the hardest working people in US. They take the jobs americans don't want.
      If they left, US economy would take a big blow.
      • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -7/+8Dude, I know. Like, 5 years ago, before 100,000 illegals starting pouring across our borders every month, I couldn't get my grass cut and my lawn just got OUT OF CONTROL! And dude, when I was hungry, not a single fast food place was in business! What kind of Real American wants to work in fast food? THAT'S CRAZY TALK! America couldn't build homes because Americans are too proud to do construction. And there was no fresh meat in our markets because meat packing, well, thats just too denigrating of a job for a Real American! I swear, thank God for these illegals doing jobs Americans don't want! They're saving America!
        • tehxen3, on 02/10/2008, -5/+2Right... and where would you be right now if people said that to your ancestors and deported them away from US?
          • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -4/+5I guess I'd be somewhere in Scotland or Germany. But since my ancestors emigrated here legally, I don't have to worry about that.

            But the real question is, once the US gives these illegals amnesty, they'll become Americans and who's going to do the jobs they won't want to do anymore?
        • noisey, on 02/10/2008, -2/+5tehxen3 is exactly the type of sheeple that are destroying the US.
          Using idiot logic to excuse a gross influx of 20 million illegal immigrants - purposely done to drive down wages and drive a deeper wedge between the working class and the rich. tehxen3, you are scum, you and your type are idiots and need to be removed from the gene pool.
      • Xenufield, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2I know alot of people who'd take construction jobs, and I know that if we got rid of social handout programs you'd have those living off of uncle sam doing those jobs 'americans dont want'.

        There is no such thing as a job 'americans dont want'. If someone is homeless and starving, they're going to work or they're going to die.
  • tekiek, on 02/10/2008, -2/+15He really believes money grows on trees
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 02/10/2008, -0/+2It does for politicians, they can monetise the debt.
    • Napoleone, on 02/10/2008, -1/+4Well, duh. He has a tree of printing presses.
    • hellokittyownsu, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1Isn't 1.4 billion dollars like 5 pesos now?
  • faizal5k, on 02/10/2008, -7/+5I wish it was January 20, 2009 today :(
    • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -0/+22Is that because you think any of the top 3 candidates, McCain, Obama, or Hillary have a different stance on Mexico then Bush? My how you're going to be surprised.
      • Xenufield, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Obama will be too busy attacking Pakistan to talk to mexico.
        • GoneGreen, on 02/10/2008, -0/+0If these mexican americans don't start voting for him ... mexico may become the new pakistan! LOL
  • BannedTwice, on 02/10/2008, -10/+19Mexico does not have a dictator. They have an elected president, buried for the sensationalist ***** headline, and the fact that it's posted , simply to talk ***** about the president.
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -7/+3He is, now, what you could call a "soft-dictator" like the soft-facist Alvaro Uribe in Colombia.
    • NewGTGuy, on 02/10/2008, -2/+4Yup, just like we have an "elected" president. /sarcasm
      • imthe1, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2Ya you're right. we should all flee this dictator and head for Cuba. I hear life is great there
      • balthisar, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1You might've had a point in 2000, but there's no doubt about the 2004 elections. FWIW, I voted for him, and want him gone.
  • faizal5k, on 02/10/2008, -4/+1http://digg.com/politics/Why_you_shouldn_t_vote_fo ...
  • Rythlok, on 02/10/2008, -0/+20Hey Bush, WE DON'T HAVE 1.4 BILLION DOLLARS TO GIVE AWAY!

    So much for an economic stimulus. Now, our debt continues to grow. God I hate this man.
  • NikoKun, on 02/10/2008, -1/+8The "War on Drugs" is NOT a good excuse to waste this much money... -_- Not at all... WAY out of proportion...
  • FiestyPumpkin, on 02/10/2008, -1/+5When will the madnes end!!??!!
  • thedaylights, on 02/10/2008, -1/+8When will people realize that the drug flow is supported by the state?
    • imthe1, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Which state? The drug flow is supported by the endless demand for drugs.
  • Radical5, on 02/10/2008, -10/+11Now do you ***** see? The North American Union is going to happen... they are rigging the elections as well, so there's no ***** chance to get a president that isn't corrupt. What's it going to take to make this ***** end? Mexicans should stay in Mexico, and develop a stable economy there, not invade a country with a crumbling economy and is over-populated with foreigners as it is. Nothing good will come of this, they'll bring foreign diseases, and if you thought it was hard getting a job now, wait until there are thousands of Mexicans competing for the same job. NWO inc
    • mushoo, on 02/10/2008, -1/+4Because you nosy ***** would stand for a revolution that would truly work the mexican people instead of the corrupt ***** that benefits the assholes in power in both countries.
    • Rulex, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Are you Navajo or any kind of native American?, because as far as i know the USA is made of immigrants, not invaders as you say.
  • Strell69, on 02/10/2008, -4/+11So what is Billary or Obama's plan to stop illegals from coming here? Anyone...Anyone??? They have no plan. Just tax us to death.
  • tehxen3, on 02/10/2008, -12/+7BS paranoia filled article with inaccuracies. As usual, facts are distorted on digg to make sure Bush looks like an evil monster.
    People of Mexico hate Calderon, that must mean something...
    Or not. Mexico is dirt poor, the only way for them to reach the US living standard and stop creating a flood of immigrants is to increase their economic growth and start reforms that will enable prosperity.
    Calderon is moving Mexico in free-market direction and slowly taking care of that problem.
    His left wing opponent was running on a platform of helping the poor blah blah. How exactly was he going to help the poor following the failed economic policy of socialism? It would only sink Mexico deeper into poverty.
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -4/+5Calderon is moving Mexico in a managed-market direction which has nothing to do with free markets, he just claims it is free markets but that's a lie.
      • tehxen3, on 02/10/2008, -6/+3He is doing all that is possible within the framework of mexican government.
        Like US president, he doesn't have infinite powers to do whatever he wants with laws and economy, it has to pass through mexico's equivalent of congress. Despite what Ron Paul supporters would believe, in real world you can usually only make incremental changes in government through compromise with opposition parties.
        Compromise, that's something Ron Paul should learn instead of being a stubborn useless crybaby.
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1He is doing what's possible towards managed trade.
  • qruqid, on 02/10/2008, -13/+6use that money to build a fcuking WALL
    • reaperhatch, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2at first I laughed at your assumption that America's problems would go away or even be affected by the building of a fence, then I realized how one of the "Illuminati's" false wars(terrorism, drugs, illegals...) have distracted your attention from their plan.
    • bullox, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1fcuk? Who wants a clothes wall?
    • warlax27, on 02/10/2008, -2/+0I second having a sicky gnar wall. And in addition add a moat filled with sharks and crocodiles!
      • Xenufield, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1Or a great wall of china style setup, with some gun emplacements. Hard to cross the border when you have to deal with a 20ft tall barrier whose garrison is armed with 50cals or miniguns.
  • SuspicionVandit, on 02/10/2008, -9/+15BORING. Americans don't give a crap about this BORING junk. What's the latest update on Britney?
    • qruqid, on 02/10/2008, -6/+3hate to tell you but Britney is AMERICAN
  • bbqribs, on 02/10/2008, -4/+8Well, we give Israel billions of dollars, might as well toss some into Mexico too.
    • freezeout, on 02/10/2008, -1/+4we also give to Egypt, not to mention universal healthcare for Iraq. why the f*ck does our government love spending money on everyone except its own people?
  • bxblox, on 02/10/2008, -2/+9Its pretty funny in a sad way. We pay taxes, for the benefit of everyone but us. They just fill the containers on ships and palettes of money on planes and send it away never to be seen again. Sometimes the money even gets "lost".
  • AlienMushroom, on 02/21/2008, -1/+16WoW, we still have some money left after 7 years of nightmare?
    • Xenufield, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Yeah funny how having record tax revenue tends to give money.
      • GoneGreen, on 02/10/2008, -0/+0Especially when you aren't paying back your trillion dollar loans to china.
  • jcardinal, on 02/10/2008, -4/+4I guess he wants to ***** the price of corn for the poor Mexican farmers.
  • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -12/+4But, Mexico is full of brown people, and therefore, by virtue of their skin pigment, deserve a bunch of free government handouts.

    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+7The money goes to the Mexican government. Not to the people of Mexico.
      • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1The Mexicans who work in the Mexican government aren't brown?
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Some of them are brown. Most of them, at the top level, are white.
          • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -1/+3WELL HOLY *****! We must make sure the free government money only goes to the brown people!
    • joebonk, on 02/10/2008, -1/+31/3 of latinamericans are european genetically, racist Dbag republican
      • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -3/+3You want special laws and rights conferred onto people strictly because of their skin color, yet you call me racist. Amazing.
    • GoneGreen, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Your comment is wrong on so many levels.
  • pradador, on 02/10/2008, -7/+10Lots of mis-information on that site. I suggest you read actual facts and not speculation from these people before you form your own opinion about the state of México's government. Especially regarding this last election. Wikipedia has a great article on it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_general_elect ...

    Regarding the money, well as a resident of México, any help we can get to curb the drug problem is needed. I don't care if you believe drugs should be legalized, the actual facts are that there are huge cartels here which make the country extremely unsafe. We're talking about a country where there are weekly murders of judges/cops who dare arrest drug ring leaders and crime is rampant in cities where these people are in charge. Even Monterrey which was one of the safer cities has started to become unsafe. Just last year before Christmas they killed some judge or cop at a Starbucks a few feet away from my office during business hours. Trust me, it gets scary once you start hearing gunshots outside of your window.

    That being said, as a citizen of the USA, I don't believe this is the time to be spending so much money on a lost cause. Time to cut the losses and rework the drug policy. Maybe 8 years ago we could've afforded such action, but not anymore. And it's not like México is asking for the money as a loan... the USA is using this to enforce it's own drug laws so it's quite likely those 1.4 Billion will go to waste.
    • Mikhail101, on 02/10/2008, -1/+7Well if you vote Ron Paul and legalize marijuana, the profits can go towards the government rather than a druglord. Also their is no point trying to waste billions of dollars to get drugs of the streets, there will be drugs no matter what, they are very easy to obtain.
      • pradador, on 02/10/2008, -3/+3It's not about drugs, it's about crime. It's not like in the USA where you have your drug dealer who grows/manufactures the drugs and sells them and that's it. Maybe some "turf" wars here and there, but it's generally limited to drug business.

        Here, these people not only manage drugs, but they're the same people that do arms trafficking, run chop shops, kidnap people and hold them for ransom, etc.
        • imthe1, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3the majority of drugs in the US were not grown here, they came here threw Mexico.

          You mentioned all the killing related to the cartels. There was a time in US when alcohol was illegal and there were these cartels know as "The Mob". They bribed cops and politicians. There where bloody murders in the street. Rival families warred with one another. Funny thing though. It all stopped when alcohol was legalized.
          • SomeDrunk, on 02/10/2008, -0/+0I'm with you on pot, but a large portion of this money comes from the trafficking of cocaine. Most people have a harder time with legalizing that. As for growing pot in the US, you should buy American! California grows some pretty good stuff.
  • theWaterboy, on 02/10/2008, -2/+4boy, I wish Bush would give ME a billion dollars instead of that pathetic $600... to help the U.S. economy.
  • whorunbartertwn, on 02/10/2008, -1/+8Buried title is an opinion slant not an article summary
  • Mikhail101, on 02/10/2008, -4/+4Wow he seriously wants to ***** this country up, i bet his plan is to leave the next president in power a ***** up country to make him look worse than bush.
  • protodon, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Here's a crazy idea: give it to the country which you are the president of...I know, I'm a progressive thinker.
    • tgc1, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Give? Man, how about NOT taxing so much. The money is COMING FROM THE PEOPLE. He isn't giving anyone anything. Giving back maybe, but not giving outright from his pockets.
  • 2shae, on 02/10/2008, -3/+8Seriously, America....What is ***** wrong with your president??
    • manunkind, on 02/10/2008, -0/+5He's an ***** and his "followers" kept voting for his sorry ass. I apologize to the world.
    • GoneGreen, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1He is a cocaine sniffing, draft dodging, alcoholic, trust fund baby, born again christian... That clear things up for you?
    • GhostyBoy, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2He is bought and paid for by big business, banks, the military industrial complex, oil and drug cartels.
  • Mooinakan, on 02/10/2008, -3/+5Someone explain this to me:

    President has an issue with illigeal immigrants coming into country.
    President gives money to a "dictator" in said country to make the "dictator" more powerful.
    Illigeal immigrants stop coming to country?
    • p0s3r, on 02/10/2008, -2/+5Bush doesn't have any issue with illegals coming to this country. Where have you been?
    • johnpaul191, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1you forgot the "profit" part that nobody has uncovered yet.
    • GoneGreen, on 02/10/2008, -0/+0You almost have it... got get a labotomy and re-read the thread it will all make perfect sense then.... And you will be able to think just like the president!
  • 9bpm9, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2"In eerie resemblance to the behavior of the U.S. army in Iraq, Mexican soldiers shot dead five family members including three children in Sinaloa state last June when they failed to slow down for one of Calderón’s checkpoints."

    Except in Iraq they had bombs in their cars and were coming right at the soldiers.
  • jessehadden, on 02/10/2008, -1/+5Who the hell keeps loaning a deadbeat debtor nation so much money to... oh, wait. Crap. *bends over*
  • desertcoyote, on 02/10/2008, -6/+3Why bash a president who is leaving soon? Mexico needs help. The people suffer, not because of immigration policies of the US, but because there is real corruption at all levels of the Mexican government. For the honest judges and officers, you can either accept the bribe from the cartels or see your family killed before you yourself is shot. Think it doesn't happen? Read some past articles from www.signonsandiego.com the San Diego Union Tribune. The cartels have a vicegrip on Mexico and whatever help we can give them... we should. A stable Mexico is good for everyone.
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+7The war on drugs in Mexico is more an excuse to have the army deployed on the streets than to fight against real criminals. The United Nations has indicated that the military shouldn't be doing the job of policemen.
      • oscarello, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1do you know how corrupt are México's policemen?
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Do you know how corrupt is Felipe Calderon?
      • litebox, on 02/10/2008, -2/+0What the hell are you talking about? I live in a Mexican Border City, i have lived for the last 4 years afraid of going out to the clubs because is filled with Drug Dealers, heavily armed and heavily violent, more and more people were seen armed in the streets with impunity, the local police was only a branch of the organized crime, the town was filled with fear because of kidnappings extortion and car robberies, the notorious people who manifested publicly they wanted federal government to intervene were murdered. Thank god the army is here, even the National Media has fear of supporting the Army because they think they are going to go after them.
        • desertcoyote, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1This is why the Mexican army is working the streets. The police are part of the cartels.. and again.. theydon't have much of a choice.. either fall in line or die. The people are scared and feel that the corruption has been in place for so long that there's nothing for them to do. Rising up and doing somethign about it is the same as painting a target on their backs and begging for some cartel enforcer to shoot them. It's easy to say "Rise up and do something!" But where do you start? The government? The police?
    • Randinn, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Why doesn't the populous rise up and do something about it, we can't do everything. Go ask the European Union, try Canada... America is doing too much already, we're killing off our children and going broke as a nation to 'help' other countries...
      • 2trkpony, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1*Billions* of us, we the people right, so few of 'them', yet we are powerless to evoke real change in our countries. They've got us right where they want us. Voting? LOL! please...the game is rigged folks. If voting really changed things for us it would be ILLEGAL. We've all been expertly divided, separated, conquered over the years. They've conditioned us to fight amongst each other over non-issues, religion, left vs right, race, democrat vs republican, the ultimate false paradigm distractions. Keep the billions of citizen populace battling EACH OTHER, divided not united against the REAL enemy, while govt. overlords take over to rule their conquered taxpayer serfs with ease.

        Divide & conquer= oldest trick in the book. The oppressors know if the billions of duped consumers out there ever woke up to the lies, fraud & deceit they've all been sold over the years, and UNITED together - strength in numbers - BILLIONS of awake, AWARE, conscious people against them, they'd have a bit of a problem on their hands. By then (if ever..) it will already be far too late...
        • Randinn, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1I never said vote, do what the French are good at, well besides surrendering, and that is revolt.
          • 2trkpony, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1hey Randinn sorry for any confusion I know you didn't say vote, I didn't intend to imply you did. I added that line for effect as it fits context of the reply.. since the same liars & deceivers & career sell-out politicoid creatures keep getting voted into office again and again, voting never seems to change anything for the better unless it's part of the plan. When was the last time we the people, the taxpaying citizens got to vote on a war? Vote on giving away billions of dollars to foreign countries? Or vote whether or not con-gress will receive a pay increase? Vote on a job creation program for this country that wasn't rife with 'amendments', revisions, redaction's & compromises? The important issues they vote themselves on their own with ZERO public intervention. Yet we are thrown a bone every once in awhile with some minor issue such as what type of grass to put in a local public park' so we can feel we have a say in the 'democratic' process. Revolt is a good idea..
  • Kajico, on 02/10/2008, -1/+3Wait what? So all those soldiers rescuing people in Tabasco on the news was false, and the people helping and saving each other was also false?
    This article is old and pandering to some heavy anti-drugwar issues. Fine if you don't like the drug war, but the border problems along the border span more than just drug trafficking control. There is a lot of corruption along the border, trafficking humans, extortion, blackmail. The cartels have killed police chiefs, mayors, and musicians, yes muscians. For having written a song that is used as a soundtrack by gang members on their videos as they murder their rivals. As vengeance for their dead members, they go out and kill the muscians that wrote the songs, even if they have nothing to do with the cartels.
    I don't believe that we should be giving so much money to help Mexico in it's problems, but I can't believe that it's saying that Mexico basically abandoned it's people in Tabasco because they chose to redirect their military to drug searches.
    The flooding in Tabasco was horrible and the state is still struggling and it's not out of the woods yet. But it's had millions of dollars of and aide and support sent to it by the Mexican government.
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -1/+3Citizens in Mexico gave food and money to help people in Tabasco. The federal government gave almost nothing. Felipe Calderon just used the disaster to make speeches and have his photo taken.
      • Kajico, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1“Los 7 mil millones de pesos que el Presidente de México ofertó, sí están llegando y se están invirtiendo a través de la obra de infraestructura carretera, hidráulica, que fue totalmente destruida, y en el campo también están siendo restituidas las cadenas productivas”, afirmó Granier Melo.
        http://www.esmas.com/noticierostelevisa/mexico/693 ...
        I don't think I have to translate it for you, since you are so up in up in the situation in Mexico I assume you can read Spanish and know what is going on.

        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -1/+2Yes, I do read spanish. And I also know the situation in Mexico pretty well. We'll find out in a couple of years what those 7 mil millones de pesos were really spent on :)
          • oscarello, on 02/10/2008, -0/+0I really doubt this, because all of your current comments show that either you don't live in México or you're one of AMLO's followers, who oppose Calderon in every imaginable way.
  • polo8, on 02/10/2008, -0/+8Poor Mexico so far from God and so close to the USA (said by a corrupt dictator but sometimes true).

    So Calderon is bad for actually trying to do something about the near total control of certain regions of Mexico by drug cartels? Corruption is endemic at senior and junior levels of the police in a lot of these regions. In some cases the army has been drafted in to seize all police weapons and analyze them for use in drug related crimes. If he does nothing he will be accused of being corrupt too.

    The electoral fraud mentioned in the article was not proved and also highly unlikely as every major party had an observer at each polling and counting station for the last election.

    I think Fox (previous president) was a little under the (U.S.) influence too.
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-03-mexi ...
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -1/+1Thousands of people came up with proofs, which were ignored by the media, and then they claimed there wasn't any proof.
  • eqlou, on 02/10/2008, -1/+4Legalize it
    • GoneGreen, on 02/10/2008, -0/+0Seriously, if we took the 1.4B and bought drugs direct then sold them through the government we could actually reduce the deficit
  • 405994, on 02/10/2008, -3/+6For God's Sakes people! Look at the source! How can we assume this to be accurate information?
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -2/+2Narco News has very accurate information. A few years ago, a Mexican bank called Banamex (now part of Citigroup) sued them, and Narco News won because the information they published was true.
    • manstein01, on 02/10/2008, -3/+1We can't. But since it is anti-American and non Americans look like victims, it will be generously accepted by the digg community.
  • Efrenjo, on 02/10/2008, -1/+8So, OBVIOUSLY a site called narconews.com is a 100% trusted source of information.... Dictatorship hasn't been a problem in Mexico for many years; we have many issues to resolve indeed, but President Felipe Calderon is not a dictator and people don't hate him. In fact he's one of the presidents who's had the most acceptance in his first year.
  • mundofuentes, on 02/10/2008, -6/+2I have an IDEA why don't you fuc%·"ng stop doing drugs so there is no market for it and you can save you 1.4 Billion bucks. !!!!!

    By the way the article is totally inaccurate.
    • bonkeykong, on 02/10/2008, -0/+5Just like in the 30's how people stopped drinking during the prohibition of alcohol.
  • poidh, on 02/10/2008, -6/+13Buried as inaccurate. Mexico doesn't have a dictator.
    • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -3/+3Not yet. Right now he could be called a soft-dictator like Alvaro Uribe in Colombia. But he has his own Dick Chenney: Juan Camilo Mouriño.
      • oscarello, on 02/10/2008, -0/+3Good news, reelections are constitutionally illegal in México.
      • ZiggyPlayedG, on 02/10/2008, -2/+5Holy *****, you've made that same comment like ten times already. It couldn't be more obvious that you're a Lopez Obrador fanboy. Just shut up already
        • magoghm, on 02/10/2008, -2/+3I am not a Lopez Obrador fanboy. I just believe that maybe he wouldn't be as bad as Felipe Calderon. On the other hand, we now have Marcel Ebrard in Mexico City, who belongs to Lopez Obrador's team, and I don't like him at all.
    • ZenMojo, on 02/10/2008, -3/+8No, not a dictator. Just a guy elected under shadowy means which caused a massive riot so large that the entire capital was taken over until it was surpressed by the military. But, no, not a dictator...
    • Dyssolve, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1He may not be a dictionary defined dictator, but these days it's pretty important to call these leaders out on their BS.
  • baalzebub, on 02/10/2008, -2/+7what an incredible waste of tax dollars, it would be cheaper to legalize marijuana...
    • j3z22, on 02/10/2008, -7/+0It's this kind of ignorance that will lead to the degradation of your country. Legalizing marijuana would obviously lead to more marijuana use and undermine the cumulative efforts reinforced by the law. More marijuana means more marijuana related problems, removing the legal prohibition on it would eventually have adverse affects on public health.
  • BananaGrabber, on 02/10/2008, -2/+2blah, more ron paul policy spam
  • wilhoitm, on 02/10/2008, -2/+1Head for the border!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 91 of 91 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. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.