What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- nokla, on 10/12/2007, -5/+41I'd like to see a debate between Mike Gravel, Doug Stanhope, and Ron Paul after they win their respective party nominations.
- fuzzYogHurt, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27I'd like to see this guy win the nomination. Debates are just talking .... blah blah blah. This guy would actually DO something. (but then maybe he would do too much, it's always a gamble, isn't it?)
- redslash, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Anybody want to post a transcript?
- airwalkery2k, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4I have several dream debates too. Just imagine... Rudy Giulliani versus Hillary Clinton. Both from New York... man, that would probably have some juicy soundbites. Or, dude... Barrack vs. McCain. I am just drooling.
- smitting, on 10/12/2007, -2/+44Ban political parties and we might be a lot of interesting presidential debates.
- quomen, on 10/12/2007, -25/+3STOP POSTING VIDEOS IN THE NEWS SECTION.
I DONT CARE IF IT'S MIKE GRAVEL OR A GAME OF SCRABBLE. - Blackninja4ever, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1Great job copying someone else's story from a couple days ago and reposting!
- deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22Mike Gravel doesn't pull any punches. Gotta love it! Mike Gravel for President in 2008.
Help spread the word ... http://www.democratgiftshop.com/mikegravel
That's right, Americans should make the laws. Go Mike. - th3heretic, on 10/12/2007, -13/+8So who's the next candidate that digg will love?
- vemerge, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3It's funny watching Diggers shift their allegiances... first it was Obama, then Ron Paul, now Mike Gravel. Superfluous group you are.
- themastersb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Even if he doesn't come close to president he'd be a great speaker on everyone's behalf.
- RonPaulPres2008, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4I LOVE MIKE GRAVEL!
- AustinMeoang, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Gravel For President!
- Tabou, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Give 'em hell, Gravel!
- daschupa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'd like to see Mike Grave and Ross Perot in a debate...heck, I'd just like to see them in the same room.
- appetite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I like this Gravel guy, but he's got some holes. His only possible strategy could be to do what he's doing--since he's coming out of nowhere. So you have to be a little wary. Still, I hope he keeps talking up a storm.
Not sure how Obama became part of the establishment in the minds of Diggers. Just because he's popular? Reminds me of indie music snobs who stop liking a good band as soon as other people like them. I find that annoying. Your preferences shouldn't TOTALLY rely on the preferences of others--whether go with the flow or against the grain. Obama is still the real deal regardless of how many idiots like him. - appetite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I had already seen the posted link. It pales in comparison to this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gMlHv2lDqA&mode=related&search= - noopzilla!, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1the last line is the best. owned!! ha i love this guy :)
- hdtvdust, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1air..yeah..Hillary is from New York. Riiight.
- sollycardy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ABC ARE STILL CENSORING RON PAUL AND MIKE GRAVEL:
http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/ABC_No_mention_of_Ron_Paul_or_Mike_Gravel_as_presidential_runners
Tell them how this makes you feel:
http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3052660
- mkyanksfan, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5The best part of the video was definitely Chris Matthews' laugh at 2:14.
- oskite, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31No, that was the worst part. That guys has quite possibly the most annoying voice on TV.
- LavaHot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Oh come on, "I was hiding under a rock." You're telling me that's not hilarious, as well as a double-entandre?
- revenge7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11If that comment was supposed to have two meanings, this man is a genius.
- Tabou, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1"Gravel was hiding under a rock." Now THAT is funny!
- Junkyarddawg, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2I still want eggs with my political spam. And maybe some beans. Coffee. Black.
- jkv05, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Defenitly an interesting candidate
- Sangatious, on 10/12/2007, -13/+22This is a video. It should go in the video section
- Neiby, on 10/12/2007, -11/+25No one looks at the video section. The video section of Digg is worthless.
- nelziq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Why segregate sections by media format rather than by content? If this was an audio file or transcript rather than a video file, would that somehow make it more or less relevant to the Elections 2008 section?
- waronflesh, on 10/12/2007, -3/+43I'm a republican, and I love this guy. Can't say that I agree with him on 100% of the issues, but he seems to have a sack of steel and I like him.
- dmeyers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23I don't put myself in a party line, but I like this guy just because he is a change. I am more than willing to sacrifice some of what I believe in to get a guy with a big pair of brass ones who honestly wants to change our country. That is more important than any of the issues I disagree with him on.
- edlowe0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I'm with you, a Republican. But I hope Gravel wins the Dem. ticket. He's got my vote! It doesn't matter if I agree with him 100% or not. He's got balls and brains. He doesn't appear to be made from the same mold as the other douches (GOP included.)
Gravel 08 - mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2"I'm with you, a Republican. But I hope Gravel wins the Dem. ticket. He's got my vote! It doesn't matter if I agree with him 100% or not. He's got balls and brains. He doesn't appear to be made from the same mold as the other douches (GOP included.)"
1) I doubt you are a "Republican"
However "But I hope Gravel wins the Dem. ticket." Would be great for the Republican Party - Instant landslide victory.
2) "He doesn't appear to be made from the same mold as the other douches (GOP included.)" Same goal, new engine. Throughout history there have been men like this, the true ones never achieve power or fall hard - the others simply use such tactics to achieve power and do a 180. - TheBogie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Mike gravel has more sack than Santa Claus. His balls barely fit behind that podium at that debate.
- shortcircuit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I love independent thinkers and hard hitters too! Let 'em have it!
- cuby, on 10/12/2007, -25/+7i have to say i'm not quite sure why digg has latched onto this guy as their straight-talking political savior. he has some reasonable views, and i appreciate a lot of what he says, but ... isn't he just a bit nuts?
- xxTazxx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26If he's nuts, what the hell does that make Dubya?
- swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19You admit his views are reasonable, so why are you claiming that he is "nuts?" This is the same character assasination that doomed the Dean candidacy.
- redslash, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10@swrostmore
So? If the man IS crazy, he shouldn't be elected. Look where electing crazy people has gotten us for the past six years (well, more like sixty, to be honest). Maybe it was a good thing to not have Dean be elected. Just maybe.
(I do like Mr. Gravel, though... he seems like a decent fellow and if he somehow wins, it would be a lot of fun, at the very least.) - Saccharin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13In case you haven't noticed, Digg is a bit nuts.
- jcm267, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1"If he's nuts, what the hell does that make Dubya?"
sane
Dubya has always been a politician and with that comes a certain level of pragmatism... Say what you want about some of his policies but he tends to only push for policies and laws that actually have a shot of coming to fruition. Why don't more guys like Gravel or even Ron Paul run for Congress or Senate? Get enough in there and you can gain enough support to maybe get some legislation passed. Imagine how well Congress will get along with a guy like Gravel who doens't play the game, but instead calls them out on each and every thing he thinks they do wrong? Gravel has no qualms with using personal insults to get his point across, and for a guy who really seems to want to shake up Washington it's not the smartest way to act. - Raian, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7By nuts you must mean honest and genuine-- it's rare in American politics so no one will hold it to you.
- swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3You admit his views are reasonable, so why are you claiming that he is "nuts?"
Haha, nobody wants to answer my question. You people have absolutely NOTHING going for you except ad-hominem attacks...
REDSLASH: YOU ARE A WORTHLESS SACK OF ***** FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED REASONS. THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE POSITIVE DIGGS BLOWS MY MIND. - darkmule, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@jcm267: "Former Senator from Alaska..."
I agree though, these are people who'd make better representatives. Right we need someone who can compromise, and stand ground in the middle. Thats what being a leader is about. - jcm267, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1swrostmore:
You're an ***** - swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3JCM: "You people have absolutely NOTHING going for you except ad-hominem attacks." Now go cry about it.
- jcm267, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1swrostmore:
You're an *****
- booga1134, on 10/12/2007, -37/+5Gravel didn't list any enemies of the U.S. "We have no important enemies. What we need to do is to begin to deal with the rest of the world as equals. "
This guy is a moron. The US doesn't have enemies? WTF? We do not deal with the rest of the world as equals because we are the biggest and the most powerful, DUH! http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Apr27/0,4670,DemocratsDebateQuotes,00.html- cumbuster, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13Dugg down for being a piece of *****.
- nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8gee and i bet fox news didn't take that quote out of context or only show half of it eh?
- biggrz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11dugg down because the only thing worse than Faux news, is quoting Faux news.
- sibhod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You perfectly encapsulated what is wrong with American foreign policy. And if you actually believe it, you are severely deluded.
- tmk40, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0@booga...you are absolutely right and are one of the few on this thread that has any sense. Dealing with other countries as "equals"? Do these people know what this really means? These countries have put Cuba and Sudan on the Human Rights Commission at the UN. What the f*** is that? These "equals" have allowed thousands of women and children in Iraq to die and lined their own pockets with that blood money. Our own allies, Germany and France wont allow their soldiers to face the tough fighting in Afghanistan. They are content with letting Americans and Britains to die instead. China is banning websites that question their government. Iran is actively supporting terrorists...so is Syria. North Korea is ruling with an iron hand and killing their populace every day.
So the evolution of law and order and civilized society in the USA means nothing? Our country is the light on the hill and we need to make sure that it continues to be so. I am not advocating the abuse of other peoples or taking advantage of them...but we should not get carried away to "be fair" because it feels good. We have made a lot of good decisions in the direction of our country and have reaped incredible prosperity from it. There is not any reason to feel guilty about it.
- yossarian24, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5This guy can NOT get control of America... I think its awesome that he is stirring the pot and in the long term it will be good for America, but I think we all see he's a little bit crazy
- Zreitan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11i think you're right, let him make a scene and then someone whos actually able to do the job will come out of the woodwork
- alexm13, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3this guy is such a g, we gotta make sure he wins
- ruley, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4i hate you
- Zreitan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Even if you do not agree with what he's saying you have to admit its very good this man is getting air time and support from the public because of the internet.
- IEatHamburgers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree with what he's saying. I don't agree with how he's saying it. I can't stand that "I'm an old fart, and a jackass too" voice of his.
- kushed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12what happen to Digg couple of days ago showed me the influence that the digg community can have. Lets put twice the effort and make sure this guy gets elected. I was initially leaning towards Obama, but its clear to me now that besides having balls Mike Gravel speaks the truth, and he does it with logic and common sense.
This is our time, its our era, lets make difference. Besides voting for him, make sure you influence others to do as well, as you can see media doesn't give him enough exposure as it is.- mister711, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2The problem is that even if all of the Digg crowd and all of their friends voted we got too many people in the between the two coasts that will keep the status quo and vote for whoever their pastor or minister will "suggest" they vote for. Also with the way the primaries work, a few select folks in states that do not matter at all except during an election year like New Hampshire will decide who the party candidate is. This is a really odd way to have a democracy.
- ScionAltera, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7@mister711
Then I guess we have our work cut out for us, don't we? - kushed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6For example, my parents, most relatives and most friends DO NOT VOTE, I didn't vote when bush first got elected, and I think the main reason for that was, that the country was ok, but I am not going to sit around and let things get worse. And trust me, come election time, anyone I know that is capable of voting WILL vote, I'll make sure of that.
- ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8if anyone cought him on colbert last night.... he did seem quit messed up (he is from alaska so maybe he was stoned?) but what he says is definately what this country needs. Is he right for the job? i dont know but if he rubs off on the others even the slightest bit i will be happy
- SinkToTheBeat, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3I'm disappointed that he buys into the global warming swindel and that he claims to believe universal health care will work, but I agree with his foreign policy and his drug war stance. I like him infinitely more than the Lizard Queen or Barack.
I'd love to see him get nominated, but Ron Paul is still my number one choice.- bobcobb42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Global Warming Swindel?
So, the scientific method is flawed and your VAST intellect can see through all the mountains of evidence?
Oh and by the way, universal healthcare might not be the solution, but at least he is acknowledging this country has serious problems with it's health industry. - nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Why wont universal health care work? it works for EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY ON THE PLANET! why do we think it wouldn't work here?
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4"Why wont universal health care work? it works for EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY ON THE PLANET!"
I don't want to pay the same tax rates that Europeans and Canadians pay. I don't want doctors to be state employees with no options for private practice. I don't want my only option for health care provider to be the US govt. - Raian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3geekee-- don't be foolish, you probably pay more in taxes than most Canadians and Europeans.
The US puts way more in to their military than Canada and any European Country puts into their healthcare systems and military combined.
Your second argument is completely fallacious and rhetorical-- and shows you really don't have anything to offer to the debate. - DiggDuggDugged, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"I don't want to pay the same tax rates that Europeans and Canadians pay. I don't want doctors to be state employees with no options for private practice. I don't want my only option for health care provider to be the US govt."
I don't know about you, but as a single dad with two dependents I pay a little more than $350/month for employer subsidized health insurance (which really isn't very good). Now if the government can somehow offer universal health care for something like an added $250/month tax bill (which should be very realistic) I would be more than happy to give it a shot. It would be like a karma boost (everyone gets health care!) and a small pay raise (more cash for me!) all in one. - SilentSpyder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2help thy neighbor.
- sibhod, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2global warming swindle?!? haha!
so it's all a big hoax perpetrated by every climate scientist? - blaze4metal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@sibhod
"so it's all a big hoax perpetrated by every climate scientist?"
Only the climate scientists that aren't paid to say what the government tells them to say.
- bobcobb42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Global Warming Swindel?
- Saccharin, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3So his central argument from that clip is that the Democrats in Congress should pass a law that makes Bush a felon. And well, if Bush vetoes it, they should get a 2/3rds majority to override it.
Ummm, okay. Wasn't this covered on South Park a few years back?
1) Get bill vetoed.
2) ???
3) Override veto with 2/3rds majority.
Cool Gravel, come up with step 2 and we've almost got something. Yep, he sure owned the media.- SinkToTheBeat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9His step two was to vote on the law every day until it passes. If the voting is brought to enough people's attention, maybe they'll make enough noise to sway some votes.
- ScionAltera, on 10/12/2007, -1/+101) Bill gets vetoed.
2) Philibuster until enough people are so ***** sick of your yammering that they vote your way.
3) Override the veto with 2/3 majority.
That's what he did to end the Vietnam war draft. It took five months of yammering, but it worked. It could work again. It's a shame nobody in the current house or senate has the cojones to do it. - Saccharin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1The Republican party is very different today than what it was in the 70s. Back then there were quite a lot of liberal Republicans, and they did eventually start leaving Nixon's side. We don't really have those people today (sorry Olympia Snowe and Chuck Hagel aren't going to overturn the GOP).
Then Reagan happened, and movement conservatism took over. Along with a general shift to the right by the DNC as well, and many have to worry about being electable in their own districts if they come off too liberal. It's a different political landscape now. There's no way the Republicans who've had their head in the sand for 5 years are going to suddenly find religion on political integrity. - mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11) Bill gets vetoed.
2) Philibuster until enough people are so ***** sick of your yammering that they vote your way.
3) Override the veto with 2/3 majority.
This is not Vietnam. There is no draft and nobody is being made a felon.
1) Gets vetoed
2) A number of Democrats and Republicans - with a majority support of the American people - destroy his filibuster.
3) The End. Life goes on as normal.
It would be a terrible and trivial use of congress to attempt this and most assuredly anger the American people. Im not sure what world alot of you live in - but I can be sure its infinitely far from reality.
"There's no way the Republicans who've had their head in the sand for 5 years are going to suddenly find religion on political integrity."
I guarantee there would be Democrats opposing this man also.
- yossariantwin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11he gets me so wet, and i don't even have a vagina. he's almost like a lucid hunter s. thompson running for president.
- gooddaysunshine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4classic. and a catch 22 reference name to boot. added as friend.
- bobcobb42, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2While Gravel is making noise about issues that need to be brought up, I think he may be a bit too flaky to be president.
What was the thing about gay loving in the military on the Colbert report last night anyways? That was odd.
Bill Richardson, theres a man I would not mind having President. Anyone but Hilary... - ScionAltera, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14I donated $50 to the Mike Gravel campaign. Even if he doesn't get the nomination, it's very refreshing to see a guy like him even giving it a shot. All the other candidates on either side are far too slick and polished and politically correct. They all say the same things, they all worry too much about their image, and now is not the time. Now is the time to be forceful, resolute, and clever. Now is the time to take risks and upset the status quo. Now is not business as usual. Our politicians on both sides of the aisle are far too worried about their money and maintaining their power base to worry about you and me; the little guys. This old coot from Alaska is just the kind of change we need.
Even if you don't agree with a flat tax; even if you don't want pot legalized; even if you don't want universal health care... don't you at least want a guy in office who tells the truth, even if it's not what you want to hear?- hdtvdust, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1"even if he doesn't get the nomination"? That is like saying "Even if the sun rises tomorrow."
And considering most people DON'T want any of those three things, no...people don't want him in office.
And it is also a perfect example of why he is pathetic. Does he not realize that hte president of the US does not have hte power to legalize pot? - ScionAltera, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@hdtvdust
"And considering most people DON'T want any of those three things"
Really? How do you know that? Have you asked them?
"Does he not realize that hte president of the US does not have hte power to legalize pot?"
Neither does he have the power to wiretap without warrants, and yet he still does. Of course he can't just wave a wand and legalize pot. He'd have to introduce a bill to congress and drum up support to pass it in both houses.
That, however, was not the point I was making. I merely said that even if you do not support Mike Gravel's platform, I hope you are interested in having a president who tells the truth instead of telling the American public what it wants to hear. I don't even care if it's Mike Gravel that you support. Do you support telling the truth, hdtvdust? Do you want your president to tell the truth? I do.
I support Mike Gravel because he is the only candidate from any political party that has in any way convinced me that he will tell the truth even when the truth hurts. I put my money where my mouth is and sent him a contribution. If you feel as strongly about this as I do, you will do the same thing. Send your candidate some money so they are beholden to YOU. Don't rely on corporations and lobbyists to do it for you, or your candidate will be beholden to THEM. - Area417, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ScionAltera
Gravel is a supporter of the Fair Tax, not a flat tax. That's something that would *almost* make me vote for a Dem. In fact, if Ron Paul weren't running, I'd have to at least give it serious consideration, though the socialized medicine is a turn off.
- hdtvdust, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1"even if he doesn't get the nomination"? That is like saying "Even if the sun rises tomorrow."
- kahakauai, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Whether you agree with him or not, you have to agree that this guy knows the ins and outs of the way the world and government works. I think he would really do some positive things if he was Pres.
- minox, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2People who use the expression "speak truth to" should kill themselves.
- hdtvdust, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2Seriously...diggers? What are you going to do after Super Tuesday when both Gravel and Ron Paul drop out?
They are in this for PUBLICITY. For future book deals. Not because hthey have ANY expectation of coming even close to winning. Or even making a strong showing.- b1111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think you are right about Gravel but not about Ron Paul. The only reason Ron Paul isn't getting a lot of support is because the MSM isn't paying attention to him. The first GOP debate was tonight. Look at the results of this poll.....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18436681/
(You might have to vote first)
- b1111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I think you are right about Gravel but not about Ron Paul. The only reason Ron Paul isn't getting a lot of support is because the MSM isn't paying attention to him. The first GOP debate was tonight. Look at the results of this poll.....
- toastman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Gravel is what more politicians should be like. He cuts through the *****, and is for reforming the system. He doesn't try to be nice and put on a cheesy smile like so many of these canidates. I think there are thousands and maybe even millions across the country that feel just like he does. Its just that they wont vote for him because they dont think he will win. If u watched the democratic debates you noticed he was the only one even calling out his opponents, the only one actually trying to "DEBATE".
- Chmura, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7That Chris Matthews sure has an annoying voice.
- Psyael, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1For a guy who blames the media so much and claims they have some sort of conspiracy against him, he sure has no problem getting an interview.
- riggs32, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ Psyael
ummm just because he is saying the media is corrupt doesn't mean he shouldn't use it to his advantage. how the f else is he supposed to run if he doesn't have ANY interviews.
- riggs32, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ Psyael
- artsike, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5dugg for being awesome
- blizzardice, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Buried for being awesomely retarded. Gravel is a ***** talker.
- mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I think its just in the wrong category, should be under videos --> comedy.
- mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1You want to know why Obama and Hillary won't become happy extremist? Because they want to get elected - they need the American people to vote for them. This man Gravel, will never get elected as president or even win his party's nomination. He represents a tiny part of the American public - so tiny I doubt he would carry one state. Gravel honestly made me laugh, its as if he is trying to play a game "before I left office", "I stopped the draft", and "FILIBUSTER" represent this mans entire speech. Yeah - because all the democrats and a number of republicans are going to declare Bush a felon, the American public would get tired of such a charade and the Democratic party would suffer greatly. Remember diggers, your political opinions represent the leftist minority in America and it is highly unlikely that Gravel or anyone like him would be able to put any of his plans into action; even if elected the civilized politicians would do nothing but scoff at this man.
- Mast3rDigg3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4wow you know a lot, why is gravel even wasting his time? you should let him know this dude
- banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1You're exactly right.
Gravel is a crack-pot, and he appeals to the crack-pots, wackos, nuts, and loons.
Democrats are stupid, but they're not THAT stupid. Gravel won't get anywhere near the nomination.
- xShad0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Wait why isn't he president yet?
- mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Because he will not ever win a presidential election.
- revenge7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Because most people are too f*cking stupid to notice a good politician when they see one.
- ITinNYC, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4As a Republican I actually want Gravel to win (Dem primary) because it will be at least honest. At least the Dems will be putting someone who will signify the true other side of the debate. From what I've seen Obama, Edwards and even Clinton are all pretenders to the crown. I'm not afraid to say this, but Clinton is working from her name and Bill's, Obama is working the black angle, and Edwards well I just think he has nothing else to do. The other are not worth mentioning.
Gravel actually has experience and seems to talk with some sense, I'd like a debate between him and and any other Republican opponent. To me his is the sounding board and which our ideas should be thrown into the light and debated.- mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2"As a Republican I actually want Gravel to win (Dem primary) because it will be at least honest."
As would any Republican strategist. It would be the largest vote count ever achieved by the Republican Party, and quite likely the highest number of electoral votes.
- mirunit, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2"As a Republican I actually want Gravel to win (Dem primary) because it will be at least honest."
- Nocturnalsgfx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I encourage everyone to spread the word about Gravel. He's awesome and America deserves to have this man as our next president! At least he has the balls to speak on every issue that's presented to him without dancing around it. Give the power back to the people! Vote for Gravel in 2008!
- minox, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2All these Gravel and Ron Paul fans on digg. People here must get some kind of joy out of picking esoteric candidates, perhaps out of some kind of victim/minority mentality (there is no chance either will get their respective nominations). You all know you'll end up voting for Hillary and once again have a hard time looking at yourself in the mirror.
- Nocturnalsgfx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Dugg Down for making a comment that is negative towards Gravel. lol
- Nocturnalsgfx, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1Dugg Down for making a comment that is negative towards Gravel. lol
- jonj, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1buried for organized diggspam
- stealthc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3I just want to let bobcobb know that anthropogenic global warming is a complete and total scam to trick you into submitting to a global tax on naturally occurring substances. That is all.
Global warming is happening, but it is most likely the sun. It is also good, and the environmentalist freaks are the ones funded by BP -- because they have a vested interest in artificial shortages and other government interference to drive up the price and their profits.- AstroMech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1+1 my friend.
There is absolutely no definitive proof on global warming. It's all up for debate.
saying that we caused it and then arguing that we can do something to turn it around is quite ironic. - bobcobb42, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Really? I've done some research into the issue, and while there may not be a direct cause/effect relationship that we can have an affirmative answer on global warming, the fact of the matter is that there is a correlation between CO2 levels and temperature of the Earth. While I never stated that anthropogenic greenhouse gases are the "only" cause of global warming, there is a mountain of evidence and a pile of climate scientists that believe that humans are causing some of the warming we have seen in the past decades. Most likely increased solar activity is also a direct cause, however it is not the only cause.
There really is no more debate. Global warming is real, it is caused by humans to a degree, and we need to cut back on our carbon footprint to restore CO2 levels to what would be naturally occurring.
There is no definitive proof on gravity either, but I don't see you trying to debate that one. Science isn't about definitive proof. Get off digg and read a book. - JustAZombie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Greenhouse gases are unquestionably responsible for retaining the warmth of the sun on a planet's surface. This is why Venus is hotter than Mercury. Sure, global warming may be partly the sun, but to say that the fact that we pump billions of tons of CO2, a greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere anually has no effect whatsoever seems crazy to me. How can all the gas be doing nothing?
"saying that we caused it and then arguing that we can do something to turn it around is quite ironic."
Are you serious? We caused it therefore we can't fix it? Is that what you're really trying to say? - tmk40, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@JustAZombie...if you believe in human-caused global warming...see if you can be the FIRST to intelligently answer these questions. What caused the significant rise in temperature from 1900 to 1940? There was not nearly the industrialization then that we have now...and that industrialization was only dominant in Europe, Japan, and the US. It wasnt nearly enough to influence temperature for the ENTIRE planet.
Then from 1940 to 1974, we had a period of temperature DECLINE. This was a period of a huge boom in industrial activity...which would also have huge CO2 emissions. The global warming people have said that aerosol phosphate polution being released, reflected sunlight back into space. Do you really believe that the few industrial powers could emit that much phosphates to not only hold temps steady (with the huge CO2 increases)...but would cause temps to decline??? To decline enough that scientists were worried about a new Ice Age?
Ice core records show that CO2 does not cause temp increase...but the other way around...that temp increases cause increased CO2 levels. If we signed onto the Kyoto treaty, we would incur MASSIVE spending and make a tiny tiny difference in our climate. We need to spend our resources much more wisely to save the third world populations. - JustAZombie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@tmk40
I never suggested there weren't other causes for global warming, merely that pumping so much of a greenhouse gas into the atmosphere is going to have some kind of an effect on global temperatures. As for the global cooling thing that people often love to throw around, it's important to note that, while there was a media frenzy around it at the time, only a minority of scientists supported the idea. Today, the vast majority of scientists believe that humans are influencing global warming, which I think is an important distinction.
I never said anything about the Kyoto protocol either. I do think it's crazy to think that our pollution is doing nothing at all to the atmosphere though, given that we know planets retain heat because of the greenhouse gases in their atmosphere (again, look at venus versus mercury). I also think you can't really say enacting the Kyoto protocol would make only a "tiny, tiny" difference. But again, that's not the primary point. - tmk40, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@JustAZombie...you have an intelligent post and I think we agree for the most part. I shouldnt have mentioned the "new ice age" point...because I dont care about what a few scientists thought back then. But the fact remains that temps cooled significantly during those 35 years from 1940-1975 and no one can explain why...when CO2 levels were going off the charts.
There is a graph from a recent IPCC report going around that shows what temps would be in the future 100 yrs without Kyoto and then with Kyoto implemented. The lines are almost exactly the same.
I am in total agreement with you that we should be doing something about greenhouse gasses and other types of polution. Being good stewards of our planet only makes sense. The recent increases in the price of oil and other factors will make "being green" much more attractive and it will draw investment capital into that market. Audi has shown off a new A4 car that gets 44mpg in Europe. The market and consumer demand for these products will transform our society without the huge expenditures of government money.
- AstroMech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1+1 my friend.
- AstroMech, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0Gravel is an angry old coot.
Duncan Hunter is the only candidate I would vote for. Otherwise I'm not voting.
No more Douche Vs. Turd Sandwich. - banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1I'm a Republican, and I hope Gravel wins the Dem. ticket...
So we can smear him all over the map in a 50-state landslide.
Let's pray that Democrats are stupid enough to put that jackass on their ticket. - zioxide, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1There needs to be a "Bury > Useless Political Candidate who has no chance of winning" option.
Seriously, at least vote for someone who has a chance.- banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Agreed.
But look who Gravel's base are. Pot heads, losers, druggies, hippies, unwashed scum bags, basically the absolute worst of the college age demographic.
Few mature, rational adults would waste time on him.
- banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Agreed.
- Guyver03, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0I'm not saying I don't like the guy...but he won't get elected. He's too radical and he's already said he'd legalize marijuana if it was up to him. The pot thing alone is enough to keep the "hardliner" and "war on drugs is good" people away from voting for him. That pretty much tanked his whole campaign in my opinion. It's a Howard Dean-esqe move. If he gets very at all this will haunt him.
Hang it up...he's done. - banderbe, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1I wonder how many of you Gravel supporters were also Deaniacs in the '04 election.
Dean was a nut, Gravel's a nut, and at this early stage of the election process, the nuts are the loudest.
Democrats are generally very stupid people but they're not stupid enough to elect Dean or Gravel because they still want to win and neither of those crazy ***** could come anywhere close to victory on the national level. - wiremonkeymommy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3AhhhHHHhhhh... he's refreshing!! Gimme' that old style politics, punches being thrown, gauntlets being thrown down, confrontations!!
- bobcobb42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2He won't win. Doesn't mean you shouldn't support the man. I think you people forgot the political process.
- rspeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This guy doesn't beat around the bush!
- tehbored, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You know you really can't respond to that with anything other than "Gravel for president!"
- keithburgun, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4MIKE GRAVEL for the WIN! I'm going all out for this guy.
- minox, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1GRAVEL IS A LOSER! VOTE CLINTON/OBAMA!
- lu88ke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1this guy has serious balls
- TheBogie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0His balls are serious, but I'm sure they have a more frivolous side to them as well.
- brettmjohnson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I like this guy because he's not afraid to say what he actually belives. Clinon/Obama/Edwards are so controlled by their "groomers" that they are not allowed to say anything the least bit controversial ^H^H^H^H... meaningful. With polls in the single digits, Gravel has the leeway to say what he believes - or at least what he believes needs to be said. I just don't envy him going through airport security with those huge brass balls...
- TheBogie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Do you remember when they were considering making overweight folks buy 2 seats on a plane?
Well Mike Gravel will need to buy three. One for himself, and two more for each of those giant brass balls that he has.
- TheBogie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Do you remember when they were considering making overweight folks buy 2 seats on a plane?
- gjzilla, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm an Obama supporter, but I'm still excited about Gravel (even though he'll never win). Anyone but Hillary!!! ~~~~
- vguard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Only if the average Joe continues to let the establishment dictate their "choices" for them.
- chrgrose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0!!!!! Everyone go here and push up our next president's ratings!!!!!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18335732/
Lets help him get his voice heard. - forsytjr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ron Paul also called B.S. on his party during the GOP debates - check it out at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNvoaGfwZcc - Area417, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@diggduggdugged, how about the government confiscating a lot less of your money to begin with? If Gravel could get the Fair Tax passed, you'd be keeping the money in your pocket anyway (plus the prebate) so you'd be able to afford the insurance. From the people I've spoken to that have been in those countries with socialized medicine, it isn't that great. Everyone one gets to wait in a long line for their turn at mediocre, one-size-fits-all-medicine and hope they don't die before getting treatment.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is