digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Activists begin hunger strike seeking impeachment of Bush & Cheney

sfgate.com — Marghi Dutton is 90 and losing her eyesight, but nothing was going to stop her from trekking to midspan of the Golden Gate Bridge on Sunday with the anti-war group Code Pink: Women for Peace. She joined a crowd of about 100 demonstrators dressed in hot pink hats, shirts and scarves and fought the wind to raise her sign: "Impeach Bush and Cheney!"

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • LawKSS, on 10/10/2007, -24/+25Now the activists are hungry...hungry for change.

    Ba dum ba.

    Thanks, I'll be here all night
    • bagelpirate, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10"I've had a few requests, but I'm going to keep playing anyway..."
      • mdhauke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+190 is a good age to die at.
        • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1...at which to die.
        • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1...at which to die.
        • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2"Activists begin hunger strike seeking impeachment of Bush & Cheney"

          100 less stupid liberals is a good thing.
          • VanillaStarfish, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hunger strikes are nonsense. Hope they starve to death.
    • nyx210, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2'She joined a crowd of about 100 demonstrators dressed in hot pink hats, shirts and scarves and fought the wind to raise her sign: "Impeach Bush and Cheney!"'

      A little late for that don't you think?
    • Ghstfce, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12In related news, 90 year old Marghi Dutton died today. Bush and Cheney are still in office. Back to you Fred.
    • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6I love people that starve themselves to prove a point. Who do they think really gives a ***** that they're starving themselves? What point do they believe they're making? Idiots, if you want to sacrifice your life to prove a point, grab a gun and take someone relevant down with you.
      • physphd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Aren't you missing a "/sarcasm"? The very fact that you are talking about the political agenda of some little old lady on the Golden Gate Bridge whom you've never met is proof that it works. Its about attention.
        • moin1097, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Talking about, no.
          Laughing at, yes.
        • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, I didn't forget the sarcasm tag. I seriously love it when people do something incredibly stupid to draw attention to themselves, the whole time thinking that they're making a point when really they're just being idiots and getting laughed at.

          If you want attention that does something, than do something meaningful. The kind of attention she's getting isn't worth having. Look around at the comments, most people aren't even discussing the point she is trying to make, just the method.
        • a6n28f, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0"No, I didn't forget the sarcasm tag. I seriously love it..." Umm, that is literally sarcasm, son.
    • MacParrot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4C'mon guys! This could TOTALLY work! By my estimates if they keep from eating for...oh...roughly about 400 days, then Bush and Cheney will be out of office!
      • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1The point is not whether it will work or not; the point is that these people have the fighting spirit, are willing to make some noise, and care about their country. They are setting an example, and if a 90 yr old can march and starve, many more can, too. Free Bongs for Code Pink .
    • pjsk8, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Poor activists....they've got the munchies for freedom.
  • coffee200am, on 10/10/2007, -27/+24LOL! Useless.
    • therightside, on 10/10/2007, -7/+15Not if the activists die, then it will be totally worth it.
      • shanevendrell, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15then it will be totally hilarious
      • Lapdog1123, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Kinda sad, but true... you will see a media fire storm of some one dies in doing this. Unless..... wait, media is backed and owned by the government.... dam we were close.... better bury me.
    • robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Unless a very large majority of the U.S. goes on this hunger strike, it will be totally useless. The only reason why tactics like this worked for Ghandi was because he had almost an entire nation backing/supporting him. This hunger strike will fail.
      • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If a very large majority of the US went on a hunger strike we'd look like a nation of healthy humans in about a month.
        • mike17032, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2More like 2 months. We are pretty damn fat.
      • Lethargic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Do you honestly think that a movement like Ghandi's or the Civil Rights Movement of the 60's started at the national level? These things start with 1, 5, 10 people and balloon outward. I'm more impressed that Code Pink has expanded to ~260 chapters in only 4 years than anything else in the article.

        Keep making fun of them if you must, but at least these people are trying for change instead of whining on the internet.
    • sensical, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2It's not really the protest itself that matters, but the public's reaction to it that makes a difference. So digg it!
  • billmill, on 10/10/2007, -8/+61Rove: "Mr. President there are hundreds of women wearing hot pink hats, scarves and shirts demanding you leave office"
    Bush: "DEAR GOD!!!"
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -11/+10Mass action doesn't occur without the dedicated action of those who form small groups. What are you doing to change the situation?
      • robisfunky, on 10/10/2007, -3/+13Burying you.
      • chris9902, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7yes because a tiny percentage of people should be allowed to choose who is and isn't in office.
      • oldhick, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3True. Those dedicated small groups got Bush into power. Mass action will occur at the polls. There are still lots of apathetic folks that don't see any value in impeaching a president soon to be out of office.
        • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1That's like saying there's no need to charge an old pervert--he's too old to commit any more crimes now. Impeachment is for the crimes and should be dealt with whether he is on office for a long time or not.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8Civil disobedience is the deliberate, discriminate, violation of law for a vital social purpose. It becomes not only justifiable but necessary when a fundamental human right is at stake, and when legal channels are inadequate for securing that right. It may take the form of violating an obnoxious law, protesting an unjust condition, or symbolically enacting a desirable law or condition. It may or may not eventually be held legal, because of constitutional law or international law, but its aim is always to close the gap between law and justice, as an infinite process in the development of democracy.
      • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Ok, and what does that have to do with starving yourself?
        • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1hunger strikes are the alternative to violent actions. They mean something and make a point.
          • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It may/may not mean something, that is open to debate. It does not make any point that couldn't be easier made by carrying a sign that says "I'm a ***** idiot" or "Attention Whore, someone please look at me!'
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3There is no social value to a general obedience to the law, any more than there is value to a general disobedience to the law. Obedience to bad laws as a way of inculcating some abstract subservience to “the rule of law” can only encourage the already strong tendencies of citizens to bow to the power of authority, to desist from challenging the status quo. To exalt the rule of law as an absolute is the mark of totalitarianism, and it is possible to have an atmosphere of totalitarianism in a society which has many of the attributes of democracy. To urge the right of citizens to disobey unjust laws, and the duty of citizens to disobey dangerous laws, is of the very essence of democracy, which assumes that government and its laws are not sacred, but are instruments, serving certain ends: life, liberty, happiness. The instruments are dispensable. The ends are not.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Civil disobedience may involve violation of laws which are not in themselves obnoxious, in order to protest on a very important issue. In each case, the importance of the law being violated would need to be measured against the importance of the issue. A traffic law, temporarily broken, is not nearly as important as the life of a child run over by a car; illegal trespass into offices is nowhere as serious as the killing of people in war; the unlawful occupation of a building is not as sinful as racism in education. Since not only specific laws, but general conditions may be unbearable, laws not themselves ordinarily onerous may need to be violated as protest.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2If a specific act of civil disobedience is a morally justifiable act of protest, then the jailing of those engaged in that act is immoral and should be opposed, contested to the very end. The protester need be no more willing to accept the rule of punishment than to accept the rule he broke. There may be many times when protesters choose to go to jail, as a way of continuing their protest, as a way of reminding their countrymen of injustice. But that is different than the notion that they must go to jail as part of a rule connected with civil disobedience. The key point is that the spirit of protest should be maintained all the way, whether it is done by remaining in jail, or by evading it. To accept jail penitently as an accession to “the rules” is to switch suddenly to a spirit of subservience, to demean the seriousness of the protest.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Those who engage in civil disobedience should choose tactics which are as nonviolent as possible, consonant with the effectiveness of their protest and the importance of the issue. There must be a reasonable relationship between the degree of disorder and the significance of the issue at stake. The distinction between harm to people and harm to property should be a paramount consideration. Tactics directed at property might include (again, depending on efficacy and the issue): depreciation (as in boycotts), damage, temporary occupation, and permanent appropriation. In any event, the force of any act of civil disobedience must be focused clearly, discriminately on the object of protest.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2The degree of disorder in civil disobedience should not be weighed against a false “peace” presumed to exist in the status quo, but against the real disorder and violence that are part of daily life, overtly expressed internationally in wars, but hidden locally under that facade of “order” which obscures the injustice of contemporary society.

      In our reasoning about civil disobedience, we must never forget that we and the state are separate in our interests, and we must not be lured into forgetting this by the agents of the state. The state seeks power, influence, wealth, as ends in themselves. The individual seeks health, peace, creative activity, love. The state, because of its power and wealth, has no end of spokesmen for its interests. This means the citizen must understand the need to think and act on his own or in concert with fellow citizens.
      • CourtesyFlush, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You've just confirmed my theory that you are a certifiable nutburger.
      • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The force is strong with you. Please wait a while before commenting again.
  • fordicus, on 10/10/2007, -22/+16good riddance
  • Infantrydude, on 10/10/2007, -30/+25If I lived in San Fran (Shudder) I would go by everyday with a pile of food and eat it right in front of them, "Burger anyone I have a few here and I am willing to share. Hey got some Krispy Kreme Donuts. I can't eat them all" I would have pizza delivered to them.
    It would be better than the time I set up a BBQ at the Earth Day rally.
    Idiotic protesters are so much fun!
    • Coven, on 10/10/2007, -14/+14Yes...exercising your first amendment rights is SO idiotic.
      • Infantrydude, on 10/10/2007, -8/+23Noooo exercising 1st amendment is quite acceptable and encouraged but I also have the right to ridicule stupid behavior
        • ehalasey, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6I know! Protesting injustice is so stupid!
          • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No, protesting is great. Pretending anyone gives a ***** that you haven't eaten in a few days is stupid. I mean Hell! Be committed to your cause! Bring gasoline and a match! Show them how you really feel!
          • dgmt4U, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1And ridiculing stupid people is sooo injust.
        • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3hey infantry, sounds like a win-win situation. you don't want to be here in SF, and SF doesn't want you here. though its likely we disagree on everything, its heartwarming to know that on this one point, we are in full agreement,. have a great life and stay uncool!

          just because I know you need these things spelled out, I'm ridiculing your stupid behavior. We all had a laugh at your expense in the office.
    • nblsavage, on 10/10/2007, -11/+23Yes, god forbid anyone should protest anything. We should all just go with the flow and comply with whatever the goverment wants.
      • Infantrydude, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6See above snide comment
      • coffee200am, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Protesting by damaging one's self is stupid. If the government wants me to eat food...I'll comply.
        • Hortnon, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8Globalist NWO shill! How dare you eat! It's what the gov't wants, you MUST STOP EATING or THEY win!
    • Arcesius, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10a real life troll... how quaint

      say... are you green and exceptionally ugly?... or is that just a stereotype?
    • mikesty, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The first amendment permits Infantrydude the right to freedom of speech too. I'm with him on this one :)
    • robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm all for protesting, but there is no practically in this. Tactics like this only work if a large majority is supporting them.
  • sfpfc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/mba0256l.jpg
  • maklershed, on 10/10/2007, -25/+22I dislike Bush and Cheney as much as the next guy but these people can starve to death for all I care. What good is going on hunger strike gonna do anybody? Do they honestly think someone's gonna say .. oh *****, people wont eat unleash we impeach Bush and Cheney, lets get to work!!
    • mrsaturn, on 10/10/2007, -7/+17Ever heard of civil disobedience?
      • notque, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6We need to work together with other groups and organize. General Strike on 9/11 is my #1, digg it up, support the cause. Support other causes. We must act if we want change. No one will do it for us, not Democrats, not Republicans. It's up to us.
        • dgmt4U, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Lead the way armchair revolutionary!
        • mike17032, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Just about the only thing less useful than a hunger strike is a "strike" where you sit on your ass and do nothing all day. How is sitting home in your parents basement blathering ***** to digg all day different than any other day for you?
      • Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6ever heard of laughable effort?
      • notque, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3And our topic is topsy-turvy: civil disobedience. As soon as you say the topic is civil disobedience, you are saying our problem is civil disobedience. That is not our problem.... Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is the numbers of people all over the world who have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience. And our problem is that scene in All Quiet on the Western Front where the schoolboys march off dutifully in a line to war. Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world, in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem. We recognize this for Nazi Germany. We know that the problem there was obedience, that the people obeyed Hitler. People obeyed; that was wrong. They should have challenged, and they should have resisted; and if we were only there, we would have showed them. Even in Stalin's Russia we can understand that; people are obedient, all these herdlike people.
      • notque, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3But what about voting and elections? Civil disobedience-we don't need that much of it, we are told, because we can go through the electoral system. And by now we should have learned, but maybe we haven't, for we grew up with the notion that the voting booth is a sacred place, almost like a confessional. You walk into the voting booth and you come out and they snap your picture and then put it in the papers with a beatific smile on your face. You've just voted; that is democracy. But if you even read what the political scientists say-although who can?-about the voting process, you find that the voting process is a sham. Totalitarian states love voting. You get people to the polls and they register their approval. I know there is a difference-they have one party and we have two parties. We have one more party than they have, you see.
        What we are trying to do, I assume, is really to get back to the principles and aims and spirit of the Declaration of Independence. This spirit is resistance to illegitimate authority and to forces that deprive people of their life and liberty and right to pursue happiness, and therefore under these conditions, it urges the right to alter or abolish their current form of government-and the stress had been on abolish. But to establish the principles of the Declaration of Independence, we are going to need to go outside the law, to stop obeying the laws that demand killing or that allocate wealth the way it has been done, or that put people in jail for petty technical offenses and keep other people out of jail for enormous crimes. My hope is that this kind of spirit will take place not just in this country but in other countries because they all need it. People in all countries need the spirit of disobedience to the state, which is not a metaphysical thing but a thing of force and wealth. And we need a kind of declaration of interdependence among people in all countries of the world who are striving for the same thing.
    • Coven, on 10/10/2007, -8/+11Its called media attention, and its working.
      • CaptainNoPants, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11Really? This is the first I've heard of it, and this was posted yesterday. I'd say it isn't working at all.
        • Coven, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10quick google search for "code pink hunger strike" brings up 525,000 hits. i looked at the first page and all the hits were regarding this specific event. Even Malkin blogged about it. So yes, I'd say its getting attention, albeit not the attention they were seeking if the likes of Michelle Malkin is blogging it.
          • Hortnon, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6Compare to 1,150,000 for keywords: bridge collapse minnesota 35w
            or
            7,610,000 for keywords: bridge collapse minnesota
            or
            668,000 for keywords: hurricane flossie hawaii

            I'd say it's not getting the attention you think it is.
      • robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4What media attention?
    • superm4n, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0-1 digg for bad grammar. people wont eat "unleash" we impeach. UNLESS might be a better substitute.
    • wendelgee2, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Mahatma ***** GHANDI. Look him up.....*ignorant mumble mumble*...
      • Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3ghandi hated black people, look it up.
        • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2all your reference material comes from the mirror universe then?
          • Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1watch penn and tellers ***** episode when in one fel swoop he knocks mother teresa, ghandi, and the dali lamma
    • stupidape, on 10/10/2007, -5/+6It worked for Ghandi
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_strike
      • robisfunky, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3 ROFL... Ghandi, Pink Patrol (whatever the ***** they're called)... yeah that's an accurate comparison
    • robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Ghandi had support of an entire nation.. How many hunger strikes have been effective since then?
  • jmpeagle, on 10/10/2007, -6/+12wait if they are that old, shouldn't they be wearing red hats?
    • gusevx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Red Hat Society
    • Rapter09, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Digging you back up because you were probably digged down by clueless people.
      • Rapter09, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I really hate double posting but Safari crashed (hah) when I went to edit this. Here's some more info:
        www.redhatsociety.com/

        No, he's not making fun of your precious open source OS.... or is he?
  • ronh, on 10/10/2007, -15/+21Most useless act of activism EVER!

    This is along the same lines as the guy that blowed his brains out all over the 9/11 memorial because he opposed Bush's policies.

    "Let's hurt ourselves to make a point to the people that don't care how we feel in the first place"

    The logic escapes me.
    • Coven, on 10/10/2007, -11/+13I know...it never worked for guys like, oh, I don't know...Ghandi?
      • ehalasey, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9True that. However, I have a feeling that our government has gotten to the point where they care so little for our well-being that, unlike in Ghandi's case where the government was moved to action by his strike, I wouldn't be surprised if they just let the members of Code Pink die. One fewer protest organization to deal with, no blood on their hands. It's disgusting to even think that our government would allow such a thing to happen, but these days, nothing surprises me.
        • TheOther1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3"I wouldn't be surprised if they just let the members of Code Pink die."

          I know I will. ***** 'em if they don't want to eat.
        • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"It's disgusting to even think that our government would allow such a thing to happen, "

          Disgusting that our government would allow what to happen? A few idiots willfully starving themselves to death? If they sent the cops into to force feed the ignorant ***** you'd be bitching about Police State tactics. Or was your point that every time a few citizens pull a dumb ass publicity stunt we should throw the President out of office?
      • Hortnon, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6A community leader is different from a bunch of random people that we don't care about.

        If, say, a Congressman did it, then it might actually be comparable.
        • ehalasey, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9They're not "a bunch of random people." They're Americans. And pretty damn brave ones at that. I guess a story like "Paris Hilton Protests Iraq War" is more up your alley, then, 'cause that most certainly gives the cause so much more dignity.
          • Hortnon, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8Is Paris Hilton a Congressman? Or did you completely miss my point?
        • Chestnut3499, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Or, knowing this administration's track record, they're probably more likely try to 'save' these 'poor, misguided people'. seems like when you protest this current incarnation of american gov't, you either get arrested or, worse, they try to save you like a terry schivo
        • jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Oh yeah... they're ***** hero's.
    • robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Coven, tactics like this worked for Ghandi because he had support of an entire nation. These people are Ghandi wannabe's and no one cares about them.
      • miriclaire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Anyone notice that Ghandi--no matter how many times he went on a hunger strike--didn;t actually starve to death? He stopped them.
    • ronh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Ghandi whipped fervor in an already active nationalist movement. Ghandi's peace was nothing to the violence of the movement that came in his wake. That is what enacted the British to leave.

      Do I see a movement of people across this country to be inspired by these people's self sacrifice? No.

      There are so many differences it's absurd. Trust me I use to do the whole lock down's and hunger strikes. It does not work in this situation.
    • Lapdog1123, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3I will say this at least they are doing something.... what are you doing?
    • wiirdo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Good luck! They better compete in the Nathan Hot Dog Eating Contest before they start their hunger strike, because they're going to go hungry.
    • madm0nk, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Naturally because YOU don't care .... therefore no one cares. If you have a better idea .... then stop ***** around and do it. Otherwise STFU.
      • ronh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I was ostracized from the anti-war movement where I lived because I was to "radical" they wanted to play it safe and paint there faces with fake blood and go down to the local TV station and stage a "die-in" to show the immorality of the war.

        I wanted to lock-down and block the military bases causing true (although limited) logistical problems for the military.

        Guess which one everyone wanted to do?

        I put so much of my time and life in trying to stop this war but realized that even the people that opposed it didn't have the will to really fight it. They wanted to hold hands and sing "cumbya my lord". ***** that ***** I'm no hippy. I saw something in my country that was immoral and I wanted to act on it to the highest level not perform some hippy ass symbolic gesture against it.

        and for that I was ostracized from the movement. So you can STFU with all your pansy ass liberal *****.
    • stagl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"blowed his brains out"?!
      Your grammar escapes me.
  • DaveV, on 10/10/2007, -25/+34This is so lame. Basically, they are holding themselves hostage to try and force their opinion on everyone else. I hope they die.
    • CaptainNoPants, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9While I don't hope they die (that's definitely not necessary) I do hope at some point they realize that no one cares.
  • Cerialthriller, on 10/10/2007, -14/+11All Digg members should go on an abstinence strike. We shall touch no bush until Bush is out of office
    • Coven, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2We're Digg members. We get no bush as it is.
    • Lapdog1123, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Only someone who's not getting any would propose this idea.... I say all we do is screw until he is out of office... Who's with me?
  • meshman, on 10/10/2007, -12/+7Better break out the body bags. A half a million people could slit their own throats in front of the Whitehouse and it woudln't make any more difference than this will. What part of "you're screwed, deal with it" don't they understand?
  • mikesbaker, on 10/10/2007, -11/+29I'd prefer a conviction as well as an impeachment.
  • gtluke, on 10/10/2007, -16/+10starve to death hippies
  • FeartheKnighted, on 10/10/2007, -17/+11Good, that's 100 less retards when they die from starvation.
    • moin1097, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2There's only 8 of them The rest don't have that much commitment.
      Though, if they wanted to show any real commitment, they would have tied ropes on to the bridge and hung themselves. Why wait for the slow death that you can back out of at any time? Besides, the corpse of a 90yo woman makes for an excellent center point for all the code pinkos to point at and say "See that? Bush did that."
      If I were her family I would get a restraining order against them.
  • drmsucks, on 10/10/2007, -13/+8Oh, Darwin...where were you in their childbearing years?
  • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -15/+8Hunger strike? yawn....

    I would like to go eat a LARGE cheeseburger right in front of them
  • lobofanina, on 10/10/2007, -7/+10This always works.
    • pentalive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Oh Noes, Not all diggers are knee-jerk liberals....
    • ronh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1That and praying to god. /sarcasm
  • designer, on 10/10/2007, -16/+10Hopefully, they starve to death.
    • BangSplat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Look at the picture - That could take until the next election. - Then they'll take credit.
  • markerman, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2let em starve! Thats San Fransisco for ya!
  • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2If we throw money at them, will they go away?
  • WarPirate, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5That would be so cool if they died for nothing....
  • TheEditor1, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4San Francisco, where the fruits pick the nuts. I hope they starve to death, would serve them right for being dumb asses.
    • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1while the rest of your silly country bakes in heat, humidity and intolerance, we in the city pity you and the choices you make daily to keep yourselves so hateful, overweight, ignorant and generally uncool. We love when you visit because the look of confusion on your faces is so comical. Just don't stay too long and spend plenty of money. Have a great day !
      • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"We love when you visit because the look of confusion on your faces is so comical."

        Well what do you expect when you go to San Fransico, expecting a city full of Michael Savage's, but end up with "Hey Hey Hey, 3 snaps oh no you didn't" guys?
      • Alpione, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You too.. And don't worry, we'll bail you out again the next time you can't defend yourselves...
        • skinjester, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0ok. appreciate that. In return we'll continue thinking & innovating for you until you're able to do so for yourselves.
  • boxxa, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6Too bad the bridge wont collapse with them on it.
  • DesuKN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14This is why Bush remains in power: people believe resistance through inaction works.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Which means that those of us who understands that action works need to work together, cooperate, and foster action. Make sure you work towards the general strike on 9/11 if you think it's a cause that should be worked towards. We have to ignore the nay sayers and act.
      • senatorpjt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I never needed much of a reason to take off work.
      • mike17032, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3So your suggestion is more inaction?

        Impressive, I am sure this will do a lot!
    • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2DesuKN,
      Bush is president because he was elected president. In 2008, the US will pick another one. Thats your action, buddy.
    • Shandooga, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This erroneous belief was fed to the people under the guise that it makes them more "civilized". Really, it's designed to separate whom they can placate from whom they must destroy. Destroy can mean mock, falsely imprison, or kill. The US is irretrivably evil and always has been.
  • Mockylock, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2I'm not for or against the cause, but if you're going to do something THAT stupid, you're bound to prove the laws of natural selection.
  • FAT_PIGGY, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3lol
  • sol2006, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6I think it's so sad that the politicians run wars now, instead of the generals. It happened in Vietnam and it's happening now. So very sad...
    • Shandooga, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"think it's so sad that the politicians run wars now, instead of the generals."
      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
      Not so. Generals run politicians now. That's how they keep the idiots from revolting while still getting enough of them to volunteer for desert limb-ectomy.
  • markgl, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4we'll see how long they last...
  • cwdrake, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5Let the San Fran"sickos" starve to death!
  • tfroster, on 10/10/2007, -9/+7I'm so glad our founding fathers set up a constitution so stupid people likes these can't determine policy
    • onewingedangel9, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Maybe not "like these", but it sure didn't stop Bush from getting office.
      • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0these idiots make bush look like a rocket scientist.
    • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1so true....so true.
  • jimski1961, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4Good more food for us
  • lordchronos, on 10/10/2007, -9/+5if they really were serious they would jump instead of going on hunger strike
  • eburetto, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4They are going to starve to death
  • HubbertWins, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6Useless symbolism ftl.
  • slackerxpc, on 10/10/2007, -8/+4I hope they all starve. who really cares?
  • khabba, on 10/10/2007, -8/+8These women will be remembered as the women who stood for their liberties! For all the nay sayers here at Digg.. No one will remember you for posting your crap opinions (or any) on Digg.
    • ronh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'd rather be forgotten and alive then dead and remembered.
    • HarryBauzonia, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Yeah.
      Remembered.
      ...... until the next gay marriage protest occurs.
    • mykus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0They'll only be remembered if they do not give up and resume eating. No one remembers people who quit hunger strikes. And saying they are putting their lives at risk is a joke when they are in full control of that so called "risk". If they were jumping off the bridge to make a statement then you could say they're putting their lives at risk because once they go over, the outcome, while reasonably predictable, is not certain.
    • CaptainNoPants, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Remembered by who? You? Give me a break, 15 minutes from the time you posted that comment you were half through a bag of doritos watching Maury and thinking "I gotta get me on that show, My 8 husbands will love it."
    • tsotha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Can you name one person (not in this article), without googling, who went on a hunger strike over US government policies? If you can that puts you in a tiny, tiny minority.
  • McBradd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Their time and efforts would be better spent focused on the next election. A Pro-active response is stronger than a re-active one, just as a Productive solution is stronger than a destructive one.
    • notque, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3But what about voting and elections? Civil disobedience-we don't need that much of it, we are told, because we can go through the electoral system. And by now we should have learned, but maybe we haven't, for we grew up with the notion that the voting booth is a sacred place, almost like a confessional. You walk into the voting booth and you come out and they snap your picture and then put it in the papers with a beatific smile on your face. You've just voted; that is democracy. But if you even read what the political scientists say-although who can?-about the voting process, you find that the voting process is a sham. Totalitarian states love voting. You get people to the polls and they register their approval. I know there is a difference-they have one party and we have two parties. We have one more party than they have, you see.
      • ronh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2This is not civil disobedience this is pacifism as pathology.
  • heypastorbob, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3What a joke!
  • justinjstark, on 10/10/2007, -9/+10I am digging all of you down for saying this is useless or too late. At least these protesters are doing something to try to make a difference in the world. What are you doing? Sitting behind your monitor and bitching on digg?

    This country needs a new direction. The tyrannical war-hungry leaders need to be removed from office. Our liberties must be restored. I give the utmost respect to anyone supporting this cause, especially those who put their own lives at risk for the betterment of our nation.
    • HarryBauzonia, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2If I throw plastic in the ocean, I'm making a difference in the world too.
      ...but is it a good difference?
    • senatorpjt, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Yeah, I'm sitting behind (well in front of) my monitor and bitching on digg. It doesn't matter what anyone does. We're all *****, and all that's left to do is just sit back and watch.
      • Dewhead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My what drama! You might be f*cked, but I am not. Life is great. You ought to try and live a little instead of freaking out over make believe problems.
    • Shandooga, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Never happen. It's all down-hill from here.
    • tsotha, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0And you know what? By sitting here doing nothing we're having as much effect as the hunger strikers. You don't get points for your intentions.
  • vSuperLuminal, on 10/10/2007, -6/+11What seems like the most likely outcome? A.) Emergency Impeachment proceedings begin to save these women's lives. B.) All of these women actually hold their ground and starve to death. C.) In 3 or 4 days these women say, "Awww, ***** it...I'm gettin' a burger!". If you chose A or B, Congratulations! You are officially a dumbass!
    • Shandooga, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1C. Definitely.
    • tsotha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah, remember Al Sharpton's last hunger strike? He quit after a few days "for his health". Hahahahahahaha - I thought damaging your health was the whole idea.
  • HiCaP, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6@ eburetto "They are going to starve to death"

    Thank God, it's about time.
    • Tweekster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0sadly they wont, because they are weak, and will act like their usual self of no conviction and give up in 2 days

  • L0g1X, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4I like how they say "HONK TO SUPPORT" because now people won't honk to yell at them. I remember back then when people protest, some cars would do a long honk to show that they disagree. Now when they say "HONK TO SUPPORT", there's no way, other than yelling at them, that you say you disagree.

    Not stating that I disagree. Just mentioning the evolution of protests.
    • sol2006, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0There's my fun fact for the day lol. Dugg
    • TJATL, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's why I have to yell, "Get back to work bums!" every time I pass a union picket/strike. It's funny hearing them try to respond and flipping me off as I'm heading down the road.
    • sspooner, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sure there is. I ALWAYS give the finger to the lame anti-war protesters in my area. I honk to grab their attention and then flip them the bird to show my disapproval.
  • horatiolust, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Stupid people should have to wear signs that just say, "I'm Stupid"
    Thank you Bill Engvall
  • IslandDog, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4Don't these people have jobs?
  • n8f8, on 10/10/2007, -5/+4Losers. Starve.
  • jason469, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2How foolish of them. Why be anti anything? why not pro something else? if you want Bush out, don't go on a hunger strike, get people to sign a petition, forward it to state representatives and start a movement, get media attention and talk about what needs to change instead of why "Bush sucks".

    The anti-______(insert whatever you hate) is retarded, we've seen anti-Bush protest and nothing, absolutely nothing, has come from it.

    It's time for a different game plan, one that doesn't involve just sitting on the sidelines with a protest sign.
    • senatorpjt, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Why start a petition? Nothing anyone does has made or will make any ***** difference. There's a reason these people are referred to as being "in power." Because you're not.
    • tsotha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Well, er, yeah. Because most people in the US don't want to see Bush removed from power, that's why. As Gerald Ford said "'High crimes' are whatever Congress says they are." If the Democrats really had the public support to remove the president, they would already have done it. But they don't.

      If you *really* want Bush removed from office you're gonna have to do something much harder than a hunger strike - you're gonna have to convince a large majority of your fellow countrymen that impeachment is warranted. But its much easier to label them "sheeple" and wallow in your supposed intellectual superiority.
  • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2You can really tell that Digg is overrun by leftist bury artists by looking down the right column.
  • horatiolust, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3"@ eburetto "They are going to starve to death"

    Thank God, it's about time."

    Now, if there were a way to prevent them from voting and breeding...
    • moin1097, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The person that is the focal point of this article is 90 and is losing her eyesight.
      I'd say nature took care of both of your concerns.
  • n8f8, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Hey, why don't the rest of you whiners join in?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 89 of 89 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.