What is Digg?84 Comments
- zeeeej, on 10/12/2007, -9/+67True conservatives (I'm not one) I can respect. They have principles.
The guys in power now are guided by greed and govern by fear. They don't care about America -- they merely try to use those of us who do. - daldredge, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24@Libberkey
One little problem with the Libertarian party is their stance on illegal immigration. Their position that their should be 100% open / unlimited immigration isn't exactly a vote getter. - TheKlaw, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16@grizwald
"how would it help anything to simply hand the election over to people that are so opposite of your views?"
If you read to the end of the article, you'd see the point he makes is that the process works better with different parties in control of the different branches of government. - gropo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19Indeed. Conservatives are at their best when they... what's the word I'm looking for? ... Conserve!
How these bozos in 2 branches of our federal government have worn the title for so long defies all logic. - Libberkey, on 10/12/2007, -9/+22For real conservatives on the web, see: http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/
Watch the NOW video "Votes for Sale," linked on-site.
For "real conservatives" on the ballot, see: Libertarian. - cprincipe, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13The worst thing about the two-party system is that it encourages people to think that the only way to protest is to sit out.
I think disaffected conservatives should vote libertarian, if only to freak out the Republican party when they see the Libertarian vote jump to something like (just a random figure) 20% of the vote. Far more effective than "sitting out." - Fejerro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11"3) Privatization of Social Security
Approximately 80% – 12.4 cents of the 15.3 cents – I pay in FICA taxes (see above) are Social Security contributions. Money I’ll never see. A rip-off if I’ve ever seen one."
Agreed. I would love to start writing off any taxes towards Social Security as a charitable donation on my tax return. Unless something unforseen and rather tragic happens to me, I'll never see that money again. - waynechng, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16No, the Fab Five are ***** because they're rude, dismissive, and disrespectful of others. As I said, political views aside, they're jerks.
- waynechng, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11What made you think that my comment was in anyway an attempt to discuss the points of the article? I was commenting on Hannity's bilious treatment of a listener who called in to the radio show to debate Hannity.
My opinion of the article, since you want to know, is that the writer's first two points are correct. For any 'conservative' to continue voting for this fiscally irresponsible administration is mind-numbing. As for the other points, I don't have enough background to criticize/encourage Social Security privatization, I'd buy American if American goods are better, and I believe everyone should go out and vote.
Happy now? - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Don't tell anyone to stay home. Hannity said the same thing last week and we blew a gasket. Everyone should go vote.
- iTorrey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9He isn't commanding you to sit out... he is explaining why he thinks you should sit out and not vote for Republicans who betrayed their so called ideals.
Remember it's Hannity whom a few days ago said to Cheney that he can't believe we are even debating the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act of 2006!
VERY conservative and a GREAT American.. excuse me.. I think I just threw up a little in my mouth. - Avogadro65, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11And the fact that he's lived in different places makes him insane...why?
I know some of those locations he was doing local radio, so he probably went to where he could find a job. - waynechng, on 10/12/2007, -10/+17Sean Hannity is an ***** period. Party or political affiliation, doesn't matter. Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, and Ann Coulter are just plain *****.
- Agrajag, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Did you read the article? He said conservatives should sit the election out, or not vote Republican. Republicans != Conservatives.
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16He's more of a dick than an *****.
- oricyst, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Its nice to see some reasonable debate here that doesnt involve mindless mocking of the president and the "evil" republicans. On that note as a registered republican i have to say that i agree with most of what was written there. I am either goin to vote democrat against any incubant republican and libertarian against any incubant democrat. Im sick of legislated morality and ridiculous spending on the right and the unimaginative and predictable left. Something has to give here.
- uForgot, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7What you failed to mention was that he dropped out of college to pursue a Career in Radio. I would assume that you conveniently placed the "..." in there to some how imply he couldn't hack it. At least be honest.....
- Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Of course you do! You have the option not to choose either - if you don't take it, that's your fault!
- chkltcow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7This assumes Libertarians can get on the ticket. In most places, that is unfortunately not the case. We're stuck in a 2 party system, forced to vote between chopping off our left foot or chopping off our right foot. Either choice sucks equally.
- gdm9000, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Um, the LewRockwell.com site lists 207 commentators on their site under the Columnists menu, and this is the opinion of one of them. Don't discredit the whole site based on this one person's opinion. Generally, I've found their commentators to be fairly well-informed...
- joybran, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@ daldredge
"One little problem with the Libertarian party is their stance on illegal immigration. Their position that their should be 100% open / unlimited immigration isn't exactly a vote getter."
That is the ideal, but as long as we're saddled with a welfare state, open immigration isn't at the top of any libertarian's list of priorities. The point of libertarianism is that you don't back off your principles just because they aren't vote getters or aren't practical at the moment. If you understand the principle behind open immigration, you might understand a little more about why the welfare system, as well as all other economic "intervention" by government, is so harmful. - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9a) The article is by Tony Kondaks, not Lew Rockwell.
b) Rockwell /is/ a libertarian. Kondaks here calls himself a Conservative. There are quite a few non-libertarians who write articles for LRC.
c) Not voting is /always/ the Right Thing - iTorrey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Olbermann is one of the few voices of ration and reason in this day and age.
I never thought I'd be reading articles by scholars talking about replacing the constitution ( http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/24/opinion/courtwatch/main2117497.shtml ) and hearing Hannity say that we shouldn't question the Patriot Act (which in Section 802 defines everyone in America as a terrorist since no burden of proof is needed when they say it only has to be appear as if you're a terrorist). How is Olbermann an ***** for standing up for the constitution? That is more than the NeoCon boot lickers can do. They claim to support the constitution and be "conservative" but they are the ones advocating torture, the end of habeas corpus for Americans and more!
Wake the ***** up - mumbler, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@littlebylittle
"You Cons are going down in a few days."
Did you RTFA? Apparently not. This guy's entire premise is that the Republicans are NOT conservative. So the "Cons" have already gone "down" as you put it. Perhaps you meant to say "Neocons" instead? - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Sure; wouldn't want to have waste energy trying to think, would you?
- boff, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9No, I think they're all a bunch of ass-hats. The whole damn lot of em.
- millyuns, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Lew Rockwell, a Democrat? I think you spilled some of your Kool-Aid!
- MercedRocks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7I hate to say it but this guy is dead on. The guys running the Rebublican party are not true conservatives. They mess with states rights every chance they get, look at MED Marijuana here in Cali, and they let the stupid DEMs and their own inertia let reform of social security die a slow death. Let the DEMs cal it privitization all they want, the truth of the matter is that it is OUR MONEY and we should be able to DO WITH IT AS PLEASE!
Anyways, I usually vote REP if for no other reason than the DEMs never seem to have a better alternative but, to tell you the truth Im pretty much sick of both.
Maybe we'll get lucky and a guy with some substance like Obama from Illinois will run in 08' ...who knows. - millyuns, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Excellent Idea!
- cramtod, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7> And before all of you (single white males) start saying it was just a tax cuts for the rich > this includes the $1,000 child tax credit and other incentives aimed at those of us with
> wives and children.
This in inaccurate. The Child Tax Credit was to revert to $700 in 2005. Instead, congress passed the Working Families Tax Relief Act of 2004 to keep the Child Tax Credit at $1,000 per qualifying child through 2010. Your credit was increased by $300 per child, not $1000. Your tax savings (assuming 25% tax rate on income) was only $75 per child. Was saving $75/year per child since 2004 worth destroying the fiscal security of the country?
BTW, this was not just a Republican issue. The Working Families Tax Relief Act of 2004 passed both the House and Senate on voice vote (overwhelming support from both Republicans and Democrats). - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Diggeral is about the least clever political epithet I have ever read.
- littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10Whatever. Hannity is a loud-mouthed, rude, simple-minded, thug who likes to act tough because he is behind a camera.
You Cons are going down in a few days. The Dems are going to take control of both houses and then it's ALL OVER. The American public will NEVER allow Cons to have control of all three branches again. Ever!
Enjoy your last few days of the pipe dream. - uForgot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5That's the point - these comments tend to degenerate into "You suck", "No you suck", "Democrats are stupid", "Republicans are Stupid". If that is the most you have to contribute to the discussion, why even bother? I get better commentary from my 3 year old son.
- Envark, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5No, you refuse to vote for them in this election to show that you're paying attention to their actions as much as their words. Hopefully, they will have cleaned house and learned their lesson by the next election. Rewarding bad behavior will only encourage bad behavior to continue.
- missoulasamd, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I agree completely, and this is exactly what I was going to post.
- TheKlaw, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5If you actually read the article, the point he makes is that when there is tension between the different branches of the federal government, i.e. when one party doesn't control them all, the budget gets balanced and we don't have enormous deficits.
- Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5And if you vote, you deserve the leader you get!
- Antiherome, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I am not a democrat but I lost any respect for Mr. Hannity when he defended the oil companies gouging practices. The proof is in the quarterly profits. I do not believe that as long as there are career politicians that we will ever have a government that will actually have the best interest of the people in mind. VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS!!!!
- Baddox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'm also a little puzzled that on one hand, some Conservative persona is met with Digg outrage a few days ago because he urged people to sit out an election rather than vote Democrat, but on this hand, it's fine for this guy to urge people to sit out rather than vote Republican. I'm pretty sure that the whole idea behind a Democratic Republic (i.e. voting for representatives) is that whoever you vote for is fine---and whoever gets the most votes wins. If you get a bad leader, it's not the voters' fault---that's just one of the inherent and necessary "lesser evils" of democracy over, say, a dictatorship.
and @cramtod:
Who would "get the message" if many people left their ballots blank? They simply wouldn't be counted, they'd probably be thrown away. There's no difference between not voting and leaving the ballot blank. - uForgot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Good god - Did I say anywhere within those comments you were attacking anyone within DIGG? My simple point is that by merely calling Hannity and Ass**** has nothing to do with the actual article that was posted and adds nothing to the conversation.
What I said still holds true - Go through every political post within Digg and a vast majority of the comments center around "Dem = GOOD/EVIL" "Rep = GOOD/EVIL" "W = LIAR", etc...
If that constitutes as comment degeneration (rather than simple statements about people being ass****s or d!**s) - than I guess I am guilty. - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm glad you threw Coulter in with the guys. I think she's a man anyway ....
- uForgot, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5@grooviekenn
Yeah, and maybe you should actually listen to the broadcast before commenting on it. The purpose of that segment was to show the absurdity of those out there that are calling for Conservatives to sit out the vote in protest this election by making the same style of arguments for the Democrats and the Left. - waynechng, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Firstly, I didn't attack anyone commenting on Digg. I merely stated the fact that Sean Hannity is an asshat, pardon my prior French, and in retrospect, I could have clarified what in the article made me think so but I didn't because I thought it was obvious.
You know, the only one who's degenerated the thread I started by name-calling has been you. Maybe you should go back to talking to your 3 year old. - revisrev, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9also @grizwald
If the Republicans get pushed out of control they will be forced to take a look at the situation and change their tactics. Perhaps we can even have, in the next election, situations where incumbent republicans don't get their party's nomination due to the fact that there is a much more conservative candidate.
Now that I've said my piece there I'd like to agree with the writer of the article about Bill Clinton. He was a damned superhero. I don't really care who sucks him off, and neither should anyone else, save his wife and daughter. The problem with today's conservatives is that the religious right has moved in and deluded the entire message.
The message is supposed to be "Leave us alone and let us live." The message has become "Jesus is Lord." The only Republicans that are happy with our party lately are the religious wackos.
I was going to vote all Dems down the line, but if I abstain I have less of a chance of contracting Socialism. - cramtod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3> Where's the faux diggeral outrage at this jackass telling Repubs not to vote?
The Republicans should vote. If they don't agree with any of the candidates they should leave the vote blank or write-in "None of the above". Not voting sends the wrong the message (I don't care). Casting a ballot and voting for neither candidate sends a message, a strong one if enough people do the same thing. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Is this the same guy who I heard has a gay dating service?
- pabster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And so are you, *****.
- uttles, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7MediaMatters is the worst of all types of propaganda: the kind that claims to be correcting propaganda, but is actually just spreading more.
Hannity was running his Man on the Street Thursdays interviews where he gets his assistant to talk to random people on the street in New York City. He was asking them simple questions like "who is the vice president?" and "do you know who Donald Rumsfield is?" and the people were constantly clueless, most had no idea and said things like "I don't really care who, doesn't affect me." Then Hannity would ask them what party they were and they all said Democrat. He asked them who the Democratic candidate for house or senate was from their district and again they didn't know. So at the end of this segment Hannity simply said that if you don't know anything about any of the government or any of the candidates, please don't go vote and cancel out the votes of informed voters.
Now, I know this really pisses off Democrats because they rely on three main factions: moonbats like digg users, votes they've paid for, and uninformed voters that become useful idiots by buying into the general sentiment they see on TV. "Letterman is dissing the Republicans, looks like I'm gonna vote a Democratic ticket." Now most people argue "but nobody is that stupid..." well, you're wrong, there are plenty of people who are that stupid, and Sean Hannity proved it. - killinger777, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8"Conservatives shouldn’t vote for Republicans who can’t keep their promises about significantly reducing taxes."
This point is completely illogical.
The Republicans didn't "significantly" reduce your taxes, so you are advocating replacing them with people who would RAISE your taxes? Doesn't add up. - FTLJohnson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@daldrege
Yeah, armbands with yellow stars.... That was a vote getter. I agree, the fact that Libertarians don't get votes over their stance on immigration is definitely a problem. -
Show 51 - 83 of 83 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is