What is Digg?129 Comments
- MarkDykeman, on 10/10/2007, -5/+57:: plays world's tiniest violin, then smashes it ::
- Michael9636, on 08/04/2008, -5/+41Rove leaving the White House is scary. He can now go back to Texas and devote all his energy toward destroying the democratic nominee for President, who might likely be Hillary Clinton. Remember the destruction of John Kerry - the Swiftboat ads? That will be child's play compared to what Rove will do to Clinton. His sole focus is now on keeping the Republican party in the White House in 2008. This terrifies me!
- gwinerreniwg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+29Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think think Rove is done with Bush, not the other way around. Rove is off to find his new Bush-like protege for the Republican ticket in '08. That man is pure Svengali evil-ness
- nofrak1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21I don't know that Rove's departure is as important as some are making it out to be. His primary job was winning elections, which he did with a very high success rate. And remember, he almost pulled out the 2006 elections. There's just not much left for him to do there.
- yutt, on 10/10/2007, -7/+28Listen you ***** idiots. "Lame duck" is not some random word you use against politicians you don't like. It has a very specific meaning, which is *never* properly used on digg.
A "lame duck" is an elected official that is serving out their term ***after another official has already been elected to replace them.*** Bush will not be a lame duck until after a new president is elected. Stop spreading this ignorant use of a term.
For the record: Bush is an idiot. Iraq quagmire. O'Reilly is a fathead. Etc. - skytoil, on 10/10/2007, -9/+24I predict that If we get another Republican President this country is going to be *****.
- twinklyJesus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Good. The sooner Clinton is destroyed the sooner a legitimate, honest democrat candidate can take the lead.
- Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17Rove was the brain and a trusted wall protecting the President. The wall has fallen but another is being built. There is nothing stopping him from continuing to be his brain however, the President can speak to whom he wants.
- Kinkistyle, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10From the American Heritage dictionary:
lame duck n.
1.
a. An elected officeholder or group continuing in office during the period between failure to win an election and the inauguration of a successor.
b. An officeholder who has chosen not to run for reelection or is ineligible for reelection.
2. An ineffective person; a weakling.
So yes. Bush is technically a lame duck because of term limits AND he is a lame duck because he is an ineffective person and a moral and mental weakling. - vroom101, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7It's a mistake to underestimate this current administration.
- gropo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Sure, cling to that fantasy. It sure seems to be the current marching orders talking point being spewed by your feel-good media outlets.
Here's what I'll watch and see: Continued Iraq quagmire, more and more talk of draft reinstatement. Increasing anti-Republican nervousness. Bush approval rating slipping below 25%. "but-but-but Democongress is wrong! wrong!" will only counter that ***** for so long... - gropo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8...Unless it's the mythical Ron Paul fairy who will wave his magical wand and make the Republican party stand for honesty and integrity once again.
- CincyGuy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8The major news media continues to call Rove "boy genius" and "Bush's brain" despite the fact that Karl Rove has turned out to be a complete and utter failure and has destroyed the Republican party's chances to dominate American politics for years to come. Thumping the bible and extending our military empire into Iraq and leading America closer and closer to fascism has destroyed our standing in the world and left us completely bankrupt. So why has the news media failed to report this accurately?
- whatthefu, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8I'll agree with this when Cheney gets out.
- OldBear34, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Rove was and well may continue to be the spokesman and planner for evil, but plenty of evil remains in Bush's lame duck administration. May God help the country if the Demo's don't win in 2008. We need Barack Obama.
- meechwings, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Did you read the article you posted?
"The recommendation would allow U.S. commanders in the field to turn over security functions to Iraqi units, and redeploy them to other hot spots or as reserve forces, according to the report."
Those troops aren't going home any time soon. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5OK. So he's just lame.
- gropo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7'Huge Democratic victory' = razor thin margin in the Senate, slightly larger margin in the House.
Let's examine the way almost all Republicans in either wing are so lockstepped with Bush's destructive agenda that majority votes to fix said blunders are almost impossible to attain. - diggface5000, on 10/10/2007, -11/+16MC ROVE AINT NUTTIN TO ***** WIT
MC ROVE AINT NUTTIN TO ***** WIT - gropo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Ahh, "more and more talk of draft reinstatement" passes through the knuckle-dragger filter as 'ZOMG THEY WILL BRING BACK TEH DRAFT.' No, it's quite undeniable that "more and more talk of draft reinstatement" will occur. It's equally undeniable that such talk will not reflect well on Republican (and Democratic) war-supporters.
P.S. linking to Faux News reports is the equivalent of stating "My IQ is no higher than 100 by any institutional measure" - ElwoodHerring, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4What do you mean "Going to be"?
- MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Are you kidding me? They won't touch her until after the primary. Why would you waste your time attacking a candidate just to get them out of the race? The way to win is to attack her when the only choices are her or the Republican nominee. Then when she's ruined, the Republican wins, because the other Dems are already irrelevent due to the primary loss.
Elementary political strategy. - n1kon82, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4It doesn't matter - democrat or republican. Nothing will change until people remove their heads from their asses and vote a third party. I'm so sick of the two party dominance in this country and the assbags who continually get elected to run it.
- asaturn, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So now that Bush is a "lame duck" does that mean congress will quit pussy-footing around as if he's got tons of power? Probably not.
- gwinerreniwg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3LOL - haven't you been following politics over the last decade, haskinb84? Its not just the Dems who like to raise taxes. Who do you think is going to have to pay for this fiasco of a war in Iraq? Just because you're hand isn't on the rudder when your ship hits an iceberg, doesn't mean you didn't steer it there in the first place!!
- Nougat, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Rove was subpoenaed, because he's an advisor to the president. Now he's not an advisor to the president; he can tell the president anything he likes with near impunity. Previously, if he advised the president to break (or bend, depending on your political leaning) the law, he could be held responsible. Now he cannot.
This only increases Mr. Rove's power, and by extension, the power of this administration. - thekid42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Actually, "lame duck" can have several meanings, as cptl pointed out. Also, just because you call people "***** idiots" doesn't always mean you're right. Why don't you do some reading before calling people names: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lame_duck_%28politics%29
- diggtomanjeri, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Rove's departure doesn't really mean much for the Bush presidency, it was lame-ducked as soon as immigration reform failed as that was Bush's last major initiative. Rove's said repeatedly he's not interested in Presidential politics, he and Bush were long time friends which is why they ended up together and Rove's focus was on Supreme Court Judges and they lucked out and got two (thank you very much Sandra Day O'Conner for quitting during the Bush presidency, what were you thinking?). Rove will most likely do what he did before Bush's run for Governor which is get hard right judges elected and now that his reach isn't just in Texas, he as influence over our judicial process across the country (just look at the US Atty scandal for a mere sampling of what's to come with him). Bush's presidency won't change, but our judicial system just might.
- mikemil828, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4At least Rove has an exit strategy, too bad the American Military doesn't
- Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2you'll have to ignore the political section completely. they spam crookandliars.com *****, thinkprogress.com ***** and rawstory.com ***** incessantly.
- Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2on calls from outside the country when originating from known terrorist locations. horrible isnt it.
- chris9902, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4if he goes down he's taking at least 2 people with him... before he can reload again.
- kamisama, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2He is referring to that silly rap act Rove did at a correspondents dinner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln5RD9BhcCo - Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2hes really tearing it up at like 3% in the polls. its a lock!
- cptl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Not necessarily. It can also mean someone who is nearing the end of his term because they cannot run again due to term limits...regardless of if a successor has been elected.
- Waiting2awake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2True - but just thinking out loud here... but if he was the presidents aid and something...bad...happened to him wouldn't that charge be worse than if just a simple civilian had something.....bad...happen to them?
Like maybe a hunting trip... - Kelgann, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9FTA: "Wouldn't you love to track the phone lines this morning from the various campaigns?" Bennett said, smiling. "I wonder if any Democrats might call him?"
I'd bet some good money that all the democratic candidates have massive wiretap programs already associated with them. Maybe, just maybe, the president will let a few good Bushies have an orgy of illegal information disclosure, for Little Rovie's birthday?! - evilregis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2They've been planning the swiftboating of Hillary for 8 years. If she gets the nod, this is going to be one nasty election.
- DiggsOnlyJew, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Q: "Why is he getting dugg down?" A: "He's making perfect sense."
You answered your own question... - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I agree, I think they will help her win the primary, because they view her as the easiest candidate to beat.
- Konrad9, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sorry, but Lame Duck means Congress has the balls to do ***** the president doesn't like.
Last time I checked, Congress is still Bush's lapdog. - martalli, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Maybe this will begin the full flowering of the Cheney presidency. We all know he has been important, if not central, up till now. However, with Rove out, the only leader left is Cheney.
- DebtOn2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2If Bush is a lame duck, why does he keep getting his way? (You know about war and wiretapping...)
- gropo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3P.P.P.S. I learned French on my neighborhood street in Switzerland beginning at age 4. Something tells me I can pronounce the word 'faux,' and all other surrender monkey words with a hell of alot more authenticity than you, though I might be wrong... A disclaimer you embarrassingly neglected to add in your P.P.S.
- MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Here's a clue:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYZre8kEsuw - Zarchon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The WMD issue is only a big deal among those who would never vote Republican anyway. Just as those on the far right understand that "world" intelligence agencies backed up the WMD story at the time. Some of the fence sitters may have fallen for the WMDs were a lie scenario poushed by the left, but as a whole, at least among people who actually vote, the left calling Bush a liar about WMDs just didn't play out in the elections. Get off this dead horse and start beating another.
In 1998 Bil (he's your god) Clinton said that Iraq had WMDs. In 2002 he said the same thing. Saddam actually USED some of those WMDs on the Kurds. So, where the hell did those weapons go genius? Oh wait, I forgot. Iraq never had WMDs. Right. Thank you, nothing to see here. Move along. - n1kon82, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Nice typical reply. Is that your response to anyone who voices a complaint about the country? Very insightful.
P.S. - I'd love to. - gropo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I sleep just fine at night knowing "liberal values" will win in the end, the propagation and success of our species and the planet relies on that fact, and the "free market" is quickly coming to terms with it.
Intellectually berating uppity mouth breathers merely comes as a public service. But thanks anyways for your concern. - mlvassallo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Why is it only the good guys that get assassinated?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 127 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is