What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
137 Comments
- rhabd0mancer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+36Fred Thompson is a visiting fellow at AEI.
Vote for Fred Thompson if you want 4 more years of quagmire in Iraq. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+27Reminder to American voters: Don't put people who are ideologues into power. Reality doesn't matter to them, only their ideology.
- mishaco, on 10/10/2007, -3/+29is anyone here surprised ?
- hawkeye17, on 10/10/2007, -4/+25Bush caught in another lie. Go figure. The man is a disgrace to the Office of President.
- johnhummel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+19That might be the scariest thing about this group. During the 80's Rumsfield was convinced that the Soviets had secret super-quiet submarines, and when evidence failed to show, he said that proved that they existed (since they were so quiet). Later on, it was WMD's in Iraq: the fact that the UN Weapon's Inspectors found no weapons when they went in during 2003, and then when we didn't find them after the US went in "proved" that Saddam had hidden them rather well.
Over and over again, it's the same thing with these guys: if the facts don't fit, well, that proves it, because that means that somebody hid it really well! It's like talking to a conspiracy theorist who claims their non-evidence is proof (since if there was actual proof, it wouldn't be a conspiracy).
In the meantime, Bush says "al Qaeda in Iraq" 90 times in a 29 minute speech on Tuesday, ignoring that before we invaded Iraq that a) Saddam hated al Qaeda, b) al Qaeda hated Saddam, and c) there was no evidence other than 1 guy running around getting a surgery that al Qaeda was anywhere other than in Afganistan and Pakistan (which, if you ask the neocons, proves that there was a link, since after all, Saddam had such control over his country he wouldn't have allowed one guy to have a surgery, right! Right!).
I don't want to engage in hyperbole, but isn't the trait of a sociopath the ability to ignore all evidence and twist it as proof of their beliefs? If that's the case, this administration fits the bill to a T. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13"Reality has a liberal bias."
Thanks Mr Colbert. - forgiste, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Giggity Giggity
- kethraal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12TheEditor1:
You know, even if you were right, the fact that you refer to people as "libturds" destroys any possible credibility you might have. If you act like a child, then we'll just treat you as such and ignore you. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I am Jack's *complete* lack of surprise.
(Disclosure: I also work at a think tank up here in DC...sort of a rival to AEI. AEI used to be a bastion of old school, pragmatic conservatism...until the neocons took it over.) - Typhoon2009, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Hey I'm an armchair 2nd Lieutenant in BF2, can I command stuff in the war now?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Maybe you aren't aware of the way Digg works. Articles only land on the front page if readers "digg" the articles. The fact that you don't like a news source that continually lands on the front page of Digg means YOU are out of step with the rest of us. It doesn't reflect on the news source, it reflects on YOU.
You can always go hang out with the freepers if you don't like reality. - InetRoadkill, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11For those who don't know, AEI is the parent of PNAC and is the neo-con headquarters. They are the ones responsible for getting us into the Iraq war. They pull Bush's strings from behind the scenes.
- rinkjustice, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Actually, I saw PBS Frontline's documentary "End Game" that talks exactly about that. It's online if anyone wants to watch it (and I think every American should).
- havesometea, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11And people are criticizing soldiers for deserting this war? Please.
- Waiting2awake, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12 Now America unite against the evil overlords, just like the movies....
*crickets chirping* - Stormflux, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9The reason you can't get away from Bush-bashing is because the man is both evil/insane AND in charge of America for some reason. Remove one of those conditions, and the Bush-bashing will stop. Until then, everyone has cause to be concerned.
- kidford, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8bush keeps saying that his strategery is based on recommendations from his generals on the ground. he clearly means his generals in the armchairs.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7We're LAUGHING at you.
- havesometea, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7They are also regular commenters on NPR. And rarely ever called on their ***** on those programs.
- cloudyprison, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Damn beat me to it.
- MadN, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Who wants to bet that the Bushies have a terrorist event planned to happen before the "September report", that will allow martial law.
- MeanGeno, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I'm not surprised by anything Bush or his gang does anymore.
But then again, I do not get how more than 50 million morons voted for this looser in 04. This is what you get when you vote for a person whose mentality of "Good versus Evil" is destroying this country and making it more dangerous.
January 20th, 2009 can't come soon enough. - johnhummel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6A lot of bad can be done in 16 months. Should we just turn a blind eye to people who are lying to us still, who continue to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on a venture that does not make us safe? Should we continue to have soldiers fighting in a place that does us no good, instead of having them chase down the people actually responsible for killing over 3,000 civilians in one day?
So far, the political system is proving *not* to work, when people can refuse to testify about their possible wrongdoing. And I'm not just going to put my hands over my ears, close my eyes, and rock back and forth saying "It's all right, it's all right" and hope it goes away. - scottc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6If you didn't give a ***** you wouldn't be wasting your time posting here. It's obvious that you care.
- williamdyer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7We have to keep pounding the ***** out of Bush and every neocon still breathing, or we will end up in a war with Iraq.
- allan17, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Sure thing, you can replace the next General Bush doesn't agree with.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5If you don't care what people think, then why are you posting? Why are you replying to me? You have failed. The war is lost, the people you supported have been shown to be incompetent, and you can't handle this truth. It is you who is weak. It is you who is the ass kisser. You are afraid. Your fear drives you to post here, to protest, to whine & cry. We're laughing at you.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Obama, maybe. Hillary and Edwards are populist shills who will say whatever they can to get into/keep power.
- alacrity2005, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Yeah, reality has a distinctly liberal bias. Bury it as spam. If you block those "liberal" sites you'll be left with michellemalkin.com, redstate.com and rush limbaugh and you can really get your "news" unfiltered by any of that messy "reality" and "truth" so popular with all the kids these days.
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Islamic Terrorists don't care about ME. They don't care about YOU. They don't want to kill YOU. They want to install fear and guess what, their efforts on 9/11 have been pretty effective, don't you think? "OMG Terror Alert Level!" "OMG standard dry run investigation could be a prelude to attack!" "OMG WMDs!" "OMG Litebrite!" "OMG..."
- Stormflux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Bush eats a baby on live TV. House Democrats condemn the action with a non binding resolution.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Because none of these people are what they are cracked up to be. Rice, in particular, is an expert in Russian affairs, but that is all. These people don't have the credentials that they are supposed to have.
- Stormflux, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I would go even farther: Bush has become the 9/11 terrorists' personal advertising agency. Just in case we forget to be terrified, Bush is always there to remind us. Terrorism works by inciting overreaction.
- bubbadoo989, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Never before has one man DONE so little for so many.... of course, he has damaged the country and it's reputation, sent 3-4k US citizens and countless Iraqi civilians to their deaths... but in reality, we all took $300.00 and some small tax cuts, and traded it NEOcon hell.
- williamdyer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4PNAC also designed Israel's strategy, including the failed war in Lebanon. The U.S. government has been hijacked, and is not acting in this nation's interests.
- havesometea, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You sound like a parody of a Bush supporter but somehow I think you are really serious. That is the scary thing about you 25%'ers.
- Terr01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Well, Powell claims (now that he can't change things) that he was hustled along with the rest of the agenda, and I'm not entirely sure what makes Rice so good.
(Kimchi!) - williamdyer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4If we stopped sending cluster bombs, jet fuel, and 20% of Israel's budget to Israel every year, the Arabs would forget about us in about two nanoseconds.
- dafragsta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Are you a member of the Skull and Bones society or perhaps a tenacious contributor to all church bake sales/functions?
- lev606, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The PBS Frontline espisode, Endgame, does an excellent job of detailing the motivations for the current troop "surge". Watch it and learn -- http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/endgame/view/
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"If you want to equate awareness with being frightened, go ahead." -- The Airport "have you been in control of your baggage the entire time" is awareness; don't let strangers mess/tamper with your luggage, you don't know what they might try. Added, intelligent searches at check points could be awareness. Banning bottled liquids (water and breast milk included) because it's POSSIBLE the "evil Terrorists" have liquid explosives is a fear tactic. It's also possible they've stuffed C4 into a ballpoint pen casing (ban writing instruments). It's also possible to smuggle a handgun inside of a stuffed toy (ban stuffed toys or anything else that cannot be opened and checked). It's also possible shoes can be ignited and cause an explosion...if only you had a lighter (ban shoes and lighters! Well, shoes'd be impossible, so we just take them off and wave a metal detector over them; and lighters just recently got unbanned). It's also possible... What, exactly, is NOT possible? Everything, everywhere, could be used by someone to do something that might potentially cause the destruction or death of something or someone somewhere at sometime. Are we aware, then, that the world is dangerous? Can we resume diligent investigative work rather than ban, shun, and avoid anything that might be potentially dangerous? Any bag, suitcase, backpack, or other container left sitting somewhere, these days, can be automatically assumed to be a IED or other Explosive/Biological/Nuclear weapon not because you have any reason to suspect it's an IED or other device, but just because "you never know where the Terrorists are going to strike next! YOU are their next victim." This is awareness? You don't feel that small twinge of uncertainty, now? "Well is it dangerous? Should I report it? What if it is a bomb? People could die..." Again, anything anywhere at anytime could by anyone be a threat. That is not awareness, that is fear mongering and it is BS.
- Waiting2awake, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So then you think that maybe Digg hates freedom?
- spudhead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So George Bush's choices, with all the resources available to the President of the Unites States, were tree and squirrel lovers or the AEI?
You have an interesting way of looking at the world.
- BlacklabelSAR, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So if thinkprogress said that the world was round and water was wet, you would automatically reject what was stated?
- azAZ09, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I agree. I suspect that the numbers are off and rampant voter fraud occurred, but outside of this one well researched article, I have not seen this pursued in the press. http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen.
- azAZ09, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You’re equating not being blinded by the republican ideology, with being blinded by progressive ideology. It seems like you are falling back to the "if you're not with us you're agin' us" mentality that dominates republican posts-- painting everything that doesn't agree with your ideology --even facts-- as “liberal”. The really sad thing is that you can't see how morally *****-up that is. As a registered independent who was once considered “right-leaning”, I find this attitude repugnant. If you really value things like limited government, American economic strength, leading the world technologically, and security from terrorism, and a strong middle-class you would see how right-wing ideology has failed this country in every respect. Rampant out-of-control corporatism is far worse for this country than liberalism.
The total list of scandals under the republican ideologues has now reached 227 ( http://www.netrootsmass.net/Hugh/Bush_list.html ). Anyone who has been paying a moderate amount of attention to politics and is against clear violations of legal and moral principles is being labeled as a left or a "moonbat" by your estimation. While pleading for others to be open to your point of view, you are showing how severed from reality you have become. Also, by using liberalism as a put-down and repeating the term “moonbat", you are showing how you are simply repeating talking points thrown into the echo-chamber by right wing pro-fascist hacks--just as you are accusing anti-fascist diggers of doing. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3All that "expertise" and they still lost to men in dresses and sandals. Again.
I'll bet the Iraqis who are killing invaders today don't even have PhDs... the nerve of some people. - dafragsta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Amen brother. Professional politicians, both of them. I'd vote for a Ron Paul-P/Obama-VP platform though.
- scottc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"Digg should just block the domains from being submitted." If you want to get your news and opinions that way then go get them from Fox or CNN. The rest us want a chance to read things not approved by an editor or a censor.
- tidu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Anyone ever notice that in training on BF2 (it's in the demo too) the narrator that explains all the game's functions sounds EXACTLY like Bush? I loled
-
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is