What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
165 Comments
- Wacer, on 10/12/2007, -7/+144They should get rid of him and get rid of the Patriot Act.
- chicoer2001, on 10/12/2007, -8/+107Gonzales will be out by next Friday
- ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -8/+67Impeach these ***** already!!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+56Monkey - use your brains instead of parrotting neocon talking points - the controversy is that BushCo fired the attys IN THE MIDDLE OF HIS TERM not at the beginning like most administrations.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/12/2007, -2/+52Yoo is one of the main architects of the system to declare people "enemy combatants" and strip them of their rights. He would be much, much worse than Gonzales, so I hope that doesn't happen. I wouldn't say he's a nutjob though, he is more of a morally-deficient legal genius.
- Nocturnal, on 10/12/2007, -5/+52Why digg him down? Why the hell would you want the Patriot Act?
- Dumbledorito, on 10/12/2007, -4/+47@ monkey: Are you seriously the only one left that hasn't had why that was different explained to you?
- trghpy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+42Huh, what an odd coincidence that all the prosecutors with balls to do something have been fired...
- flernk, on 10/12/2007, -3/+39@Bamont
"Tell me - does this affect YOU and YOUR daily life?"
And Lewinski scandal affected your life exactly... how? You're a hypocrite. - totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32"you'll see that Bush was just the first in a long line of President's to be scrutinized by fire from the trollies of the internet."
The first? wtf? Just because you weren't on the Internet before 2000, doesn't mean the rest of us weren't. - flernk, on 10/12/2007, -6/+35The only people who would dig him down, ironically, are the same ones who cry "purgery!" every time Clinton's name is mentioned. Purgery is somehow alright if you're lying for the right cause, I guess.
- totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -10/+38Holy *****, does every ***** neanderthal need this re-explained every ***** Digg thread?
- LukeSkope, on 10/12/2007, -7/+34Moron Monkey. For the last ***** time, what Clinton did is SOP, but the firing of 8 attorneys during a president's tern, ones that he appointed at the beginning of his term, for political reasons is unprecedented. *****, I think that has been said like 1000 times on Digg this week and people still push this Clinton *****.
edit: beat me to the punch. - Hillsfar, on 10/12/2007, -4/+29It's expected for U.S. Attorneys to be let go when an administration changes hands. They've finished serving out their term of office, so to speak.
It's not expected for U.S. Attorneys to be let go in mid-stream - especially when it appears this is apparently because some did NOT prosecute Democratic politicians hard enough, and because some DID prosecute Republican politicians the White House didn't want them to.
Basically these U.S. Attorneys were let go for following the path of justice. - porcupus, on 10/12/2007, -6/+31remember, it has absolutely nothing to do with Bush and Cheney. They are just innocent bystanders that had no idea this was happening.
- ThisBlows, on 10/12/2007, -6/+31Well, he wouldn't have lied about a bj if she was really hot.
- UtuOnYou, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29The_Red_Monkey,
Were any of them investigating Clinton or Dems at the time? NO!!! So don't whine "well Clinton did it and no one said anything". You twerp. - Shiftgood, on 10/12/2007, -4/+27nblsavage - i like that term 'parrotting'. its really a good description of conservative thinking...err... not thinking...err. you know what I mean.
- shawnfassett, on 10/12/2007, -7/+30The scary thing is if the Admin tries to push John Yoo on us. This guy is a f'ing nutjob with the education cred that may get him confirmed.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25Just to clarify, I wasn't saying Gonzales shouldn't be ousted, I was saying it would be a tragedy for Yoo to become AG.
- Shawnosaurus, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25I second the "Impeach these ***** already!!" motion. There you have it, done!
It's so frustrating to watch the daily barrage of ***** coming from the white house yet no one seems to ever do much about it. Are we that hamstrung that we can't get the dishonest criminals the ***** out of power? Anyone? Bueller? Paging someone with the power and balls to clean this aisle the ***** up. - porcupus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21wow sarcasm is lost on everyone
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18The Repukes will just find another nazi nutjob to replace him. The GOP is full of them.
- eleventybillion, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19How can we have such a bulk of evidence that this administration has failed us, and still not have impeached Bush and Cheney yet?
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills... - piznut, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Bush-fanboi rebuttal to all rational arguments pointing out a fallacy or mistake in the administration.
Step 1) But Clinton......[find some loosely similar reference]
Step 2) Repeat
Accountability my ass. - orp2000, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16@xlar54
We're angry about ignorance, for one thing; on the part of the people.
Regarding the Shrub (RIP Molly Ivins) administration, we're angry about:
- corruption
- war mongering
- lack of integrity
- the oligarchical puppetry from Big Oil
- war profiteering
- Goebbels-like manipulation of the American people (and the putrid cynicism that makes these assclowns think it's ok)
- Karl Rove's apparent deal with the devil (only way to explain why he wasn't gone long ago)
- no-bid contracts to Cheney's company (Halliburton)
- countless lives lost in a pretend war on terrorism, with no end in sight
- lying to congress
- lying to the American people
- non-thinking intransigent positions
- win-at-all-cost mentality with no pay-off except to make the rich richer
- fiscal irresponsibility, while throwing that charge at the Dems
- an attitude of "we'll step on whoever won't do our bidding for us"
- the idea that getting a BJ is worse than all of this
...need I go on? Because there's lots more.
Can you keep up now Sparky? C'mon, citizenship in a Democracy is serious business - we are the watchdogs, we can't be sleeping in the job. - jereh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13That is because Clinton fired all of them at the beginning of his term, regardless of what their loyalties were, when it is expected that an incoming administration will fire them and hire a new set of attorneys. Bush is firing them because they are not doing what he tells them to do, they are instead pursuing justice and being punished for it.
- Hillsfar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14@geekee
"Former U.S. Attorney H.E. "Bud" Cummins lost his job in Arkansas to make room for Tim Griffin, a Republican political operative and a protege of presidential aide Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser."
(Remember, this is Tim Griffin, who put together the list of voters in Florida he wanted the Republicans to challenge back in 2004: overwhelmingly Black, poor, student, soldiers.)
"Cummins resigned without protest, but told The Los Angeles Times that he now wonders if his ouster was related to his corruption investigation against Republican officials in Missouri. Administration officials haven't explained why they were so intent on putting Griffin in the job."
"Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, who was fired in New Mexico, has been outspoken in his belief that politics played a role in his ouster."
"Iglesias said he felt 'leaned on' when two prominent New Mexico Republicans, Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson, separately called him about the investigation. At the time, Wilson was in danger of losing her congressional seat, and Republicans were struggling to avoid a Democratic takeover in Congress."
(If you'll remember, it is against Congressional rules on ethics to even contact a U.S. Attorney regarding progress on a pending issue. Both Domenici and Wilson backtracked and said they weren't trying to influence him.)
Source of quotes:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/16919399.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nation - verifex, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17Did anyone expect anything less from a Bush-appointee? Bush has all the wisdom of a rock, why would you expect him to appoint an attorney general (Mr. Gonzales, in this case) with any respect for laws or ethical integrity? Man, I wish we could have our presidential election a little early.
- 3n7r0py, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. BUSH/CHENEY WILL NOT BE IMPEACHED BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A SAY IN A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G. We the People of this Nation are F*cked.
- GeneralFault, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Bush may have not lied under oath, but he has lied at the State of the Union and *knew he was doing it*.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16599094/
To sum up:
In 2000, a break-in was reported at the Ambassador for Niger's office in Italy.
The only thing that was stolen was an official stamp and letterhead.
A person was found, tried and convicted for the crime, a cleaning lady who was also an ex-Italian intelligence operative.
Later in Feb of 2002, The prime minister of India gave a document to Dick Cheney, which was apparently a receipt from the Niger government to Saddam regarding purchase 500 tons of yellow-cake uranium.
That document was immediately given to the CIA who after only days determined that the document was a hoax (was not hard, the person that "signed" it was already dead and some of the Niger "officials" were not even in office any more.
The document was archived until later in 2002 when the Bush administration re-retrieved the document and gave it to British intelligence (who had already received it from Italy but had also determined that it was fake). Shortly after, Bush went to the State of the Union and claimed that "British intelligence has determined that Saddam is seeking yellow-cake uranium". But he ALREADY KNEW that the British intelligence was based on already debunked information that HE gave to them.
Wilson was sent to Niger to verify this document and easily came to the conclusion that it was false (but Bush already knew that). When Wilson went to the Bush administration and told them that the information was false, they wanted nothing to do with him (after all, they had a war to start). Wilson, became upset and decided to release his information to the public (he wanted to prevent war). The Bush administration tried to cover their asses by slandering the messenger of the truth (the way they always do) and Plame was outed.
This is all public info now people. If you still want to support Bush, well your hopeless. Who else would you have supported in history? Nixon? Castro? Hitler? Why would you have not supported them? How is Bush any different? - jimsf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Sadly I worry most about the US population becoming complacent about all the lies from this administration. How is this different than anything else the administration has done to this point? Shocked? Sadly no. Sad? Very much so. This administration has single handedly soiled the honor of the Oval office and this country... more so than any blow job or stay in the Lincoln bedroom ever did.
- ThisBlows, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15dugg down for posting the same ***** over and over again...That talking points memo has expired.
- gruvsf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12For all you "Bill Clinton did ______, so why can't Bush?", check the Patriot Act provision that was slipped in right after 9/11:
http://uspolitics.about.com/b/a/207986.htm (no, it's not a ThinkProgress link!).
Basically, with the provision in place, all US attorneys replaced no longer need to be confirmed by the Senate, unlike Clinton's US Attorney appointees, so stop using the lame right-wing talking points about Bill Clinton! If you listened to them, everything bad that happened in the last 6 years was Bill Clinton's fault. - gwinerreniwg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Yet another Karl Rove casualty. I swear to god, that man IS the devil himself.
- an0nymous, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16So, when Gonzo does gets ousted, how long before he shows up on Fox news as a special commentator?
How does "The Oliver North, Mark Fuhrman, Alito Gonzales News Hour" strike you? - creepermclurker, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13@The Red Monkey
Do you really not understand the difference? - teaBagger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10
/BEST MORTAL KOMBAT VOICE
- FINISH HIM! - milomilomilo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12Do all neo-cons act as crazed and paranoid as you?
You sound like you wanna beat democrats up on the playground, or as if they were your enemies O_o
WTF is wrong with you? - killthepoodle, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"Awwwwwrrrrrrrkkkkkk.....Clinton did it! Clinton did it! Awwwwwrrrrrrrkkkkkkkk"
-The Republican parrot - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Difference is, the appointments Clinton made had to go before the senate(republicans at the time) after 180 days. Bush has decided to use a clause in the patriot act which says that the president can fire US attorneys without senate confirmation. The clause was snuck in at the last minute. The patriot act was supposed to help fight the war on terrorism, how is firing Bush's political foes and apointing politically friendly replacements indefinitely fighting terrorism? In fact, many would say it's a slide towards a dicatorship. Fortunately congress will overturn this patriot act provision, fighting against republicans who apparently don't like democracy, and force his appointments to go before a senate, which means his appointments, some of whom are buddies with Karl Rove, will actually have to be moderate.
- Babykitkat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8These People Stand to Close to our Flag
- andrgo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Here are people I can name OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD that either lied under oath or committed a crime while working at or in relation to the White House.
The Clinton administration:
* Bill Clinton (lied about an affair, of all things)
* Sandy Berger (illegally stole classified documents)
The Bush administration:
* Bush
* Rove
* Foley
* Haggard
* Rumsfeld
* Abramoff
* Hastert
* Brown
* Delay
* Bolton
* Reynolds
* Frist
* Santorum
* Gonzalez (FRESHLY ADDED TODAY!)
Oh and Bush still has another 675 days in the White House. - tommyhanks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9To continue Pfhreak's comment:
The Democrat's also need to get some leadership who have (figurative) balls. I would honestly be surprised if Bush is given so much as a letter of censure for his or his administration's actions. I hate shady politcal ***** as much as the next guy. I also hate people who talk a good game but never follow through. Where is this miraculous change we were supposed to see with this new congress? If things keep going this way, it's the Repbulican's game to lose. - iomatic, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8"I didn't even read teh artical or reviewed the issues... BUT YOUR ALL LIBRUL SOCIALISTS!!!"
(misspellings intentional)
'tard. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Bills in house and senate that repeal the controversial patriot act power grab:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-214
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-580 - WildBil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"We the People" did not Re-Elect Bush, He lost the popular Vote if you didn't notice.
The Courts put him back in, or were you not paying attention? - lunasunshine, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11@ geekee
you do realize that he did the same thing in 2001 as clinton and that these 8 were *already appointed by bush* and a completely different political maneuver - iomatic, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12This is far too complicated for Conservatives to swallow.
Please go back to reading Dr. Seuss. - kefs, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11NEXT!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 167 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