digg

Join DiggAbout

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

See the original image at whitehouser.com

Defending Liberty: Fighting Terrorism and Treason in America

whitehouser.com — Either our country stands for freedom, defends our constitution and protects liberty or it doesn’t.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -5/+90"Patriots" today only speak of freedom but the United States doesn’t actually practice it, unless you count censorship, invasions of privacy, and guilty until proven innocent the new definition of “freedom.”
    • XNihil0Zer0, on 02/16/2008, -2/+27That's because the word patriot was officially redefined in the "Patriot" act.
    • IAmLegend24, on 02/16/2008, -21/+9I was told by my Liberal professor to kill my self because I did not think Hitler was a great man.
      • davemartin7777, on 02/16/2008, -0/+13Well than your "Liberal professor" is either your dad or some schmuck with a GED.
        Hitler was a ultranationalist, Reich-wing fascist... just like you.
        • RGWX, on 02/17/2008, -2/+1Oh..."Reich-wing"...aren't you PRECIOUS with your clever wordplay? Obviously, anyone with a view other than your own is a mouth-breathing fascist, etc ad nauseum.
          • bjornski, on 02/17/2008, -0/+2Funny how you took such offense to that.
      • JoeFoel, on 02/16/2008, -1/+4All that world need is a SUCCESSFUL Hitler :-) And yes if you look at Hitler from point of view of mid-class German in 1937 he was a real patriot. So rephrasing old saying - "One men's Patriot is another men's Hitler". Bush is a Hitler in view of Afghan farmer.
        • chopenik, on 02/17/2008, -0/+2He's an aspiring Hitler in my view as well.
        • RGWX, on 02/17/2008, -2/+1Been to Afghanistan, have you? Spent a lot of time out in the provinces? Somehow, I doubt it.
      • Acewrap, on 02/16/2008, -0/+4I don't believe you.
    • baalzebub, on 02/16/2008, -0/+13Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel...
    • LukasSmith, on 02/16/2008, -15/+2the hypocrisy of democrats:
      A. guilty till proven innocent- Bush and crew all guilty even though they have never been impeached or set foot in a courtroom.
      B. Invasion of privacy- The word privacy is not mentioned even once in the constitution.
      C.censorship- What censorship? There is no censorship. Ive seen people on digg.com threaten to physically harm Bush and they haven't been carted off to jail. Anti Bush anti everything are still allowed to congregate to bash the Bush administration at every school or government hearing.
      • drachasor, on 02/16/2008, -0/+9A. Bush and crew have gone after people and tortured people without proving their guilt. They have an entire prison where they hold people for years without any proof of guilt.
        B. The President cannot unilaterally wiretap people without a warrant. That's just a simple fact of the law. As for privacy in general, consider the 4th, 9th, and 10th Ammendments:

        Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

        Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
        The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

        Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.
        The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

        C. If you can't see how the Bush Administration has routinely tried to shut people up, I'd advise you to simply look at how it treats scientists on matters such as Global Warming.
      • bjornski, on 02/16/2008, -1/+8Oh good! I was hoping to hear some of the wisdom of the hate-filled!

        Glad you could join us, LucasSmith! I'm still laughing my ass off at your comment history.

        Come back to give us some more of the great wisdom of someone who was FOUR the last time there wasn't a Bush or Clinton in office?

        You have ZERO political knowledge, but you spout the Limbaugh talking points well.

        Now let the adults talk, and you polish your jack-boots quietly like a good German patriot.
        • LukasSmith, on 02/17/2008, -5/+1Ive never actually heard you say even 1 worthwhile thing.Ever.
          • bjornski, on 02/17/2008, -1/+4Lash out, Lukas. Use the hate.

            People add themselves as fans/friends when I talk, Lukas. All I see is you and your negative diggs, on EVERY SINGLE COMMENT YOU MAKE.

            Shall we talk about saying anything worthwhile?

            You lash out hatefully at anyone who doesn't agree with your "it's not in the constitution, so you have no right! We NEED to be protected from those evil non-Americans!" fascist rants. It's actually quite funny. Someone defending fascism so strongly, but not giving us one single reason besides "it's not written there" or "they want you dead" or "we're tougher than them, ***** 'em".

            You make ZERO points at all. You have NO political knowledge, and it shows. Very very prominently. You're like a person telling your doctor that you know better than him, because you took health class in high-school. You're young you're green, you've got a lot to learn yet. Deal with it.

            Now, how about getting yourself some education, so next time you open your yap telling us how we all need our phones tapped if we've got nothing to hide, because government knows best about that, but yet rail against government in all other aspects of life.......just wow.

            Stop polishing your boots, and pick up a damned history book. You obviously went to one of the lower performing public schools in your area. But I'll bet your football team was awesome.

            Now go, let the adults talk.
          • LukasSmith, on 02/18/2008, -3/+2Hypocrite. Everything you have said for last three paragraphs was pure hate. You think of +digg as an unbiased approval rating. except digg.com is not an unbiased source of information. IN fact all political discussion on digg.com follows either a democrat or left wing agenda to a t. How can I prove this? Well lets examine when was the last time a (positive) Republican or John mcCain discussion found its way upwards? The answer. never. not once. Anything republican or otherwise gets 0 confined to dustbin. So please forgive me if I dont give a ***** about your +diggs. In fact I don't even feel offense about receiving them because it only proves how small and insecure the democrats really are that they have basically made digg.com their portal of frustration. The republican party is not dead. Not even close. The republicans have nearly half the congress and a twice elected president. What does the democratic party have? I view every -digg as a sign of digg.com liberal and left intolerance and fascism. Besides your not changing the world this is digg.com. So please feel free to feel superior. Your not.
        • LukasSmith, on 02/18/2008, -2/+1And obviously you missed out on my fan list. because its not empty.
      • LukasSmith, on 02/16/2008, -8/+1Are you kidding me? You cant open even a local paper without hearing about some doom story of global warming. And I live in Texas. Bush and crew have kept terrorists imprisoned. Those who have been found innocent or at least with minimal charge have been released. Some cant be released because nobody wants them. The number held has dropped to a few hundred. 5 at most have been water boarded which doesn't sound that extreme to me considering that the ones tortured were clearly terrorists. Saying you cant stoop to the level of terrorists is ridiculous. If you believe you win only by having higher moral ground notice before pre- Bush there was justice and peace. Apparently that justice and peace didn't d ispell Osamas desire to destroy us. They were training to attack the US even during Clintons days. Which reminds me Clinton had no luck catching osama either. Oh and Google Clinton bombing Iraq because Bush wasn't the first president who thought Iraq was a threat after Gulf War.
        • drachasor, on 02/16/2008, -0/+6I am struck by your inability to admit you are wrong or read what I wrote. You've completely ignored my comments on privacy. You are not acting like newpaper stories about global warming means that Bush administration has not routinely tried to silence scientists in government employ or censer what they say. You somehow believe that the Iraq war has reduced the number of terrorists in the world, when in fact it has increased them. No doubt you have similarly ignored the Army's statements that standard techniques (without any torture) work and are effective for gathering intelligence from detainees. No doubt you somehow think that the inability of those rounded up in Guantanamo to have a fair and speedy trial has no bearing on the release of innocent prisoners. There are examples of Canadians, Germans, and other citizens of our allies being detained for YEARS and in some cases tortured before being found innocent.

          These tactics are self-defeating, and they alienate our allies and make combating terrorism harder -- as does acting like terrorism can possibly destroy our way of life. Osama bin Laden cannot destroy America. The attack on 9/11 was catastrophic, but the scale of the attack, compared to the scale of America and its citizens, was relatively small. That's not to say it isn't a tragedy, but to pretend that we are fighting for our survival and that there is any justification in destroying our freedoms is to pretend this conflict is far, far more serious than it is. This is not a Civil War, this is not an INVASION of our Country (attacks on our home soil do not an invasion make). Habeus Corpus should still be maintained, and we should all remember that while terrorism (and extremism) is a serious threat to the world, it is not a dire one.
        • LukasSmith, on 02/16/2008, -4/+1Wrong about what? Your point on privacy wasnt missed. In fact I think you missed mine. PRIVACY is not in in the constitution. Silence who? Watched tv lately? Opened a paper lately? DOOOM the world is doooooomed. Greenhouse gas will eat your babies! Nope the war in Iraq has only drawn out the terrorists like ants to a trashcan. The terrorists have come out of the woodworks instead of fighting like cowards. Every terrorist that dies in Iraq is 1 less in the world. A victory in Iraq is a victory against terrorism. YOu say there is no terrorism in Iraq. I say wtf are you smoking. Some guy strapping a bomb to his chest to kill 50 or so Iraqis isnt terrorism? Oh let me guess that is the US's fault. We put the bomb on them we made them kill innocent people. I see how you lumped nationalities together to make your list of supposed torture cases seem larger then in fact the reality. There are only a handful of cases. How many of them aer even fact? who knows. Our allies are still our allies. Hell even the french president loves George Bush. Talk about good taste. germany loves us britain loves us. The fact is few if any countries complain. Oh and yeah im sorry but 4,000 deaths is worth something. Im sorry if I cant believe in a world where you just pretend bad things dont happen. it wasnt a big deal. not really important you say? Yeah 4,000 dead not invasion? wtf are you on. You value human life so little. ***** you.
          • drachasor, on 02/17/2008, -0/+31. The word "privacy" doesn't appear in the Constitution, but the concept of privacy is certainly discussed (and if you disagree with that, the Constitution clearly says that it doesn't spell out all the rights of people, so you aren't limited to what is in the Constitution).

            2. Silence who? Scientists that are on the government payroll. How is that a hard concept for you to grasp?

            3. Al Qaeda doesn't have a significant presence in Iraq, that's a fact. The Army has said so itself.

            4. I never said there was no terrorism in Iraq. Read what I write.

            5. The are only a handful of cases of the US torturing our allies. There should be no such cases however. There's no need for torture and it isn't in our own interest to torture (to say nothing of the immorality of the practice). If the Army thinks torture is a bad idea, then I'd think you'd might take that into consideration. There are a lot more cases of people imprisoned that can't even find out why they are prisoner. They have a right to representation and to know what they are accused of, but the current administration doesn't support such fair and good measures of government. Given how secretive the government has been on its prisoners, who they are, why they are imprisoned, and how they are treated, it is fair to suspect more innocents are being tortured. That said, NO INNOCENTS SHOULD EVER BE TORTURED AT AMERICAN HANDS. Do you disagree with that statement?

            5. If you think Germany, Britain, Canada, France, and other allies of ours are happy with us, then you really need to listen to what they are saying. Popular opinion of the United States in those countries has plummeted in the last 7 years.

            6. An invasion requires feet on the ground and a sustained presence. 9/11 was a terrorist attack, not an invasion. Look it up. I didn't say it wasn't a big deal. I didn't say it wasn't important. I explicitly said the opposite in fact. I said that 9/11 did not threaten our way of life. Terrorism in general is not a threat to the very survival of America or our way of life.

            7. Please try to read and understand what I am saying and where I am coming from. Misstating or fabricating claims of mine is not helpful to this conversation, nor is that practice in general helpful to America. I would say that in a number of ways, such practices and the inability to deal with problems such practices lead to are a more significant threat to America than any terrorist.
          • bjornski, on 02/17/2008, -0/+1The "war on terrorism" in Iraq is similar to a bonfire that you keep piling bundles of sticks on, and then proclaiming victory every time you extinguish a stick.

            Yes, killing people's family and friends ia a great way to keep them from turning against us.

            Know the best way to keep from getting stung? Get your hand out of the bee's nest.

            But that honey....... oh, that dark, black, yummy honey......
          • victorypup, on 02/23/2008, -0/+1Lukas, I haven't followed your posts very far, I hear your concern and your commitment to Judas George, the man in charge that refuses to secure our borders, and prosecutes our border patrol for shooting drug dealers. I think we have an identical type person in Barrack Hussein Opera. He too will keep our borders open, he wants to bomb Pakistan, (keep the military industrial complex happy). Terrorism is moving to a neighborhood near you as we speak. Muslims are moving across our southern border UNchecked, living amongst the illegal population, developing their networks, and looking forward to Jihad against the great Satan, all with Judas George blessings. His Oil for war is not a war on Terrorism. We've been Bush Whacked. Now comes Obommer, a worse than George has arrived.
        • sravll, on 02/17/2008, -0/+3Hahahaha. You can't be serious.
    • zyko, on 02/17/2008, -0/+9Bush and Cheney have freedom to do whatever the hell they want. Just nobody else does.
  • phnx0221, on 02/16/2008, -6/+72"This is a problem for President Bush, as Americans are learning to fight their fears. Over the last 7 years, it hasn’t been Al Qaida or other terrorists that are frightening Americans with their acts of terror. Instead it is the President of United States that is using terrorism tactics against his nation in order to push his political agenda. His patience is being tried by the House of Representatives, and he’s resorting to his same old tactics of bullying and terrorism to get things done in Washington."

    Too true, it is incredibly difficult to invoke the boogeyman of terrorism, when the greater fear lies within our own government, at the hands of our very president and his administration. It is difficult to push for violations of privacy, rights to dissent, and acceptance of greater inconveniences (security measures, search and seizure, terror lists that contain ages ranging from 2 years old to 90 years old), when the reasons given for such acts have drastically fallen short with this administrations incompetence, arrogance, and hypocritical threats and allegations against other nations.

    Statistically speaking, we are far more likely to die in a car accident, house fire, crossfire from a shooting, or a lightening strike, than by a terrorist attack. Although certainly, the amount of terrorists have increased since we began our occupation, and began implementing such shortsighted foreign policy in the middle east. In fact, it has become easier to recruit insurgents against the occupying united states, than it has been to recruit armed forces to continue said occupation.

    However, given this information, and given the statistics and the likelihood of terror attacks, it's become very difficult to convince and increasingly disenfranchised and knowledgeable population, to lay down their rights, lay down their privacy, lay down their comforts, and lay down their own constitutional protections, in order to fight an enemy that is seemingly, no longer in the middle east, but within our very country, who is by the day, only exacerbating the threats we face around the world.
    • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -3/+16Very well said. Thank you.
    • Corrosionx, on 02/16/2008, -1/+13Seems to me like "terrorism" is a tactic to achieve political or social changes through the use of fear techniques and terror-inducing propaganda.

      The modern US powers have learned well from their ideological predecessors, the 3rd Reich and the Soviet Union. They believe they will achieve longer lasting changes if they incrementally bring us into this kind of police state society.

      Eventually we will evolve to see we don't need those parasites. Then these people will need to find real jobs where people pay them on a voluntary basis for services they actually want.
    • LukasSmith, on 02/16/2008, -17/+2yes because its statistically less possible to die from terrorism we should just give up trying to fight it. Terrorists ramming planes into buildings was just a mistake. They really just hijacked planes to fly to Cancun. 4,000 people really didn't die from terrorism. People all over the world didn't hate us before Bush. ahahaa. What fantasy are you living in? Our government has been protecting us for the last 7 years and they have done a good job. What rights have you had taken away lately? any? I don't recall any of my rights taken away. You people think there is this vast government conspiracy that involves YOU. My question wtf are you? wtf would the government care about you? your just a number. 1 person out of 300 million. Stop watching hollywood movies and get back to reality. I have this little comedy bit I like to use to describe my idea of the liberal vision of counter terrorism. Theres this guy who is shot. He says "hey you shot me". He gets shot again. he says "hey man, stop shooting me" He gets shot again he says, "hey ***** im bleeding." he gets shot twice more and falls over dead saying "ive been shot."
      • Acewrap, on 02/16/2008, -2/+2You must be as great a comedian as you are a thinker. Seriously, go back to freerepublic or lgf or whatever fascist site you came from.
      • Corrosionx, on 02/17/2008, -1/+6"yes because its statistically less possible to die from terrorism we should just give up trying to fight it."

        Sure, have a war on terrorism. Just look at the results of the war on drugs, there's more drugs than ever before! Why do you think today there's more terrorism than there ever was?

        "People all over the world didn't hate us before Bush. "

        Only those in the countries the previous administrations have *****. I don't have to name them, you should know your history if you're so smart.


        "Our government has been protecting us for the last 7 years and they have done a good job."

        Our government has been robbing us of our wealth and our rights at an pace never seen before the last 7 years.


        "What rights have you had taken away lately? any? I don't recall any of my rights taken away. "

        That's because you don't even know what your rights are. Habeas Corpus is a good one. Also the 4th amendment is pratically non-existent anymore.. In some parts of the country the 1st and 2nd amendments are void. Also your purchasing power is being destroyed each day by the actions and policies of the US government.

        "wtf would the government care about you? your just a number. 1 person out of 300 million."

        They are creating a snitch society and a police state the likes of the old Soviet union, especially with people like you continuing to defend those power hungry maniacs. They don't protect you, it's a ***** PR scam to take your money.

        If the war in Iraq wasn't achieving the wanted results, it would have ended by now. The results they wanted is a transfer of wealth from the American taxpayers to war profiteers. They are counting on idiots like you to think they are doing it to protect America. What a farce.

        The government isn't here to protect you. This is an undeniable truth. The Supreme Court of the US has ruled many times that the government has "no duty to protect" (look it up on Google).

        They exist to protect themselves first and foremost.
      • sravll, on 02/17/2008, -1/+2Ahhh, sometimes idiots can be so entertaining!
    • caponumen, on 02/17/2008, -0/+1Just as I wrote congress the day after 9/11, every single drop of blood shed that day should be considered just another offering at the alter of freedom. As you can see they had no Intention of honoring that sacrifice but instead converted it to a symbol of defeat and disillusionment......
  • philodygmn, on 02/16/2008, -15/+15How in hell is it we're still framing this in terms of our stupid nation?! The guy's a criminal slimeball, a despicable excuse for a human being, yet, like our idiotic expectation that government will bring corporatists to heel, people act like "the Constitution" magically is needed to legitimize denunciation of tyranny, like religion with God's own authority! The whole notion of owned property as foundation of right is literally inhuman.
    • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -3/+25What you are failing to grasp, Philo, is that "property" does NOT merely mean an iPod or a Lexus or a parcel of land. Property means YOU. YOU are your own property. And because YOU are your own property, no one has a right to invade your space, so long as you respect the space of others.

      As far as material property goes, they are yours because YOU earned them or were properly gifted them. And as a sign of respect to you, your property should be left alone.

      Your thoughts are you property: No one has a right to penalize you for thinking "improperly".

      Your feelings are your property: No one has a right to force you to feel what you do not feel.

      Your friendships are your property: No one has a right to decide your friends for you.

      Your goals are your property: No one has a right to force you in a direction contrary to your will.

      Your health is your property. No one has a right to make you sick. No one has a right to force you to take better care of yourself.

      Your life is your property: No one has a right to enter you into wars, take your life, or forbid you taking your own.

      All of this, of course, is contingent on your respect for the right of others, and that your ability to reason not be greatly compromised.

      Property is no vice.
      • satanatnmtedu, on 02/16/2008, -14/+4Yes, it is contingent on your respect for the rights of others. But, it has long been true that people do not respect the rights of others. hence there have to be laws to enforce those rights. The libertarian ideal would work if everyone cared abotu everyone else, but this is not the case and the major reason why libertarian ideals are not reasonable.
        • jeffiek, on 02/16/2008, -2/+6Think what happens when people don't care about anyone else. What type of government do they get?

          Who gives a ***** how many Iraqi orphans we create? Somebody's got to pay. Doesn't matter whether they did anything or not, somebody's got to pay. Bombs away.

          You see NOT caring is a far more powerful argument against government. It requires a government to start a war. Anarchists can't start one, they don't have a government to tax its citizens to pay for a vast military.

          War CAN NOT exist without at least one government.
        • Corrosionx, on 02/16/2008, -0/+7You do NOT know about libertarianism if you say that. That's like saying "The goal of eliminating slavery is unreasonable, who will hire ex-slaves? They will resort to criminality, etc."

          In fact, having a group of people with the monopoly of power on a certain geographical area is probably the most unreasonable thing imaginable, knowing what human beings do with power once they get their hands on it.
        • gandhi2, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3How many rational, civil interactions do you have per day that go unnoticed? You seem to think that nobody has any incentive to care about their fellow man, both for emotional and selfish reasons. But this happens on a daily basis, and is in fact the more common occurrence. However, like most people, you assume that the uncivil or irrational interactions you have are the norm. You can go a whole day without this occurring, or even longer, but most people will only realize it when something affects them negatively.
      • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -2/+13@satanatnmtedu

        You are confusing Libertarian ideals with those of Anarchists. Libertarians believe in the rule of law, hence their devoted advocacy of the Constitution. The Constitution authorizes the federal government to defend and protect your rights from outside threats to it, and at the same time, it limits the powers of the government so that the government itself is not the one trespassing on your rights.
        • Corrosionx, on 02/16/2008, -1/+6Either the Constitution allowed the current government or it was powerless to prevent it. Either way the Constitution is in reality nothing more than a piece of paper. It's a mythological symbol to make people believe the government was established legitimately.
        • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -0/+7The Constitution is there so that the people know what goes and what goes not. Ultimately, it is up to The People to see that it is followed.

          The lines on the street and the signs that line the sidewalks are only as useful as they are used properly.
    • cmackattack, on 02/17/2008, -0/+3News flash people. You own no property. You pay property taxes, right? Whelp, that's just another term for renting...from the government. Even if you use ZERO services. See how long something remains "your property" if you quit paying rent...I mean property taxes.
  • Frostman3D, on 02/16/2008, -5/+43This is basically a throwback to the McCarthy era. If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists, and it's just not that simple. Bush has overstepped his bounds countless times since 9/11 and he should be removed from office.
    • krnldmp, on 02/16/2008, -2/+5Right, but the FAILURE falls on the people for allowing him to remain.
      • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -1/+3Yes and no, politics and governing are much more complex than advocating for one side or another or pushing a political agenda. I'm as disappointed as anyone, but I partially understand why the impeachment process isn't in process and criminal complaints haven't been filed. This stuff requires high amounts of actual evidence of wrong-doing and the administration has destroyed a lot of evidence and the rest is protected by their coveted "state secrets" protection. This makes it very difficult to mount a case, and if you wage an impeachment war and fail you will make things much worse and potentially swing the next election to another war-hawk.

        Again, I feel your anger and passion - but do not agree with your argument.
      • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -0/+5"...I partially understand why the impeachment process isn't in process and criminal complaints haven't been filed. This stuff requires high amounts of actual evidence of wrong-doing..."

        This President has openly admitted to torture and violating the 4th Amendment. He has also violated Habeas Corpus, as the Supreme Court itself found. There is ample evidence with which to commence impeachment. Sorry, but don't give me that apologist *****. Democrats have failed the American people and their oath of office BIG TIME.
        • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -1/+3I apologize for no one, I've studied politics and the law, I've also seen the process from the inside. All of it is made even more difficult by the Rupert Murdoch controlled media that has made torture and other war crimes "debatable" in the public eye. I've agreed with just about everything you've said, but I take offense to your tone -- it reminds me of neo-cons who refuse to listen to other perspectives and -that- in my view, is *****.
        • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3iraq, on this one I have to disagree with you, and not for the sake of disagreement.

          I read what you said, and correct me if I'm wrong, but basically you have concluded that there is no evidence (which there is, as I outlined above), and that even if there were it would be politically imprudent to pursue it.

          That, to me, is outrageous. I don't give a damn about anyone's political ambitions. What I and most Americans care about is the rule of law. The law was broken by the top office holder in this country and that must be remedied.

          The Constitution tells us that the way by which to remedy this is by impeachment. If we let this go unpunished, and just wait for another election to wash away a corruption of this magnitude, we make ourselves complicit to this crime. I'm not taking it anymore.
        • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3I never said there was no evidence! There is a difference between having evidence and proving it on the legal front. Do I believe Democratic leaders have failed us? Yes. Is there a chance that our legal system, the media, and our government framework is making it difficult for more legislators to get behind impeachment? I believe there is a good chance of this. Is Nancy Pelosi a complete loser and needs to be ousted? Yep! Hopefully we agree on more, now.. but it's tricky to wage this battle and you can't escape the politics of it all. Remember there are parliamentary procedures that could easily derail anyone who attempts to take the lead on this, but I agree strongly on one point. It would be an American travesty if President Bush isn't brought to account on his crimes and failures to abide by our Constitution and law.
    • Ash1138, on 02/17/2008, -0/+0I agree with you, but if you study history it's actually more accurate to say this is a throwback to 1930's Germany, and that is truly scary.
  • openj, on 02/16/2008, -11/+7Nothing will be fixed until we all decide to become terrorists. Only terrorists can repair fascism.
    It's time to decide that we're no longer "with us" and instead "with the terrorists." "Us" are the bad guys now.
    • IAmLegend24, on 02/16/2008, -2/+7Terrorism is a good way to make the American people stand behind the current administration I dont think many people will support your side if you start bombing markets shooting up federal buildings.
    • leftyslament, on 02/16/2008, -0/+4Terrorism won't solve America's problems. If anything it will only serve to alienate/frighten more moderate citizens, and the powerful will use that fear to further their own agenda, just like they did after 9/11. If we want true change it must be from the ground up. We must change socially if we are ever going to change politically.
  • macwac, on 02/16/2008, -5/+20As an outsider... americans you better do something fast or you will lose whatever rights you still have left. Vote smart, not popular. Will your candidate revert the changes that Bush has made? Go down the list of candidates and check it.. have any of them promised to revert the changes? or who is more likely to do so in order to restore your rights?...
    • giantdouche, on 02/16/2008, -1/+7Take a look around. Our elections are rigged. Democracy is dead. http://blackboxvoting.org
      • brokensystem, on 02/16/2008, -1/+5Isn't that the truth. I haven't checked out your link but anyone who even briefly turns on their idiot/ad box (TV) should be able to see that. From the beginning only certain candidates received any decent amount of exposure. For a Presidential election shouldn't all the candidates be given equal exposure? Station owners, programmers, whoever controls what the public sees shouldn't have that much power in such an election. Fair elections are a joke, we're pretty much bombarded with who we should be voting for, that goes for both parties. The sad thing is I don't see one candidate still in the running, in either party, that I can honestly say I would vote for. It has pretty much boiled down to either voting for a visual change of a woman, a non white man, or a business as usual white man, to hell with the issues.
  • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -4/+28"America was founded by men who understood that the threat of domestic tyranny is as great as any threat from abroad. If we want to be worthy of their legacy, we must resist the rush toward ever-increasing state control of our society. Otherwise, our own government will become a greater threat to our freedoms than any foreign terrorist." - Ron Paul

    "The federal government has no right to treat all Americans as criminals by spying on their relationship with their doctors, employers, or bankers." - Ron Paul

    "There is but one special interest that we should be working for, and that would solve just about all of our problems, and that is our liberty." - Ron Paul

    There's a longer, more detailed comment issued by Ron Paul on this issue, under my reply button. I'd recently posted it in another thread, so I'll give you the option of exploring it again or for the first time, on your own, rather than being exposed to it so often, involuntarily.
    • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -2/+18"Liberty once again must become more important to us than the desire for security and material comfort. Personal safety and economic prosperity can only come as the consequence of liberty. They cannot be provided by an authoritarian government... The foundation for a police state has been put in place, and it's urgent we mobilize resistance before it's too late... Central planning is intellectually bankrupt – and it has bankrupted our country and undermined our moral principles. Respect for individual liberty and dignity is the only answer to government force, force that serves the politically and economically powerful. Our planners and rulers are not geniuses, but rather demagogues and would-be dictators -- always performing their tasks with a cover of humanitarian rhetoric... The collapse of the Soviet system came swiftly and dramatically, without a bloody conflict... It came as no surprise, however, to the devotees of freedom who have understood for decades that socialism was doomed to fail... And so too will the welfare/warfare state fail... A free society is based on the key principle that the government, the president, the Congress, the courts, and the bureaucrats are incapable of knowing what is best for each and every one of us... A government as a referee is proper, but a government that uses arbitrary force to direct every aspect of society threatens freedom... The time has come for a modern approach to achieving those values that all civilized societies seek. Only in a free society do individuals have the best chance to seek virtue, strive for excellence, improve their economic well-being, and achieve personal happiness... The worthy goals of civilization can only be achieved by freedom loving individuals. When government uses force, liberty is sacrificed and the goals are lost. It is freedom that is the source of all creative energy. If I am to be your president, these are the goals I would seek. I reject the notion that we need a president to run our lives, plan the economy, or police the world... It is much more important to protect individual liberty and privacy than to make government even more secretive and powerful." - Ron Paul
      • Bronnster, on 02/16/2008, -1/+12Excellent! I am voting for Ron Paul. So much truth comes from him throughout every site i visit. whenever i stumble across comments or blogs concerning Ron Paul, be it an interview or speech or opinionated article, it always rings true to what i feel and believe. Trying to frame a statement about what i actually want to convey always seems difficult, but when someone comes across and says what I wish to say time after time, then i feel that this person speak to and for me. This is what I find true in Ron Paul. He has my vote.
      • pjr12345, on 02/19/2008, -0/+1I remember the time in Texas when Ron Paul was stumping for office. One of his supporters was being derided. Folks were chanting "Paultard" at him. Ron Paul took to the microphone and said, "Wear the label proudly, son! Let me tell you about the origin of the word "Paultard". Then Ron Paul related the following piece of his little known, personal history:

        It started at a rally in 1972, when Ron Paul was given a dilythium transporter by a mysterious stranger. At the time, Ron Paul had no idea what the object was, but kept it for reasons unknown to even him. The stranger had assured Ron Paul that at the right time, the value of the object would become clear to him. Some 35 years later the stranger's words bore fruit.

        One evening in 2007, while Ron Paul meditated on the plight of his beloved nation, the object began to glow and hum. Ron Paul kept the object in a display case (due to its aesthetic value), so it was in easy reach of him. Drawn to the strange sound and glow, Ron Paul reached out to grasp the device. No sooner had he touched it than he was transported to a place far from his living room; indeed, a realm in the far reaches of the Rubicon Galaxy. There was nothing for his senses to perceive; one moment he was in his living room, and the next he was in the Ruling Chamber of Tardish, facing Reginald Egsboro, president of Tardish.

        Reginald Egsboro, or as his friends called him, R.E., explained to Ron Paul that he had been selected for transport to Tardish because he alone possessed the purity necessary to save Tardish from imminent destruction. Ron Paul was required to enter the Lair of the Unconst and wrest the Lamp of Hope from its nest. Even for The Puretard, the name given in Tardish Prophecy for the savior of their realm, the task was by no means assured. Ron Paul accepted the challenge, vanquished the evil Unconst, and delivered the Lamp of Hope to the thankful Tards.

        In response to Ron Paul's selfless acts to preserve a people not his own, the Tardish renamed their land Paultardish, and the people are ever known as Paultards.

        Returned to his living room just moments after the dilythium transporter had started glowing and humming, Ron Paul switches on his computer. As he surfs the net he notices the first references to his supporters as Paultards. He smiles knowingly. Apparently Tardish gratitude had been extended into Ron Paul's own world.


        Ron Paul - Defender of the Paultards and Vanquisher of the Unconst - For President!
    • Kent4jmj, on 02/17/2008, -0/+9Love the direct quotes.
      The truth and wisdom of what he says are the best argument we have against the nonsense all around us.
  • Evolutuon, on 02/16/2008, -2/+25History will not be kind to Bush and his Administration.
    • digindrivefast, on 02/16/2008, -0/+14History will tell the story of the demise of America. Misled by the "leaders" of this nation, we the people will be doomed because we dare not speak against them. We lose a little bit more of our freedom everyday.
      Bush does not give a damn what the history books will say about him. Nor do the Clintons....
      • Evolutuon, on 02/16/2008, -0/+4One can hope those in the future learn from our mistakes.
        • digindrivefast, on 02/16/2008, -0/+6Exactly!
          Until we have leaders with "integrity"... we are teaching the "now" generation how to continue to screw this Nation up and cause further damage across the globe. The Now generation will just simply excuse this because that's "how we roll" ...
          Being a "leader" is not and should not be about a popularity contest. Our Nations leaders are not running for class president etc. and so having learned, over the course of a life...
          less mistakes, less destruction, less taxes, less government...
          I do not want to wait another political cycle to have the "errors" written in the History Books!
    • brokensystem, on 02/16/2008, -1/+3I wouldn't be too sure of that. Look at Ronald Reagan, there have been so many things named after him that they're probably uncountable. During his run at the helm with his grasp of corporate America and big business, trickle down economics mindset, the middle class was pretty much squashed. Corporate earnings started going through the roof and US manufacturing started suffering and heading over seas or across the border. A country without its own manufacturing is pathetic and at the mercy of others, we're pretty much at that state. It used to be that any product that had "Made In The USA" stamped on it it was more than likely a top quality product made by US citizens who earned a decent wage, not anymore. Then the pin head business whiz kids started all the "over engineered" rhetoric, if a product is too good it's not good business, quality tanked. Now the business creed is make it as cheap as you can and it only has to last as long as the warranty. I couldn't understand why so many people hate US automobiles and products then it dawned on me, age, anyone born after say the late 60's or early 70's has only known or experienced crappy US products. Now corporate America, wall street financier's, etc. are selling their homes here in the US and moving to COMMUNIST China chasing the buck. Our corporate/big business owned government is turning its back while manufacturing and US dollars are poured into China for cheap labor. China's economy and wealth is growing in leaps and bounds while our country is going down the tube, but the people with the money are getting rich doing it. We should all be worried about terrorist attacks but in the mean time our country is being sold behind our backs. Then again not really, they're pretty much blatantly doing it right in front of us. History unfortunately tends to paints a prettier picture for some people than it should.
  • lajaw, on 02/16/2008, -2/+16And only one person running in the major parties actually advocated the defense of the Constitution and the citizens liberties. But, many of you still want "mother government" to take care of you.
    • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -0/+6I agree with you, but a bit of advice: the MOVEMENT will go nowhere with that tone. You are doing libertarian thought a great disservice by wagging your finger and say "I told you so." People aren't inspired by that and if anything you'll just attract more trolls and passionate people to resist the movement.
      • lajaw, on 02/16/2008, -1/+2No, the "movement" will continue on, but this election cycle is a wash. We got some exposure, but we get a socialist for president.
        • digindrivefast, on 02/16/2008, -1/+9Still, everyone continues with the "marching orders" to prosecute & impeach, (from the democrats,) and the idea that our "sitting" president is a "Republican" (in some perverted definition,) with real patriots being "informed" every day...
          More republicans, like myself, are able to stand up and say I was mistaken, misled, ill-informed and ignorant as to my Rights and my duty. I've yet to see our Nations true leaders stand up & admit they were wrong. More republicans should be screaming to have this administration removed and more democrats should wake up to the song & dance that will continue with both Hillbill & Obama...
        • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -1/+7Oh, I agree the movement isn't going to die.. my point is that in order for the movement to grow and infect the masses, it must be delivered properly or risk being met by unnecessary resistance. If Libertarianism is to evolve beyond the "cult / crazy / out of touch" stereotypes, advocates must learn how to recruit and convert others. It is my personal view that the Libertarians I know are among America's most intelligent people. This is just a guess, but the Libertarian IQ is higher on average than for any other ideology, unfortunately that comes with social challenges (Ron Paul is perhaps an exception, he's brilliant with people) -- I'm just offering some friendly advice.
    • SaperKain, on 02/16/2008, -7/+2May I remind you that Ron Paul’s party is solely responsible for this *****? The fact that he is a republican makes it hard for me believe anything this person is saying.
      • lajaw, on 02/16/2008, -1/+12What are you talking about? Solely responsible? Man, take a look way back to Lincoln, then the next biggy is FDR, then Johnson, Nixon, Carter. Then Clinton and Bush. Your dislike for the Republicans has clouded your memory of history. Both parties have eroded our rights and liberties.
        • SaperKain, on 02/16/2008, -8/+1You are an idiot. Libertarians try to confuse liberals into voting for republicans. But it ain’t gonna happen now. Everybody can see you for what you are fascists.
          • lajaw, on 02/17/2008, -1/+6Liberals are brain dead. They want "mother government" to take care of them........and I'm really very tired of it. I pay my taxes to enable you to sit on your butt and draw welfare and get free medical care. And it's not just the Democrats socialists that keep pushing this crap, no, it's the Republican socialists too. Fascists? You are an imbecile. You had better look that word up. I'm a freedom loving individual, and you my friend, want to deny me mine if you vote for Obama/Billary/mccain. Soon, we freedom lovers will congeal and take this country of ours back!
      • kemp34, on 02/17/2008, -0/+7SaperKain, you need a little more discernment before throwing out disparaging remarks. Otherwise, you sound very dumb. Ron Paul is not a "George Bush Republican".
    • digindrivefast, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3You are on point.
      Taking responsibility for our own ignorance and having allowed our "leaders" to lie to us for so long....
  • baalzebub, on 02/16/2008, -3/+9personally i think bush has a mental illness, i think he needs to be heavily medicated and put in a mental institution for having paranoid delusions...
    • silversword990, on 02/16/2008, -9/+2What the hell is wrong with you?
    • shupy, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3I think that mental illness is called alcoholism.
      • iraq, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3Not really, he was a coke head before he found Jesus.. it makes sense that he has some baggage, but I wouldn't say he's suffering from paranoid delusions, heh. Maybe he's bipolar or something.
    • digindrivefast, on 02/16/2008, -0/+3"Manic patients may need to be hospitalized to protect themselves and others." Wiki

      So, in some way you insult the truly "ill" in society.... Bush has planned and detailed the destruction of our Nation and gets away with it just as Clinton did and daddy Bush before that...
    • Napoleone, on 02/16/2008, -0/+7It seems to me the mental illness resides, not in the mind of Bush, but in the minds of the American People who take his abuse.

      Bush and his Republican and Democratic supporters are enemies of the Constitution, and they have to a large extent succeeded in seeing it destroyed. It is We the People who have failed the Constitution with our poor defense.
  • macweirdo42, on 02/16/2008, -1/+18It's the Red Scare all over again. The commies are horrible, because they want to take away your individual rights. So we're gonna take away your individual rights so we can fight the commies and prevent them from taking your individual rights.
  • Look4Truth, on 02/16/2008, -3/+12Everyone who disagrees with the establishment is considered a terrorist in a fascist dictatorship in the making. Hold on to your hats, it's only going to get worse.
  • tierpinho, on 02/16/2008, -2/+13terrorists or freedom fighters? war or peace? freedom or slavery? wake up america.
  • overkillingness, on 02/16/2008, -1/+16“If you aren’t doing anything wrong, you have nothing to fear”

    The motto of the Tyrant
  • Niteryder, on 02/16/2008, -2/+6Al Qaida means the base, originally coined for Osama Bin Laden
    because of a supposed database with radical islamist names content.
    There has never been a group by that name. An American creation
    which helped to spawn unknown terrorists against the US who before
    had no power to get attention so that name became convenient.

    Most Americans are more worried about their next meal and how to pay
    their bills than they are about even thinking of becoming a terrorist in
    their worst moment. George Bush needs to get out of the White House
    and simply fade from American life as the worst leader of a modern
    nation in the history of all of mankind.....
    • brokensystem, on 02/16/2008, -0/+5So true. The thing that gets me is the fact that the average US citizen is more likely to die on the road than any terrorist attack but boy they want to keep that fear factor going. Terrorism only works if you let it and this administration has played right into Osama, Al Qaida, or whatever fanatical idiots hands. Hell, there are lunatic people born here in the good old USA that are more of a threat than any over seas nut case.
    • Bronnster, on 02/16/2008, -1/+2Dammit! Accidentally buried your comment. Apologies. Stupid new G5 mouse clicker. Went to dig it and hit bury. Thank you for your post. I agree. Your post is informative and agreeable. I didn't know these facts. Impeached, charged, and convicted i believe is worthy of his reward in the future rather than to simply fade.
  • skews13, on 02/16/2008, -1/+7you people are getting it. if you think for one minute that social engineering equals following the law. you have been duped. unjust,and unconstitutional laws,such as ones that are enacted for your safety,ie; gun regulation,the war on drugs,etc.,were not put there to protect you.these kinds of laws allow the government,federal,state,and local,to get around constitutional protections.in order to further political social engineering agendas. usually religious,and authoritarian fanaticism
  • simplicityiskey, on 02/16/2008, -1/+3The ability to openly voice your discontent is one of the greatest evidences that liberty is alive and well.
    • leftyslament, on 02/16/2008, -0/+6Not necessarily. Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy that I can still voice by discontent, but that doesn't mean I'm completely free. The powerful elite in the U.S. own the masses every bit as much as the leaders of totalitarian states, they just have to exert their power much more subtly. Think "Brave New World". In totalitarian states, authority is centralized and the dictators can afford to overtly exert power through force. In a "republic" such as the U.S., the powerful must subvert the will of the masses by tricking them. They can't force the people to do what they want, so they must fool the people into compliance, usually through propaganda and herd tactics.
      • simplicityiskey, on 02/17/2008, -3/+1No one can make you get out and voice your opinion, that is simply a choice you have to make. Anywhere you go at any point in time there are going to be factors that affect your decisions/opinions/views on subjects. Whether it is mass media, a small town newspaper, or the simple fact that you live in a different part of the world that someone else and see things from a different side, every opinion is some way influenced by outside factors. Not to say that large groups of people cannot be "tricked" as you say, because we have seen that happen plenty of times. But because of this, does that mean you're not free? I'm a firm believer that a man's freedom is a purely subjective thing. The only person who can decide whether you're a slave or not is you. So what it is to be "completely free"? That is something only you can decide for yourself. If completely free means you can make decisions completely independent of outside influence, then no person on this planet is completely free. If completely free means you have the ability to do whatever you want without consequence then no one is completely free. Frankly, I think it is evidenced every day that people get out there and complain, some to seemingly no end, about their rights being revoked shows that their rights are, in fact, in tact.
  • JointVenture, on 02/16/2008, -12/+1Wow theres really a lot of SMART people on DIGG making POSTS on a "kill some time" site.

    I bet 80% of you actually get refunds when you fill out your IRS forms. ie the poor disenfranchised , its not my fault my life sucks folks.
    • Herostratus, on 02/16/2008, -0/+5Wrong dude,

      These are the people who dont fill out income Tax forms because the 16th Amendment wasn't properly ratified...

      Dissent is the ultimate patriotism! Doubleplusgood!
    • Bronnster, on 02/16/2008, -0/+4Shouldn't there be a Britney Spears breakdown, Paris Hilton break up article or a new glow-in-the-dark butt plug news story you should be blogging about instead of coming here to flame? Newb.
    • leftyslament, on 02/16/2008, -0/+4Someones got some classism issues...
  • davemartin7777, on 02/16/2008, -0/+7"Wow theres really a lot of SMART people on DIGG making POSTS on a "kill some time" site."

    You've got 114 posts you hypocritical gas-bag.
  • davemartin7777, on 02/16/2008, -0/+5But you are one lucky boy Joint, "theres" always room for one more Reich-wing American Fascist, corporate hack/ Murdock sockpuppet on the "MSM" Apply today, you'll get the job.

    The rest of us are stuck with Digg.
  • Medisha, on 02/16/2008, -0/+1
    But you are one lucky boy Joint, "theres" always room for one more Reich-wing American Fascist, corporate hack/ Murdock sockpuppet on the "MSM" Apply today, you'll get the job.
    The rest of us are stuck with Digg.
  • d3mag0gu3, on 02/16/2008, -10/+2The real traitors are the obamabots inundating digg with obama articles. Digg is drowning in obamabot propaganda. Misleading titles and false descriptions. Wish homeland security tracks these ppl down and save digg.
  • mahela, on 02/16/2008, -1/+9
    This is basically a throwback to the McCarthy era. If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists, and it's just not that simple. Bush has overstepped his bounds countless times since 9/11 and he should be removed from office.
  • Bronnster, on 02/16/2008, -0/+6Great article. Well put. I have to say that within the passed months I've not seen much bipartisan bickering inside chat and blog forums amongst us Americans when "Bush vs. Constitution" issues are discussed. This is a good sign, to me, when differences, political and moral, can be put aside knowing that there is a greater, common and immediate concern in front of us. We are being forced (?) to come together in thought and emotion on this issue of broken leadership and the direction we are headed as the result of it being broken. I believe it is a shared threat amongst us all. In crisis, I definitely would hope for the courage and support of a neighbor or the compassion and understanding of a stranger for help. Something like passengers floating in a lifeboat just after the ship they were on sank. We are sharing the same emotional anxieties. We seem to realize that we, the people do matter and not so much the politically elected that govern us. I hope for courage, personally, to be with me when the time comes to protect a fellow American when he or she needs help. This, at least, is what I'm beginning to mentally and emotionally experience and it gives me strength to speak out these days. I'm going to believe this is true, and act as such. I feel, today, that this attitude is exactly what I, hopefully all of us, are needing to put issues right. BTW, I know not all of those those elected are Traitors to the Constitution. We do have a few Brave heroes in Congress (obviously, most are in the House) and I wish them strength in the fight! Be it they Republican, Independent, Libertarian, or Democrat!
  • MadN, on 02/16/2008, -4/+1I find myself agreeing with President Bush.
    "American citizens must understand, clearly understand, that there still is a threat on the homeland”

    I think he means he is still in office and will be a threat until removed from office.
    Don't think for one minute that on 1-20-2009 he will step down from power.
  • stevew928, on 02/16/2008, -2/+5Neither party seems to understand the Constitution or Declaration of Independence anymore... it's not just Bush. But I agree on this most recent attempt that Bush is in the wrong. Yes, we did need to update our laws post-911 as technology had out-run our old laws for wire-tapping, etc. But this recent request... doesn't seem in any way necessary, it is just a power-grab as far as I can tell. There has been a LOT of this 'we're just doing this because we're Republicans' these days and an equal amount of 'let's oppose Bush no matter what because we're Democrats'... and both are equally scary to me. I like to take each issue independently and not simply follow the party line.... and I think BOTH parties are highly guilty of just following what they want rather than paying much attention to the Constitution.
  • yldave, on 02/17/2008, -2/+2Couple of relevant quotes:
    “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin
    Pogo: We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us
    The Senate is on the wrong side of the freedom issue:
    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/ ...
    If you think the telcoms should be able to spy on us with impunity, then you're with the majority of the Senate and McCain. If you think that might not be such a good idea, then Obama's your man.
  • zanzzz, on 02/17/2008, -2/+3It's fashionable to slam Bush for the overwhelming number of obvious reasons. Understand that it has been the Republican Party (along with about a third of the Democrats) that has embraced the politics of reactionary fascism. Of course the "leadership" of the Democratic Party has been a crushing disappointment to say the least. But make no mistake- if you vote for a Republican rest assured you are enabling the Constitutional violating surveillance society these "conservatives" are determined to create.
    • Moonrider, on 02/23/2008, -0/+1Not if you vote for the Republican candidate, Ron Paul. Write him in if necessary. Let the party hacks of both parties know that you oppose all their recent and proposed actions, write in Ron Paul.
  • kemp34, on 02/17/2008, -1/+11Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate that truly cares about the liberties guaranteed by our Constitution. The rest want you to go to work for them as serfs to the statist ruling classes. Throw off the yoke!!
  • unlawflcombatnt, on 02/17/2008, -1/+5Here is a partial quote from Congressman Boner:
    "This issue of the carriers that work with our government are increasingly concerned about their liability..."

    The SHOULD be concerned about their liability. If they were sufficiently concerned in the 1st place, they never would have consented to the White House's illegal request.

    Their "concern" over liability is exactly what needs to be maintained, to serve as a constant threat and reminder to Telecoms, that the President does NOT make or write the law, and that he can't authorize anyone to break it, and if someone violates the law due to an illegal request by the President, that they may well be prosecuted for that violation. The Telecoms were fully aware of the law, fully aware that they were breaking it, and should have been fully aware that Bush cannot "authorize" the violation of law.

    And their failure to be fully aware, SHOULD cause them to be prosecuted, and even imprisoned.

    http://www.unlawflcombatnt.proboards84.com/

  • defwheezer, on 02/17/2008, -0/+1Under Republican Revolutionary Rule, there can be no Freedom or Liberty.
    By their own definition, Republicans = Unpatriotic
    The 11th commandment of the "Republican Revolution" (ala Saint Reagan) is don't EVER criticize another republican. They gain enormous political cohesion by following that commandment. Unfortunately, it is a philosophy which is fundamentally unPatriotic because it means that Republicans put party loyalty ABOVE loyalty to their country.
  • caponumen, on 02/17/2008, -1/+2The US became an institution of oppression the moment they seized upon the 14th amendment as an instrument of power over the people. The original intention of this amendment was to PROTECT individual rights, however it has instead used to slowly strip them away......
  • GhostyBoy, on 02/18/2008, -1/+3"Nancy Pelosi publicly sparred with President Bush on the issue"

    Kind of like WWE wresting?
  • capnjeremy, on 02/19/2008, -0/+3The Government only gets bigger, never smaller.
  • freedomwv, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1I agree with this article very much. We are a country of liberty not tyranny. There are a lot of American people who do not want the laws and ideas that the government wants to, and has already put into place, in our nation. We are a people who can take of things on our own terms. We do not need the government snooping around in our lives. It is our government that is turning into terrorist not the American people. Freedom Forever!
  •  

    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.