What is Digg?116 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -13/+93Lord almighty...
For the sake of the US and the world, I hope the democrats sweep both the congress and the senate. They may not be much better, but it's not possible to be worse. - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -11/+74The Scariest Thing about congressional leadership and the white house is . . . They seem dead certain there is no tomorrow.
They behave as if they are _dead sure_ that there will never be an investigation into why we went to war in Iraq, no bid contracts given to contractors, NSA wiretapping, torture, etc.
They do not expect to ever have to explain what they did or why they did it to anyone. They never expect to be held to account.
That's scary . . . because it means they think their grip on the government is so tight it can't be thrown off. Why are they so certain there is no "tomorrow"? Why don't their fear congressional investigations by future congresses? Why aren't they concerned about hearings or impeachment.
These folks have more tricks up their sleeves . . . - rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -5/+35BullyJack,
You have obviously reached your firm conclusions based on a patient, rational exploration of the facts. Can you enlighten us?
What precisely about the prospect of Nancy Pelosi becoming the Speaker of the House of Representatives fills you with such dread?
Can you enumerate the policies you somehow expect her to implement from her position in the House?
Can you list her positions on various critical issues and explain how they differ from your own, and precisely what the negative effects are that you believe will ensue from enacting them?
And, finally, can you provide us with sources for your data?
I look forward to learning a lot from you - you seem to have it all figured out! - 955701, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32Not likely. Groups like this are arrogant when they think they have a trump card. And that card, my friend, is electronic voting.
If you believe that the November elections will not be rigged, please consider the following:
* There is a risk of losing power
* There is a history of corruption from various members
* There is proof of covering for the corrupt
* There is a demonstrated vulnerability in electronic voting
* Less significant vote throwing has been done - this is more effective. - sych0, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27Put your money where your mouth is everyone and register to vote
https://electionimpact.votenet.com/declareyourself/voterreg/index.cfm - shirosamurai, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22I gotta say, I've never seen the Rolling Stone feature something this brazen, and more importantly, true. Maybe they're worth something after all.
- iheartcrack, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24I think BullyJack sums up one of the most disgusting things about those who want to keep the current round of creeps in power...
"Yeah, we suck! But THEY would be worse...F.U. America!" - maiku00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I think it would be more of a Horror
- rakslice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I think the US needs a viable third political party.
- L0phtpDK, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15My thoughts, as a Republican:
- It should been seen that a criminal is ALWAYS a criminal regardless if they are "on your team".
- I am sicken and disturbed by the current administration and our elected representatives.
- However, my ideals have never, nor will ever change; regardless of what dubious individual agrees with me.
I believe that this is the same with the Democrats or any political party. For that, I will always hold my respect for them. - senorBojangles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14If we let the country sink we all lose. Hold them responsible NOW and save yourself.
Gerrymandering, closed sessions, corruption, letting corporations and lobbyist write actual legislation, have all got to stop!
Vote the incumbents out. - FullMetalMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14I always thought that our congress would make a good sitcom on NBC.
- mweflen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11This is one of the five most important things any American could possibly read right now. If even 10% of it is true (and Rolling Stone, though hidebound conservatives may decry it without reading this article, is a respectable publication with journalistic standards of integrity), it is a chilling statement on how broken our government is.
I don't even think it could be fixed at this point, short of an asteroid impact in Washington D.C. - pgup, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Very good read.
- successrealm, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16America let the stench continue after 2004. While I agreed THEN, that Bush and his admin would do themselves in and was kinda glad they had "won" so that they would be seen for what they were (FAILURES), I really don't think America can take another 2 years of this *****. We can't afford to let them continue dragging US and AMERICA down with the ship they put holes in.
America is waking up, finally.... - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12Vacuum seal this issue, it's a classic.
- consonance, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10My guess is that there is so much overwhelming contempt for this Congress among both the staff at the readership that there is little to no risk of losing subscribers in promoting this cover story.
- MacArthur, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Every time I come on this website I think I hate the government a little more.
- maiku00, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10probobly 46 of the current 346 diggs have actually read the entire article
yes, its long, but READ IT! It is extremely good. - youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8What would an asteroid impact on DC do? They have only shown up a measly 3 months out of the year!
Chances are the asteroid would only hit those that are actually working! - maiku00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9congratulations on posting a comment. now, your next task is to actually read the article!
- fungible, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The writer of this article, Matt Taibbi, has often written articles promoting independent candidates. He also often opines about how easily corrupted both parties are. He is probably more frustrated by the system than any political writer I've ever seen. Trust me, he agrees with you.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7At least one house should never again be the same party as the president... i dont care if dem or gop is control, they shouldnt run the whole government. After all the government that governs best, governs least.
- gardnert1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5You do. It's like constantly revisiting a brutal torture/murder scene and each time you do you find out a little more evidence about the criminal.
- chaimpot0k, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Great quote:
"Bush would have to drink the blood of Christian babies to inspire hearings in Congress -- and only then if he did it during a nationally televised State of the Union address and the babies were from Pennsylvania, where Senate Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter was running ten points behind in an election year." - diggreader1963, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@ david513
It's easy to see that you are a political consultant. Things will be much different with a Democratic House and Senate. Bush will lose his "rubber-stamp" and gutless Congress, and he'll be forced to move toward the center. It's called compromise. Moreover, the Congress, if controlled by the opposing party to the Whitehouse, will do its oversight job correctly. It will investigate the presidential wrongdoings. As things are now, Bush gets away with murder. - MacArthur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I think thats why we need a system with more than just two parties. Having more parties in Congress might not completely fix the problems with todays politics but I think it would help prevent any one party from becoming to powerful. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think having at least one more party would be great for the country.
- gardnert1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Those who disallow themselves the luxury of change will show themselves to be more and more foolish as the world changes around them.
- brianjameskirk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7This article makes me wish Obama could be cloned 99 times in 50 states.
- diggreader1963, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7At the moment, the best option for the American people is to sweep out the GOP. If you want to lead a revolution outside of the system, good luck to ya'. Let me know how that goes. Meantime, a Democratic congress will pull Bush to the center and force him to compromise. It will also provide some backbone to the congress when it comes time to stand up to the Whitehouse.
In a nutshell: change the course. - blahblah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Ok. While we are nitpicking, there is nothing wrong with qualifying "congress and the senate." Saying that the democrats need to sweep both is like saying, "i'm gonna eat my whole dinner, including dessert."
- maiku00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I thought the same this as you last elections, guy. I figured "hey, they dug themselves into the *****, well they can go ahead and dig themselves back the ***** out." Guess what happened? The hole is a ***** crater.
PLEASE go and vote democrat, take control of both the house and senate away from the GOP. It will be a nice smack in the face to the Bush administration. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The US political system is written so that it'll always favor having two parties, no more, no less. Pick whichever of the democrats or republicans represent your views the best, but don't waste your vote on the libertarians. And I say this even though I consider myself libertarian.
- gardnert1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I wish the Dems could get another shot at control; maybe they could reverse the damage done to it. But I dont think they will get that chance. Not with the voting fraud so effective. Electronic or not, the voting in America will make no difference. The Republicans have the power to prevent certain people from voting, make certain votes disappear, and make certain votes not count. I predict that we will see another narrow victory for the Republicans giving the people the illusion that their votes mattered. Even with a despotic President and an actively impotent Congress the Democrats will continue to exist in the shadows to make it look like we are still living in a democracy.
The question people need to be thinking about is what will be done in the event the Republicans retain control of the government? - rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Since when did "accountability" become "vengeance"? Are you suggesting our elected officials should not be held to the laws that govern them, because they claim to be acting in the interests of National Insecurity or the War on Terra?
- cvrti5, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Wow, 2 of the 10 are from Colorado, which is where I am.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Gun duels should still be legal.
- rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3killinger, the "onthe vote.org" site you cite is clearly non-partisan and can be trusted as to the accuracy of their information - right?
Surely the fact that they list Al Gore's party affiliation as "Democrat tweedledeeb" on their sign-up page is not a statement of political partisanship (and the fact that they list him and Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader as candidates on the same page does not mean their information is outdated - as in SIX YEARS OUTDATED!). See here: http://www.ontheissues.org/join.htm - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm still reading this very intreaging article but I'll share one of the quotes that has caught my eye so far.
"This year, the second session of the 109th Congress will set the all-time record for fewest days worked by a U.S. Congress: ninety-three. That means that House members will collect their $165,000 paychecks for only three months of actual work."
Assuming they work 8 hour days (by the way they don't) they are making $229/hr plus any private sector business or under the table schemes. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I agree with MacArthur, we should get to elect 1 dem, 1 independant, and 1 repub, and they should all be forced to work tg, to come up with 1 acceptable answer, that would be great 3 presidents!
- Futurepower, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8People who think the U.S. government is corrupt usually don't even know about most of the corruption:
Why and How Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld started the U.S.—Iraq War
http://futurepower.org/why_and_how_the_war.html - youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4And they pointed that out in the article had you bothered to read it! It turns out that the republicans are still far worse though.
- ridiculoufish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4> Remember back in the '70s and '80s when Democrats controlled Congress?
> They had controlled both houses since sometime in the '50s, if I remember
> correctly. They were just as corrupt and dishonest as the Republicans
> of today's Congress.
No they WERE NOT, damn it. That's the point of the article - that this is the Worst Congress Ever, and that's born out in the statistics it cites.
"From the McCarthy era in the 1950s through the Republican takeover of Congress in 1995, no Democratic committee chairman issued a subpoena without either minority consent or a committee vote. In the Clinton years, Republicans chucked that long-standing arrangement..."
"In 1977, when Democrats held a majority in the House, eighty-five percent of all bills were open to amendment. But by 1994, the last year Democrats ran the House, that number had dropped to thirty percent... In the second session of this Congress? Not a single open rule, outside of appropriation votes."
"This year, the second session of the 109th Congress will set the all-time record for fewest days worked by a U.S. Congress: ninety-three..."
Etc. etc. So no, Democrats were not "just as corrupt and dishonest." - rationalist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Are you kidding? All you need is one politician, in order to to get three mutually exclusive opinions--all at the same time.
- robbiedo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Read article: Wow!!
- kyote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Term Limits, No PAC / Lobbyists, no campaign contributions. That'd be the first three things I'd like to see the next congress pass.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Although I'm a libertarian I say: please don't. A vote for a libertarian candidate is a wasted vote. Vote for whichever suits your views best, rep or dem, but until the system is modified don't bother voting for any third party.
- crweaks23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Did anyone else get this magazine for free? Showed up in the mail addressed to me, although I don't have a subscription... and never have for that matter. Just lucky?
- kyote, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6If Rolling Stone wanted to see some real change, they would skip past the Rs and the Ds and promote some real honest 3rd party candidates who aren't in the pockets of some PAC or special interest group. Then perhaps we'd get real campaign reform, the elimination of Lobbyists from Washington DC and get back to people who ran for higher office to actually serve the People and not their own selfish greed. Until that happens, I don't care which party is in power, they are all the same corrupt, swindling, deceitful, cheating bastards in my eyes.
Those of you blind fools who believe that "oh, if only the democrats were in power this would all be better" are only deceiving yourselves. Of course, it does no good to tell you this because you don't and won't want to hear it. That's ok And you Republicans who believe everything is great are walking with blinders on. The Republicans have so far abandoned the principals they founded themselves on it's not even funny.
I'm telling you this, the days of the United States Government are numbered. We won't last for many more years. Unless there comes some drastic change, we'll just be another chapter in history. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It was indeed. Much of it was unexpected - who'd have guessed that e.g. Arars fight to get recompensed for being deported and tortured show that the media is biased in favor of the democrats?
Seems Colbert was right: reality DOES have a liberal bias. -
Show 51 - 100 of 115 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