digg

Join DiggAbout

Ron Paul publicly names neoconservatives watch!

youtube.com — This is one of (if not) the most important videos on the net right now. Ron Paul once again proves he is 100% for the people and is the most courageous and honest candidate in modern history. Spread it!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • stienster, on 05/15/2008, -48/+358Awesome Dr. Paul!! God's Grace go with you!
    • whataboutdave, on 05/15/2008, -62/+32There is no God. There is only Ron Paul.
      • bjornski, on 05/15/2008, -48/+18Don't tell that ton Ron. It would mess up his creationist beliefs.
      • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -51/+11Heil Ron Paul!
      • yojiffyskippy, on 05/15/2008, -37/+6Let me get this straight. Obama is the Messiah and Paul is God..... or is it the other way. I don't know which group of fanboys are worse.
        • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -9/+27no, you didn't straighten anything, you just twisted it to suit your own desires. who do you idolize? Neocons?
          • Tiak, on 05/15/2008, -3/+9How about we don't idolize anyone and acknowledge that everyone has faults?... Or would that make too much sense?
        • jaznova, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9Everything is not black or white. As annoying as paul fanboys can be, there are many things in this audio clip that good Americans will resonate with.
      • sanman, on 05/15/2008, -26/+12I agree with a few of his points, but not most of them.

        He's trying to use the name of Trotsky to pin some kind of 'commie' label on the Neocons. That sounds contrived and cheesy. He also says the neocons aren't opposed to the welfare state, and I seriously doubt that. Perle, Krystol, Kagan, Krauthammer, etc are indeed Israel supporters. But what about George Will, who is a strong Ron Paul supporter and also a strong Likud supporter?

        I think it's good that he opposes foreign interventionism like Wilsonianism which helped cause WW2, but yet he feels it's wrong for the US to speak out on Tibet. Would he have turned a blind eye to Hitler, like Neville Chamberlain or Charles Lindberg?

        How does Ron Paul feel about Ronald Reagan then? Reagan pursued a mighty defense buildup, aggressive foreign interventionism, and was lionized by these very same neocons, whom Ron Paul is wary of. I see some inconsistencies here.

        Would some of the Ron Paul supporters care to answer? How do you all feel about Reagan? He proposed SDI. He invaded Lebanon. He invaded Grenada. He armed the Contras. He armed the Mujahedin. He sold arms to Iran and Iraq. He was an aggressive foreign interventionist, and he is lauded by neocons for having won the Cold War. Let's hear the Ron Paul supporters speak to these things.
        • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -8/+28maybe you should read this: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr07 ...
          • sanman, on 05/15/2008, -22/+15cmon man, use your own mouth/fingers, and show me that Ron Paul supporters aren't all a bunch of dumb rednecks too stupid to do anything but point to Ron Paul's webpage. Just show me that you know something about the man, and speak to my points on your own. The Obamabots do that too -- whenever you question his policies, they just direct you to a weblink. It's like they don't even know what his policies are, and can't speak of them on their own.
          • blackolive, on 05/15/2008, -29/+14This video shows why Paul is considered a joke - he can't stop lying. Claiming Leo Strauss is a liberal is so stunningly dishonest that you expect Ron Paul to say it.

            Paul doesn't believe in separation of church & state either. He's not a constitution expert, he's just ignorant.
          • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -11/+22sanman, your obvious bias is showing. using an excuse that you want it your way is just an excuse, nothing more... all the info is available. open your eyes. Reagan said one thing to get elected, then went against his own principles. RP even liked Bushs platform before the election. the link I supplied was THE speech this video was hacked from. It is long and intense, I had to read and re read it several times... and black olive, wow, what arrogant ignorance you posess!
          • thecoolestguy, on 05/15/2008, -9/+13blackolive, that's the biggest load of ***** I've ever read:

            --------This video shows why Paul is considered a joke - he can't stop lying. Claiming Leo Strauss is a liberal is so stunningly dishonest that you expect Ron Paul to say it.----

            Leo Strauss believed in BIG GOVERNMENT, thus making him a "liberal", as the term is commonly defined now (left winger= liberal).

            ---Paul doesn't believe in separation of church & state either. He's not a constitution expert, he's just ignorant.----

            You're just showing your complete ignorance of the Constitution. The Constitution guarantees a separation of church and state at the federal level, it does not guarantee a separation of church and state at the state government level. That matter is up to each State Constitution to deal with.

            In any case, the only time Ron Paul has commented on "church and state" is to support the right of students to pray VOLUNTARILY (in other words not mandated by the state) should they wish to in school outside of instruction time. What the f.uck is that problem with that?
          • Square47, on 05/15/2008, -3/+1"You're just showing your complete ignorance of the Constitution. The Constitution guarantees a separation of church and state at the federal level"

            Complete ignorance heh? Like it or not, the Constitution doesn't really say anything about the "separation of church and state".

            I borrowed this from another site, but it does a fair job explaining the situation.

            "Those words never came from the Constituion. The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution, but rather is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, quoting the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, he writes: "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church and State." While Jefferson's letter is often cited by separationists to prove that the original intent of the First Amendment was complete separation of church and state, anti-separationists either consider it irrelevant or might say that it supports the idea that the original intention of the First Amendment was to guarantee religion the freedom to exist without government influence, and say that it makes no mention of government being wholly separate from all religious activity. Anti-separationists also point to the fact that Thomas Jefferson was not in America during the constitutional convention, but in France as the American ambassador. This is supported by Federal Government decisions on the matter, such as Supreme court case Vidal v. Philadelphia, as well as Federal Government's past involvement in printing Bibles, and using the Bible as a textbook in public schools."
          • floatingorb, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2"cmon man, use your own mouth/fingers"
            I can't speak for Ron Paul, but I think Reagan was a real tool. He was just another 'Bushed' down {If it wasn't always Bush with Reagan as a figurehead/puppet} Nixonian. Personally, I'm not sure I would be too repulsed to read that someone broke into his grave and smoked pot out of his skull.
        • thecoolestguy, on 05/15/2008, -2/+10---I think it's good that he opposes foreign interventionism like Wilsonianism which helped cause WW2, but yet he feels it's wrong for the US to speak out on Tibet. Would he have turned a blind eye to Hitler, like Neville Chamberlain or Charles Lindberg?---

          He feels it's wrong for the FEDERAL government to speak about Tibet, because it has no Constitutional authority to intervene in the affairs of other nations. There is nothing stopping private American citizens from protesting China's actions on Tibet, or boycotting Chinese products.

          As far as Hitler, he believes that if a power arises that threatens the United States, Congress should declare war, as required by the Constitution, and the entire nation mobilized to win.

          ---How does Ron Paul feel about Ronald Reagan then?---

          Ron Paul feels that Ronald Reagan did not stand by his principles and grew government and foreign intervention tremendously.

        • Rabbittt, on 06/07/2008, -0/+1Pay attention, geez, Paul called the Far Left Troskyites, not Neocons..
    • plimpton777, on 05/15/2008, -19/+127I met him at a book signing in New York. What a gentle, kind, humble (to the point of shyness) man. May God bless Ron Paul and God bless freedom.
      • jana67, on 05/15/2008, -9/+55http://best.hopeforamerica.ever.com Ron Paul is a true gentleman and a warrior of true freedom!
      • Idiggapony, on 05/15/2008, -12/+34He is also handsome and eloquent! I am told he was once an expert badminton player.
        • afx1, on 05/15/2008, -3/+55ok this is getting weird now
        • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -4/+18Ron Paul is both handsome and dashing. Were I in possession of female genitalia, I would allow Ron Paul to use them as he wished.
        • bigj480, on 05/15/2008, -4/+11 Not only is he gentle, kind, humble, a gentleman, a warrior of true freedom, handsome, eloquent, and dashing, he is also dandy, strapping, comely, fey, puissant, sooth, doughty,froward, dour and dwimmer-crafty!
        • GianDoe, on 05/15/2008, -2/+16he has many leather bound books, and an apartment which smells of rich mohogany.
      • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -26/+16He can talk to animals and breathe underwater, and on the Tenth Day of the Tenth Month he will lead us to our home planet Blisstopia.

        Nuh nuh nuh nuh nuh nuh nuh nuh Leader...
      • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -6/+20Once I went out drinking with Ron Paul. He took me to an open field, and they built a bar around where he sat. When we left, he burned the bar to the ground. He told me "Rick, you should leave things as you found them.". TO RON PAAAAAUL!!!!
      • expert01, on 05/15/2008, -12/+4Jesus Christ, you guys are making him sound like the Antichrist.
      • orlyfactor, on 05/15/2008, -6/+5There is no God, FFS. Bunch of superstitious fools.
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -110/+21How the ***** are you ***** being dugg up?
      • mystcnurse, on 05/15/2008, -11/+55because you are a nasty dick and we don't want you?
      • 2bsbc, on 05/15/2008, -8/+45"Freedom is popular", X. Plus you're an *****.
      • lust, on 05/15/2008, -2/+17Cuz this ***** is important. Wouldn't you want to know if our government has become into one big ***** police state.
      • buckrogers1965, on 05/15/2008, -3/+11Because the Megaphone bury brigade hasn't shown up yet.
      • notanidiot, on 05/15/2008, -4/+3***** are for digging! Thats why they itch so much!
      • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -0/+7How are you not banned?
      • EmporerTitus, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2oH,OH my turn.

        "HE'S CATCHING ON, I'M TELLING YA!"
    • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -86/+21Ron Paul's more ***** insane than I ever thought he was. It's really good to know that when he hit the national scene he was a total failure. Goodbye, Ronnie. You won't be missed.
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -11/+68it's jerkhimer, the king of the zionist bury brigade, here spew his lies and propaganda.
        • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -45/+13You're the worst troll I've ever seen. If you wanna be less obvious, stop using the same phrase in every comment.
          • nitramlliw, on 05/15/2008, -1/+5really? i'd say that you were the worst troll I've ever seen. I've never seen anything you've EVER posted on these discussions above -10 diggs. just in case you didn't know, that means that more often than not, people think you're a moron.
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -19/+9Of course, he's a JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

          That's sure original.
        • CoolHandLuke70, on 05/15/2008, -10/+31ncairns -- Zionism DOES NOT have to imply being a Jew. You should crack a book--It will broaden your horizon of originality!
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -23/+12The vein of antisemitism woven throughout the Cult of Paul has been well established. Hiding behind labeling people 'Zionists' is a tired tactic of people who really which they could just call them 'Jews'.

            Just ask the folks at Stormfront, or David Duke - if he's not too busy stumping for Ron.
          • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -13/+8People who constantly reference "zionists" and "international bankers" are really talking about Jews.....News at 11!
          • Tiak, on 05/15/2008, -8/+7They're talking about people that support the state of Israel... Most of these people are in fact, not Jewish...
          • CoolHandLuke70, on 05/15/2008, -5/+14ncairns and sonofblacula -- I am pro true-Torah Jews and against Zionism---so am I just an anomaly? What about the group Jews Against Zionism? How does that play into your theory?
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -9/+4I never said that there weren't legitimate grievances against Israel - of course there are. I said that nearly invariably when you see someone slur an ideological opponent as a 'Zionist', they do so as a way to (poorly) veil their tacit antisemitism. It's a cheap way to conjure up stereotypes and foment prejudices to distract from legitimate arguments which might otherwise precipitate useful, or at least interesting, discussion. It doesn't help, either, that an appreciable fraction of Ron Paul supporters are outright racists.
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -9/+6Bahahahaha - this is too good.

            As pointed out by swrostmore at the bottom of this thread:

            "Other videos by the same uploader and Ron Paul supporter AresXIV:
            The [Jewish] Medical Swindle
            How the Jews destroy Western culture (1 of 2)
            Jewish ***** pedophiles
            Whites MUST RESIST
            Racial Facts - we are at WAR
            Whites killed by illegal aliens"

            I trust you'll now join me in burying the ***** out of this submission?
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -7/+6Dugg down for pointing out that the person who posted this video is a worthless, racist piece of *****?

            What ***** cowards you are.
          • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4Person who posted the video = racist = that sucks.
            That however, does not take away from Ron Paul's speech, which is why I dugg it.
        • mike17032, on 05/15/2008, -19/+11Glad to see Anti-semites like Bohemian still support old paul, they do almost as much to damage his cause as he does.
        • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -5/+9* ncairns .....im a JOOOOOOOOOOOOO...and and i hate YoUUUUUUUUUUUUU...and i hate myself TOOOOOOOOOOOOOO..//s....
      • conceptkid, on 05/15/2008, -4/+19Troll. move along people.
      • notanidiot, on 05/15/2008, -1/+9total failure? Seems to me he got more donations in one day than any of the other candidates, and he got more donations from the troops than any other candidate as well.

        Oh, by the "national scene", you must mean the mainstream media.

        Yeah, that's right, you're done.
      • neopolaris, on 05/15/2008, -1/+7Let's hear it for our resident spOOk. Try not to laugh fellas. The poor fool as no discernment whatsoever. Who needs a clue when you can get a paycheck, huh Herky?
    • Hrodrik, on 05/15/2008, -3/+43Smart man.
    • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -39/+16How can you people stand being lectured about fiscal responsibility from a man who earmarked more pork per head in 2007 than any other candidate?

      He's an irrelevant hypocrite, nothing more.
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -9/+26you're an irrelevant troll, nothing more. "earmarks" is an old attempt at smearing RP, but long debunked.
        • onetimer, on 05/15/2008, -29/+12LOL smeared? debunked? Is that a buzzword you people use to describe things that make mr paul PBUH look bad?

          His penchant for earmarks and pork is public record. Mr. "fiscal conservative" is ranked worse than most CONGRESSMAN (dems and repubs) when it comes to bringing in the $$$.
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -23/+24No, it's not - actually it's a fact. He earmarked more pork per head, according to the Pig Book, than any other presidential candidate.

          His earmarks totaled $22 million in 2007, to McCain's $0, Obama's $97.4 million, and Clinton's $296.2 million. Accounted for the number of people they each represent, that makes Obama's pork per head ~$7.6, Clinton's ~$15.6, and Paul's ~$33.76.
          • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -9/+21its all been explained, trolls. you are repeating useless garbage.
          • onetimer, on 05/15/2008, -21/+11Ooh, which explanation is it this time?

            The robin hood "stealing from the evil evil government and giving it back to the people!!" hypocritical argument, or the "well the money is already there so i guess it's OK" two-wrongs-make-a-right cop out?
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -21/+11Yes, if by 'explained' you mean 'totally not explained at all'.

            He earmarked $22 million, you *****! That's a fact. It's not a smear - it's public record, and you can't explain that away, even though I know an OT IV Paulentologist like you has some pretty deft chops for equivocation and apologetics.
          • matador3, on 05/15/2008, -9/+19Here you go douches. This article is from a year ago and as far as I know he's never once changed his explanation.

            "Though much attention is focused on the notorious abuses of earmarking, and there are plenty of examples, in fact even if all earmarks were eliminated we would not necessarily save a single penny in the federal budget. Because earmarks are funded from spending levels that have been determined before a single earmark is agreed to, with or without earmarks the spending levels remain the same. Eliminating earmarks designated by Members of Congress would simply transfer the funding decision process to federal bureaucrats rather then elected representatives. In an already flawed system, earmarks can at least allow residents of Congressional districts to have a greater role in allocating federal funds – their tax dollars – than if the money is allocated behind locked doors by bureaucrats. So we can be critical of the abuses in the current system but we shouldn't lose sight of how some reforms may not actually make the system much better." http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul392.html
          • onetimer, on 05/15/2008, -21/+11Ah yes, the robin hood "the money is already there so it's OK to spend it" hypocritical argument. He's philosophically opposed to spending, but it's ok to add earmarks as long as he votes *against* it, right? Funny, one would think that someone opposed to spending would refuse to get his beak wet with it. There seems at least to be a dozen or so congressman that haven't earmarked a thing.

            "I'm against murder, but if it's going to be done anyway, I have some names i'd like to add to the hit-list"
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -17/+10In other words, equivocation and apologetics?

            Sort of a hybrid of the 'Robin Hood' and 'might as well do it anyway' arguments?

            You do realize you're in a cult don't you? What happened to his "opposition to appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution."? When you're willing to try to explain away why your hero doesn't even attempt to live up to the principles he pretends to have to protect your cozy echo chamber of cognitive dissonance and willful ignorance, you've given up your ***** brain as messianic tithe.
          • 911ArtStudent, on 05/15/2008, -9/+17Earmarks are just a way to give back to his district what was never rightfully claimed in the first place. It also means he is vigilant and doing his job well by being so successful at it.
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -18/+11"Earmarks are just a way to give back to his district what was never rightfully claimed in the first place."

            Read the ***** Court decisions.

            Despite what noted legal scholar Ron "Vagina Doctor" Paul told you, the federal income tax is completely legitimate and no court will ever rule otherwise.
          • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -14/+7@ncairn
            Your post was not only biting, but very well written. I don't mean to slob your knob here but...have you ever considered writing professionally?
          • 911ArtStudent, on 05/15/2008, -4/+12Read about how FDR "packed the court" by expanding it to 9 justices from 5 because the Supreme Court kept overturning his policies as being an unconstitutional power grab. Packing the SCOTUS with cronies and paying lip-service to the Constitution are not true to the spirit of the law
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -10/+6Packed the entire federal court system, did he? He must have been a SUPER-CRIPPLE!

            No American court - ever - has recognized any of the arguments lodged by tax protesters as being legitimate. The reality is best summarized in the Alaska District Court's opinion in United States v. Rempel: "It is apparent ...that the defendants have at least had access to some of the publications of tax protester organizations. The publications of these organizations have a bad habit of giving lots of advice without explaining the consequences which can flow from the assertion of totally discredited legal positions and/or meritless factual positions."

            I don't blame you for having a poor sense of reality, though - you're a bloody art student.
          • thecoolestguy, on 05/15/2008, -2/+8----Ah yes, the robin hood "the money is already there so it's OK to spend it" hypocritical argument. ----

            Its not a Robin Hood argument. Learn what Robin Hood did: he stole from the rich and gave to the poor. All Ron Paul does with his earmarks is get the money that taxes take from his district, AND GIVES IT BACK TO HIS DISTRICT. So take from the middle class and give back to the middle class.

            You obviously have absolutely no idea how earmarks work for you to make such a stupid comment.
          • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -2/+3I can see the disinformation/smear brigade is out in full force with their same disproven BS AS ALWAYS.
      • thecoolestguy, on 05/15/2008, -7/+29If you knew any thing about earmarks, you would know that they spend monies already allocated for spending. Ron Paul has voted against ALL of those spending bills, and as a representative of his constituents, has placed earmarks in the bills to ensure that, if passed, the bill would return some of his constituents tax dollars to their district.

        To make sure you don't mislead people, I want to stress that whether a bill has zero earmarks or 500 earmarks makes no difference to how much money is spent.

        If you were objective, you would realize that Ron Paul is against spending, and has voted against, written about, and made speeches about spending more than any other public official in American history.
        • onetimer, on 05/15/2008, -20/+12Yes, we've heard the tired old "it's going to be spent anyway so we might as well grab as much as we can" philosophically hypocritical argument.

          I'm against bank robbery, but since someone already did it, it's OK to keep the money that they stole.
          • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -2/+4He votes against the system, but he still does his job under the rules of the current system in order to represent his constituents. It is useless arguing with you, however, as it is like talking to a brick wall.
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -18/+10Yes, and Batman should totally start robbing banks - because, I mean, there's going to be crime anyway.

          Right?

          Moreover, ***** Texas. They're already getting back 94% of all the federal taxes they pay in federal spending projects. New Jersey, meanwhile, is only getting back 61% - if Paul had any ***** integrity whatsoever, he'd apply this argument to them, not Texas.

          (And, by the way, no he has not voted against 'ALL' of those spending bills. From the Club for Growth: "[Paul's] record took a stark turn for the worse in 2007, in which Paul received an embarrassing 29% on the Club for Growth's RePORK Card, voting for only 12 of the 50 anti-pork amendments.")
        • thecoolestguy, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9onetimer and ncairs, you guys are missing the point entirely, because you're ignoring what I'm saying.

          What I'm saying is that whether earmarks are made or not, that money is going to be spent. Spending bills determine how much money will be spent. Earmarks simply decide HOW that money will be spent. Ron Paul says: "you shouldn't steal money for government programs, but if you're going to do it, at least have some of the government programs in my district". You're a mindless idiot to criticize his approach. You prefer politicians that vote FOR spending bills.



          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -6/+3@thecoolestguy

            You're being willfully dense, and not even trying to address Paul's obvious hypocrisy for fear it might lead to the natural revelation that your prophet is less than divine. Not that any of this will get through your blinders, but oh well:

            1. "Spending bills determine how much money will be spent."

            And, as I pointed out, Ron Paul does not always vote against those bills. In fact, recently he's more often than not failed to vote against them.

            2. "you shouldn't steal money for government programs, but if you're going to do it, at least have some of the government programs in my district"

            Yeah, you keep saying this but, at the risk of sounding trite, Ron Paul is not ***** Robin Hood. Aside from the overarching - and blinding - stupidity inherent in the idea that funding government programs with tax revenue is 'stealing', the fact is that if Paul's interest was in rectifying the citizen's monetary loss to federal taxes his first concern would be with the fifteen states which see considerably less return on their taxes than Texas does. It's an absolutely ludicrous attempt to justify his hypocrisy to claim that a man who rails about principle and fiscal responsibility can soundly violate those principles in a paradoxical attempt to validate them! Christ, I have a degree in physics and that crap makes my head spin. What absolute nonsense.
    • bugsy187, on 05/15/2008, -7/+38It's great that Ron Paul is pointing out the neocons and what they stand for, but he's not the first. Noam Chomsky has spoken about them for years. The Christian Science Monitor has even had articles about them for years. It's common knowledge in intellectual circles.
      http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/index.htm ...
      http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101 ...

      There are others, but it's not worth boring you with the details. If Ron Paul is someone you're willing to listen to, I guess that's the important thing. Just keep an open mind to other sources out there.
      • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -28/+10I know Noam Chomsky, I like Noam Chomsky, Noam Chomsky was a professor of mine. Please, please, PLEASE do not compare Noam Chomsky to Ron Paul. One is one of the world's leading intellectuals, the most cited living human being, and an instructor at MIT. The other is a borderline-senile OB/GYN from a third-rate school who thinks evolution is 'just a theory'.
        • 911ArtStudent, on 05/15/2008, -5/+16Duke University Medical School is a third rate school? BS!
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -11/+11Actually, as I told someone else today, calling Duke 'third-rate' for clinical medicine is being exceedingly generous - for primary care it's ranked 41st in the nation.
          • KMye, on 05/15/2008, -4/+6Okay, but what was it ranked back in 1879 when Paul was attending?
        • KennMac, on 05/15/2008, -9/+12Result to ad-hominem as always. Just wondering, does "XXXXXXXXXXXXXX" at least give you a reach-around?
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -12/+11I know the conventional wisdom among Paulentologist pseudo-libertarians is that 'saying Latin-y stuff makes you sound smart', but that's generally only the case if you use the phrase correctly. You see, in an ad hominem argument one party makes an accusation of a second party which is not based in or borne out by observation and which is not relevant to the argument. My frequent observation of Paul's nonsensical ravings amply evidentiate my first claim, the fact that he's an OB/GYN substantiates the second, that Duke is a mediocre school for clinical medicine corroborates the third, and if you really want I can link you to a YouTube video that verifies the fourth. If you can't see why his mental health, educational provenance and base intelligence are relevant to his ability to lead the nation, no amount of expounding upon it will do any good.

            No ad hominem anywhere in there. Sorry.
          • Square47, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I don't really care about Ron Paul (or Duke), but I don't know where you get your ranking for Duke from.

            "for primary care it's ranked 41st in the nation"

            Do you have a source for this? I also wonder that if Ron is an OBGYN than what does a primary care ranking have to do with the quality of the program he attended for his primary area of study? You seem to go through a lot of trouble to explain the Latin but I don't see these points passing your own standards. You may be right, I just see these as being unsubstantiated as I can not find a list or ranking of primary care colleges.
        • ArvinJA, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Too bad, his generative grammar is *****. ;)
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1@Square47

          ***** this new comment system is abysmal. You probably won't even find this since it won't let me reply directly to your comment, but here:

          http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/ ...
      • mike17032, on 05/15/2008, -21/+6Ah, another fringe wacko. Chomsky is almost as crazy as paul is.
        • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -2/+13I don't agree with Chomsky's viewpoints on most things, but he certainly isn't crazy. He is a very bright and insightful guy. However, I'm also not much on hero warship, so I think maybe ncairns needs to lay off the koolaid a bit.
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -14/+4Actually, everything I said was demonstrably true - he held the top spot in the 2005 Global Intellectuals Poll, according to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index he is the eight most cited human being of all time and the most cited of all living human beings, and he is a professor emeritus of linguistics and MIT.
          • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -14/+2*at MIT
          • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -1/+2Memo to ncairns: academic rankings are one small aspect of functional intelligence. Anyone who relies solely on academic standing as their judge of one's intelligence has proven where their intelligence level resides.
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1Memo to kemp34: Romanticized ***** like that was invented to make C-students feel better about being stupid. Aside from your hilariously ignorant assertion that Chomsky need to rely on his academic standing as a standard of intellect, here's a little tip to keep in mind - MIT professors *tend* to be on the bright side.
    • CthulhuDawn, on 05/15/2008, -21/+10Buried for trashing Hitchens. Supporting the Iraq war doesn't make you a Neo-Con, it just makes you wrong.
      • CoolHandLuke70, on 05/15/2008, -3/+12Hitchens is a hypocritical drunkard who would not know unbiased journalism if it bit him!!
    • mike17032, on 05/15/2008, -27/+9Looks like the pualtards got a second wing going with spamming their stupid inane ***** to digg again. Guess all those "inaccurate land line polls" where pretty much dead on after all. Maybe gaming internet polls isnt the same thing has having real support either.

      Any chance to watch old paul prove he is a ***** idiot is always good for a laugh though. Keep the running joke going paulbots, its at your expense.
    • moxx, on 05/15/2008, -5/+20False accusations made about Hitchens...
      He does not support Israel, rather quite the opposite
      He is a strict constitutionalist
      He supports personal freedoms
      He is quite far left on most issues, so to label Hitchens, the king of dissent as a neo-con is simply...wrong. Otherwise excellent work Mr. Paul
      • Fordi, on 05/15/2008, -3/+11Agreed. I'm usually in agreement with Dr. Paul, but including Hitchens in that group was moronic. I'm pretty sure he didn't even support the war; I did see one article he wrote about the minor differences between "preemptive" and "preventative" wars, but it was mostly to illustrate that they're indistinguishable, and that a Type II error (false positive) in matters of war is disastrous.
    • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -5/+23But wait, I just watched Fox News and they told me that the neocons don't exist! Nevermind that the neocon movement is the one who coined the term, nevermind that they were all students of Leo Strauss, nevermind that they are currently in power. Fox told me they don't exist, so I will always and forever call anyone who says they exist a conspiracy theorist. Fox News said so.
    • RonPaulSucksAss, on 05/15/2008, -27/+11Too bad he can't keep his God out of my politics.
      • ClyWbr41, on 05/15/2008, -2/+14Nice name. Biased much?
      • thecoolestguy, on 05/15/2008, -1/+11Ron Paul does not want to impose any thing on you, he wants to cut all federal programs, letting your own local community decide how much to tax and what to spend that tax money on.
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -7/+2Gee, is *that* why he tried to define life as beginning at conception?
      • neopolaris, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5Must be payday at the pentagon.
    • swrostmore, on 05/15/2008, -23/+12Other videos by the same uploader and Ron Paul supporter AresXIV:
      The [Jewish] Medical Swindle
      How the Jews destroy Western culture (1 of 2)
      Jewish ***** pedophiles
      Whites MUST RESIST
      Racial Facts - we are at WAR
      Whites killed by illegal aliens

      And you wonder why people think Ron Paul has ties to white Supremacists? ***** you, and to think he fools some people by speaking the OBVIOUS about neoconservativism. ***** that. Ron Paul for president and all you ***** NWO fearheads = "the South will Rise Again" oh and we hate THE JEWS too.
      • notanidiot, on 05/15/2008, -2/+11Hmmm, don't see any mention of this Ares Character. Besides, I'm sure the Nazis drank milk. I drink milk. Does that make me a Nazi? Guilt by association is the battle cry of retards. Youre done.
        • ncairns, on 05/15/2008, -6/+31. 'AresXIV' is the username of the person who uploaded this video to YouTube.

          2. Your analogy is intentionally broken. The actual equivalent situation would be if you advocated an ideology which found broad support among Nazis - which wouldn't make you a Nazi, but would make me wonder what about your philosophy appeals to racist pieces of *****.

          3. You fail.
          • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -2/+4So if a Nazi dislikes Neo Cons, I shouldn't dislike Neo Cons? Sorry, but NO. I agree with Paul's speech in spite of whoever the hell uploaded it.
    • bobangitanov2, on 05/16/2008, -3/+1I can't believe some idiots still haven't realised that the only reason Ron Paul ran for president was to secure his congressional re-election
    • pitlord, on 06/05/2008, -0/+1Wow. Someone fire up an old RP diggbot army or something? It is pathetic how digg can be so easily fooled by a bunch of puppet accounts into fraudulently allowing ludicrous crap like this video to hit the front page.
      -_-
      And then you ignorant libtard hicks will believe anything that blames the Jews for your own problems.
  • LumpyRevolution, on 05/15/2008, -30/+271SPREAD THIS!
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -78/+12Yes. All other 12-year old prepubescent supporters of Ron Paul must be alerted of the evils of the neoconservatism that is President Bush.
      • gandhii, on 05/15/2008, -3/+23you're right.. they should. As well as everyone else, regardless of age. You need a little more practice at this "sarcasm" thing.
      • neopolaris, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3...must be going for spOOk of the month. Good luck XXXXXXXXXXXX
    • DaDrake, on 05/15/2008, -29/+16And convince everyone that I am a jew-bashing idiot who likes to promote stereotypes? No thanks.
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -5/+38this isn't jew bashing, its zionist and neocon bashing, purely political.
        • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -9/+5Yeah, just like saying Barack Hussein Obama is in no way playing to anti-muslim and racist sentiments because hey, I'm just saying his name right?
          • Tiak, on 05/15/2008, -1/+8His middle name his no connection to billions spent by the government on the behalf of a foreign government... So, no, it isn't like that...
      • LumpyRevolution, on 05/15/2008, -5/+5If you have one shred of evidence, even one, please share it with me. You my dear friend are a sheep. Have a nice day.
        • CH3CH2OH, on 05/15/2008, -4/+4The Ron Paul speech itself was OK, but the guy who put this video together is not:
          http://www.youtube.com/user/AresXIV
          This guy is a white supremacist, and not just guilty of "zionist" bashing, which I can understand. Videos submitted by this guy include "Jewish ***** pedophiles," "The [Jewish] Medical Swindle?", and more along these lines.
        • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -8/+4Which is no coincidence. Anti-semites and extremist fundamentalist Christians love Ron Paul, as do 911 conspiracy theorists and pretty much all the other crazies.
      • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -10/+4I love how moonshining conspiracy theorists call everyone sheep. You people spend a couple hours watching Zeitgeist or whatever half-baked attempt at a documentary is popular that week, and suddenly your experts on political science, engineering, and history. Yeah Lumpy, Zionist isn't just a neo-nazi codeword for Jew at all. In the context Paul uses it, it is absolutely innocent and in no way refers to Jews at all. That is in-*****-feasible.
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -1/+6jew bashing? Oh please.

        Stereotypes? Isn't that what you are promoting, in your comment?

        Stop buying into diatribes and ideological banter from talking heads on Fox News Channel. It is ruining what little intelligence you possess.
        • ssn697, on 05/15/2008, -5/+2You didn't look at the list of the guys OTHER videos, did you? I suppose you also support the McCarthy trials of the 50's? Here, go watch his other videos, and tell us the poster doesn't have an agenda.

          The [Jewish] Medical Swindle
          How the Jews destroy Western culture (1 of 2)
          Jewish ***** pedophiles
          Whites MUST RESIST
          Racial Facts - we are at WAR
          Whites killed by illegal aliens

          Once again, thank you Ron Paul supporters for pushing this to the front page. You couldn't be any better at killing your messiah...
      • TheTaoOfBill, on 05/15/2008, -3/+5I am a libertarian and I agree. This video sucks. I liked the speech but I would never spread this video around. It is most definitely jew bashing and suggests that neoconism has a direct tie to jews through visual aids. The creator of this video should be ashamed of himself for linking Ron Paul with his anti semite views.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 05/15/2008, -1/+18Unfortunately, listening to this is not enough. I only wish Americans were competent enough to actually understand what he just said. *indian tears*
    • swrostmore, on 05/15/2008, -13/+4Other videos by the same uploader and Ron Paul supporter AresXIV:

      The [Jewish] Medical Swindle

      How the Jews destroy Western culture (1 of 2)

      Jewish ***** pedophiles

      Whites MUST RESIST

      Racial Facts - we are at WAR

      Whites killed by illegal aliens



      And you wonder why people think Ron Paul has ties to white Supremacists? ***** you, and to think he fools some people by speaking the OBVIOUS about neoconservativism. ***** that. Ron Paul for president and all you ***** NWO fearheads = "the South will Rise Again" oh and we hate THE JEWS too.
    • jesusx, on 05/15/2008, -0/+9Ron Paul FTW!!!!!
    • 4Runner, on 05/15/2008, -0/+9http://digg.com/business_finance/Ron_Paul_Advisor_ ...

      Wake up!
    • Nielsio, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0http://digg.com/political_opinion/President_George ...

      Take the red pill
    • wbxhc, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1That's what she said.
    • amaltemara, on 05/17/2008, -1/+1this is racist bs propaganda
  • JDenigma, on 05/15/2008, -27/+244Yes, everyone digging this, send this as a shout and it get it to the front page, if for no other reason than to just instigate the neocons here on digg. You know they and others will be frantically trying to bury this.
    • bjornski, on 05/15/2008, -40/+10A prime example of why I've totally disabled shouts.

      Your type of ***** makes them 100% worthless.
      • JDenigma, on 05/15/2008, -3/+27I know, I think it's all laughable now much like the state of the world. That's my attitude about everything now. Like a George Carlin or H.L. Mencken I'll laugh at it all.

        This is what digg or at least the political section of digg, has turned into. We've all separated into our litle cliques and we all try to shout our pieces too each other and bury our arch rival cliques pieces. Wonderful, isn't it?

        I remember it starting with Lew Rockwell pieces getting buried by a "group" of people who were coordinated in actively burying anything they automatically saw from Lew Rockwell. Then the same thing followed with Ron Paul pieces.

        Yes, one can make the case the shout system has become abused, but hey that's because of everyone failing to behave and be mature in the political section because we all fight with each other. We reap what we sow.

        So I say the hell with it all now. I just sit back and laugh at it all now, the squabbling and everything. I find it amusing :-)

        • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -17/+4What's laughable is your blind devotion to a pathetic excuse for a human being like Ron Paul and your defense of George Lincoln "Lew" Rockwell.
    • twiztidsinz, on 05/15/2008, -2/+25Also notice the frequency of people appearing on FOX shows.
      • twiztidsinz, on 05/15/2008, -2/+11Hahaha... might help to watch the full vid before making observations.
    • skyshock1, on 05/15/2008, -3/+16Neocons here on digg?! WTF are you smoking?
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -3/+12They are here, for sure.

        I worked at UPI when General Dynamics bought a newsfeed at their office on MacDill AFB in Tampa (the headquarters of Centcom), in order to have information to use to counter the negative commentary of bloggers and commentary on the internet against the war in Iraq.

      • JDenigma, on 05/15/2008, -3/+1Skyshock, it appears my mind would apparently be more coherent and better functioning with it doped up than yours perfectly clear and sober. Maybe I need to smoke something anyway to deal with the insanity of this world. You didn't get what I was saying there. You think I'm that stupid to think neocon "leaders" would be on here? That's not what I meant. I was referring to the true blue believers on here who are apologists for neocon policies. That thus makes them rank and file neocons by definition. That's what I was referring to. Now, do YOU need something to smoke. Maybe it will help clear the cobwebs for you there.
        • skyshock1, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3Heh, nice try. Humor doesn't translate well in text I guess. Just seems that with the SEA of liberal stories/posts that the chances of having neocons on this mostly left-leaning site is pretty slim. :)

          "Explaining humor is much like dissecting a frog - it's messy, and the frog usually dies"
        • JDenigma, on 05/16/2008, -0/+2Yeah, I see what you're saying now. Ok, sorry for taking you too seriously there :-)

          If you were just being humorous there, I took it the wrong way and took your comment as being more antagonistic. I suppose I jumped the gun then. I'm always on guard for people trying to attack me on here and I can be a bit too defensive at times in carrying that chip on my shoulder. You're right. It's the problem with text, which is probably one of the reasons why things degenerate into flame wars and people get mad and attack each other so easily online. It's very easy to misconstrue what someone is saying when it is only text on a screen and you have no other cues.

          So yeah, I'll apologize for that one for overreacting.

          Oh, and yes it does seem to be a sea of liberals on digg or "progressives" as they seem to like to redefine themselves now. There are more republicans, "neocons" or whatever terminology you want to use, who are inundating Digg lately though.
    • zendin, on 05/15/2008, -4/+10Yeah! 'cause Digg is such a hotbed of neocon activity!
      • Spudster, on 05/15/2008, -9/+5Yeah I think these oh-*****-the-government-has-black-helicopters-on-my-ass types need a reality check. Neocons have the weight of a feather on Digg.
      • JDenigma, on 05/15/2008, -2/+4Oh, all the right wingers on digg who support neocon policies, are themselves neocons by definition and there are plenty of them here on digg. They are the ones who are apologists for this administrations policies. Are YOU one of them?
    • GoatRoper, on 05/15/2008, -20/+5Are you freakin kidding me? We quit patrolling for RP stories long ago. Our job was done long ago and we obviously did it well :)
      • neopolaris, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9You'll make someone a fine foot stool.
        • GoatRoper, on 05/15/2008, -6/+2Really, is that the only thing you could come up with?
    • slaizer, on 05/15/2008, -6/+4From what I know, neo-conservatives are the big dollar fat cats, who own everything, including most of the military-industrial complex and have a lust for power for their own gain.

      You think that kind of a person really hangs around in Digg with a bunch of nerds posting endless tirades of why Macs are cooler than PC's? Do the neocons have a sweet spot for xkcd comics?
      • JDenigma, on 05/15/2008, -2/+7Were you talking to me there? You guys saying this to me obviously didn't get what I was referencing. I wasn't talking about the Irving Kristol's and Dick Cheney's being on digg. I was referring to the digg members who are the rank and file neocons. If you believe in those policies, you are a neocon, maybe not a "leader" of the movement, but a rank and file true believer. That's what I mean.
    • amaltemara, on 05/17/2008, -1/+1this is racist bs propaganda
  • SickOfGovtLIES, on 05/15/2008, -36/+354The good Dr. Paul is the only one with real guts and integrity to put the truth out there. The American people are asleep on the narcotic of information manipulation feed to us by the controlled media. Journalistic integrity is dead and buried. Ron Paul defies the media double-talk and cuts right to the quick about where the problems are and our challenges in solving them. Paul is more of a real man than all candidates combined, including Billary. The rest are nothing but empty suits, 2-faced charlatans, professional liars and bought sold & paid for puppets on strings who serve much greater masters. They're not going to "change' anything. More war. More bankrupting the US economy. More Federal Reserve fraud. More billion dollar taxpayer funded handouts to Israel. More million dollar checks to Pakistan in "foreign aid". More lies. More selling out America and our Constitution. More Patriot Act BS. Increased tyranny & police state. They sure as hell don't represent us, they only pretend to and FAKE it. Ron Paul is truly America's last hope. The controlled media smear campaign and censorship on him is disgusting. They want you to vote for their select war friendly paid for AIPAC friendly puppets, none else. Ron Paul doesn't play ball with the criminals so it's no surprise he is undeserving victim of their mass media blackout subversion. I cannot for the life of me understand how any media outlet can say someone has "no chance of winning". Technically, every candidate "has a chance", by saying this, they are automatically spreading their own propaganda. Ron Paul can't win? I'm sure Washington, Jefferson heard the same thing. The controlled mass media is the propaganda wing of the fascist U.S. government. The fascists own the media. The USA has become a one party system with two branches. This propaganda press is out to censor, marginalize, and demonize Ron Paul at every opportunity. Clinton, Obama, Romney, Huckabee, and McCain are all buddies that are putting on a show in order to convince us they are "opposed" to each other. When in reality it couldn't be further from the Truth. They're only up there to 'play ball'. It's a joke. It doesn't matter which one of them gets elected they will only carry out the plan. The mass media promotes all of them. Ron Paul is America's last chance to repent from being an empire. Speak Truth and Honesty to power. Don't let the treasonous corporate media shut us out.

    “The last thing the men behind the curtain want is a conscious, informed public capable of critical thinking, which is why a continually fraudulent zeitgeist is output, via religion, the mass media, and the educational system. They seek to keep you in a distracted, naive bubble. And they’re doing a damn good job of it.'
    • LumpyRevolution, on 05/15/2008, -10/+58You do know the truth. Thank you. I only hope your words don't fall on deaf ears.
      • SickOfGovtLIES, on 05/15/2008, -9/+41Thank you.. We need to band together to, if a last resort, fight for the sake of our familes and lives. We each need to do our part in learning all we can, waking people up, and banding together to form a grassroots resistance against these criminals who betray us and sell us all out. Don't fall victim to their transparent divide and conquer methods. The exposure is mobilizing people and changing the tragic events into a collective consciousness that is beginning to realize that we are all in this together and that there is true power in numbers we gotta stand together, they want us to be divided by white against black, race against race and cop against citizen, rich against poor etc. The sleepers are waking up. Power comes from within, they can't take it away.
    • whataboutdave, on 05/15/2008, -6/+106I have a real problem with the notion that Ron Paul is the "last hope" of our Republic. He's a great man and someone whose bravery and vision most of us can only aspire to, but no one person deserves such idol worship. No one man is more important than the message of individual liberty and responsibility - not the founders and not Ron Paul. Learn what you can from Dr. Paul and pick up the torch. Spread the flame to as many people as you can. Thankfully, the Republic doesn't live and die with Ron Paul's campaign.
      • SickOfGovtLIES, on 05/15/2008, -7/+39"idol worship" ? My reference to Ron Paul as last hope was in comparison with the other 'pick the 'lesser of the 2 evils' presidential candidates we're cursed with, not the world in general. He's certainly the last hope for America out of any of our so-called "choices" at this point.

        You're absolutely correct we do need to do our part individually to spread the message instead of depending on others to do it for us. Dialog with as many people as you can who are receptive and will listen. Be sincere, respectful and polite, not insulting, condescending and hostile. Distribute DVDs, flyers and leaflets. They are VERY effective in getting the word out there. As an example, I gave a Zeitgeist DVD to a plumber who repaired my sink last week. He has since praised and thanked me for it several times over! He mentioned that he spoke with many of his friends & co-workers about his newfound discovery and knowledge and they asked where they could get a copy. Little things like that can make all the difference. The ripple effect, if you will. Heck, hand out DVD compilations & CDROM to the local gas station attendant and tell them to check it out. Most everybody likes getting a free DVD! At least they will pop it in the player out of curiosity. Give one to the cop who pulls you over for speeding ticket. Don't forget to log off the Internet, get out there and speak with some real live human beings in the real world! Sometimes it's easy to forget that life is much greater and beautiful than an isolated internet connection plugged into the bedroom wall.
        • whataboutdave, on 05/15/2008, -3/+34I was taking issue mainly with your assertion that "Ron Paul is truly America's last hope". Believe me when I say we're on the same page with the exception of that small passage I quoted.
          • mystcnurse, on 05/15/2008, -3/+24only because of the other choices offered. If this were a system that made sense, it wouldn't be like this. Most people who like Ron Paul, are at least, not "fainting" at the sight of him ;) - We diggggg his message and we want our freedom and we agree with the constitution. Ron Paul is OLD ( not as old as McCain) and we know that and so does he. We live and fight for our children, and their children, and so does he.
      • JoeRW, on 05/15/2008, -3/+13Its exceedingly rare that a candidate actually scares the trilateral commission http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va& ...
        That being so, it indicates that RP signifies one of the rare possible turning points away from a possible future despotic and secretive governance of the USA, and then by extension the World.
        If theyre slowly boiling the frog. RP is one chance for it to jump out of the pot.
    • Hortnon, on 05/15/2008, -30/+31Paragraphs. Please.
    • Erich100, on 05/15/2008, -5/+65My personal belief is that Ron Paul knew exactly what he was up against when he decided to run for president. He knew the MSM would do it's best to bury him and get him written off as a whack job by the majority. I think he also knew they would most likely be successful. His expectations of actually getting elected were most likely pretty low.
      Ron Paul's "revolution" is not about him, it's about his message. I believe he has accomplished what he set out to do. He cured alot of apathy. He has made many understand the power is in the hands of the people if they choose to use it.
      Even as a two term President, he alone couldn't possibly cure all that ails America. As powerful as his message is, it's up to us to bring it to fruition. If we do not carry the torch, we would let him down. It would be shameful to squander his efforts that have accomplished so much.
      • gandhii, on 05/15/2008, -2/+27Of course he knew. He said so from the start. Still says it.
        And we do still have a chance. We have several new Constitutionalists running for Congress now. I got BJ Lawson running here in my district in NC. We have a lot of work to do this year. And it won't be easy. But lets not give up.
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -80/+18BLAHB BLAH BLAH CONSPIRACY NWO GLOBALISM

      Shut the ***** up.
    • kosser, on 05/15/2008, -1/+30Amen brother, keep preaching on. I advise anyone who's eyes pass this sentence to brush up on the constitution and learn exactly what rights you have. Please read the constitution and the bill of rights. they are trying to demolish our freedoms and when people are faced with this tyranny they have no idea what their rights are. Read it and spread it to your family and friends. Please do yourself and your country a favor.
    • Mikhail101, on 05/15/2008, -3/+45This is why Ron Paul >>> Obama, i dont wanna explain it a million times, Ron Paul is the only one who mentions how hes goiing to bring change and his plans are sound.
      • Tiak, on 05/15/2008, -11/+6...Which is why Obama gave a recent speech loaded with details on his new VA proposals and has 140+ pages of plans on his website in pdf form? (He would have more, but I only counted the plan pdfs, some policy details are only available in the texts of speeches and so forth).
      • Hortnon, on 05/15/2008, -15/+5I'm surprised brad Dugg you up, since he obsessively links to Obama's "Blueprint for Change", which describes exactly what you're looking for.

        Basically, you think Obama doesn't exaplain these things only because you don't know anything about anyone but Ron Paul. Get a clue.
      • Tiak, on 05/15/2008, -11/+6Also: Please explain how it is "sound" to simultaneously switch to the gold standard and stop the income tax considering that our debts already have committed interest rates, meaning these actions would increase our debt by a good 50% in the near term while rendering us much less capable of ever paying it off.

        (If you would recommend not paying it off ever, please keep in mind that a large chunk of that debt is to U.S. citizens, and consider the memories of the last time our investments became worthless).
        • XanderDee, on 05/15/2008, -0/+31. He never said 100% gold standard.
          2. He wants to reduce spending to pay off debt.
          3. He wants to cover social security payments that the GAO said has banckrupted America
          4. He wants to grandfather social securtiy so no one else can get on it.
          5. He wants to stop the coming Hyperinfaltion and currency collapse.

          So go vote for your guy who thinks if we rack up more dept is a means of paying it off. :)
          • Hortnon, on 05/15/2008, -3/+1Where's he going to cut spending, and how much money will it save?
    • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -10/+2tl;dr
      • GovernmentSp00k, on 05/17/2008, -0/+2tl;dr "Too Long; Didn't Read" - a shining example of the sweeping Attention Deficit Disorder (SADD) / short attention span pandemic that seems to have embraced our society. Usually said by people who a) have never read a book, b) have no logical retort, c) want an easy cheap laugh, or any combination of the three.
    • slaizer, on 05/15/2008, -7/+2I hate to break this to you, but there are no men behind the curtain. Yes. Let me repeat that. There are no men behind the curtain.

      Let me explain that. You see, it's easy to try to outsource society's problems. When a nation like the US is in so deep that social problems, corruption and deep, deep gaps between people are afoot, it's easy to pinpoint the whole ball of problems to some secret men who somehow know how to pull all the strings every time something bad happens. It's easier for the mind to think that for the garbage heap of problems the US currently is in every sector, ranging from educational to humane to financial to everything, the reason for them is a few men who know everything and pull all the right strings all the time, never being caught nor being seen. It's easy to think so, because then you don't have to acknowledge what a ***** of work really needs to be done in order to bring change to the whole society from bottom to top.

      See, society is a self-steering organism. There is nobody pulling the strings, because bending a society to your will is impossible. Bush and his machine of snakes and double-talkers tried it, and everyone saw through it. Others like Rupert Murdoch can try, but everyone knows Fox News is full of *****. Nobody is clever enough to do so, because it's impossible.

      "The will of the elite", or "what the neocons want" only mirrors the ideals and prejudices of the common people of society. It's the syndrome of the 15-year-old revolutionist: because I'm on a good cause, everyone who does not agree with me must be evil. That's why Washington and the White House don't need as much change as the minds of the common people. The problem isn't in the White House, the problem is in the corruption of the common man who doesn't give a ***** and closes his eyes when something bad happens, politics-wise. That's why I support Obama. Unlike Ron Paul, who just has a lot of financial theories to bring change, Obama really has an effect on people, and it's the people who need to change, since society is only as smart and just as it's lowest denominator. You can't make a society making educated and wise opinions when it's people are uneducated and prejudiced.

      So, Ron Paul might be running for revolution, but even though the government needs to change, the people need to change more. That's what Paul failed to do.
      • Snyder81, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1slaizer, it's clear you missed the point. Paul's only failure was being unable to get his message into main stream media - he was constantly attacked, berated, and marginalized by many MSM sources. It appears you fell for that trick. But don't feel bad - millions of others did too.

        Obama "inspires" by saying "Yes we can" and "Change" but his words are hollow. They have no substance and his policies will fail.

        Ron Paul was incredibly successful in curing political apathy for millions of Americans. He gave them a reason to get involved and fight for their future. Like many Americans, I knew *something* was wrong but couldn't put my finger on it until I heard Ron Paul's message. Now I have a reason to get involved and affect *real* change. To me, that is success, not failure.
        • slaizer, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1You're way off. Actually, I was a Paul supporter for a long time, until I really looked deeper into his issues. I liked the idea of small government and some of his other issues, but I didn't like the idea of homeschooling advocation (after all, for kids, school is the first real step in integration to society and the first step away from safe harbors. Homeschooled kids tend to be... well, weird, since they haven't had the social experiences of growing up together, and missed a lot of being a child) and I found that, among other things, the gold standard is very difficult to execute in modern times, when the available money surpasses many times over the amount of gold in circulation. Same applies to his stand on free markets: pure free markets are as impossible to uphold as is pure communism. Both fail eventually. Free markets disintegrate into trusts, large monopolies and eventually back to government control, communism does the opposite.

          So, I did my research, found his issues to be lacking (despite the good effort and a good anti-establishment attitude) and thought it's better not to support him. Is it so hard to believe that there would be others like me, and Paul's problem wouldn't actually be people not getting to hear his message, but hearing it and not liking it that much?

          Plus Paul was unelectable to the core with his beta-male syndrome, you have to admit that. If the smear machine would have kicked in on Paul, he wouldn't have lasted two days.

          But please, do not denigrate Obama supporters. For me, Obama's speeches and his public appearances (especially his "A More Perfect Union" speech) really gave me the same feelings you describe in your reasons to get involved. I think Obama gives more bang for the buck (for the vote, I mean), because he too is an honest guy coming from outside the establishment, with good morals, and unlike Paul, he really is able to get a broad following with his leadership skills and unify the country and, if it's still possible, salvage the burned remains of the US of A back into a decent nation.
    • logosx1, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4Good to know I'm not the only one who understands the depth of the crisis America faces. What most of us differ on is what to do about it.

      For my part, I believe that the federal government has so thoroughly and consistently rebuked the Constitution that there is no longer any constitutional government to speak of, and this state of affairs will not improve with the arrival of a new administration of ANY political persuasion. No government surrenders the massive amounts of power that have been unconstitutionally seized, and even if someone such as Ron Paul could and did win the presidency, he could not possibly overcome in eight years the institutional resistance of the bureaucracy, the Congress, big business, or a great deal of the American populace itself that all feed at the trough of unlawful government activity. The Bush administration represents merely the latest stage of an illness that has been slowly spreading for decades and will not voluntarily disappear. My solution is for States and local communities to re-assert control over their own affairs, either incrementally or immediately, a proposal that has entered "mainstream" discourse with groups such as the Vermont secessionists and others. Failing that, there's always expatriation, but I would hate to leave the land my ancestors fought and died for. Either way, we are running out of options, and fast.
  • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -17/+181People need to ask themselves, do they want a world of integrity and honesty or spin and deception? Do they want a world of peace and trade or force and oppression? Do they want a world of independence and autonomy or forced labor and severe socio-political stratification? Do they want equality and just law or ravenous interest groups fighting it out for other people's wealth and labor? The American people need to decide which side they are on, I know where I stand.
    • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -58/+16You are a Ron Paul supporter. You stand on the side of spin and deception. The side of force and oppression. Et cetera.
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -9/+51talk about spin... JCM is a lying neocon bury brigade troll who defends the criminals that hijacked our country and deceive the public with propaganda and lies.
        • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -36/+18Please post examples of my "lies", owl.
          • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -7/+24any time you type on the keyboard....or open your mouth....
          • Idiggapony, on 05/15/2008, -6/+22To start with, your screen name is "jcm267," when it really should be "zionist267."
          • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -22/+8I love it when the bigots take their gloves off and openly admit that they are bigots.
          • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -6/+13'I love it when the bigots"....call other people bigots...you are out classed jerkle..admit it!..what happened to your shark avatar...did the Lion eat it?...
          • Idiggapony, on 05/15/2008, -3/+14Did anyone ever wonder why zionists like jcm267 and Herkimer56 like to drink Mountain Dew? Hint: (1) Mountain Dew is made by Pepsi, which stands for "Pay Every Penny to Save Israel". (2) The name Mountain Dew is widely believed to be a reference to Mount Da'out, which (according to the Talmud) is where a gang of Hebraic thugs attacked two innocent Laotian farmers, stole their papayas which they were bringing to market, and forced them to drink their own urine, JUST FOR FUN. It's a sick story, but I didn't make it up, it's in the Talmud. Look it up. Didn't you ever wonder why Mountain Dew is artificially dyed yellow?

            Only a political leader with serious guts like Ron Paul is willing to stand up and say stuff like this in public. McCain, Obama et al. just keep on feeding the sheeple the disinfo that they want to hear and collecting their increasingly worthless dollars.
          • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -13/+6When has Ron Paul ever gone off on a bigoted rant involving involving Mountain Dew in public? I'd like to see this on Youtube.
          • NPodhoretz14, on 05/15/2008, -5/+11Idiggapony is just a Zionist shil. ( http://digg.com/users/Idiggapony/history/search?ne ... ) You can ignore him jcm. He's one of you
          • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -8/+5NPodhoretz14 is a racist Israel hating troll. ( http://digg.com/users/NPodhoretz14 )
          • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -7/+5@MarkusGarvey
            Outclassed? By the likes of you? That's the funniest thing I've read in weeks. You can't even put together a complete sentence much less develop a cogent thought. You're just the bottom feeding scum of Digg and stupid even by Ronbot standards. Now put your helmet on, grab your backpack and run out and catch the short bus.
        • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -8/+37your previous post is entirely a lie, stupid jacka$$ zionist troll.
          • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -26/+8No it wasn't, owl.
          • catfish182, on 05/15/2008, -22/+10you call jcm a troll but yet you bash him relentless and say things about him with no proof.

            So what does that make you?
          • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -7/+15put your tail between your legs and STFU JCM....maybe you will learn something...(NOT)..
          • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -21/+8You're an idiot, Markus.
          • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -7/+11ouch JCM!!...i might have to put that in the "stupid ass comments i have read on digg" book i am writing..but i am confident you will come up with something better..
          • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -16/+6Do you have anything substantive to say, Markus?
          • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -4/+11braaains....give me braaaaaaains!!!!!!...you don't have one!!!!!!!!!.........(JCM)....
          • jcm267, on 05/15/2008, -15/+5Isn't it past your bedtime, Markus?
          • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -3/+13what about the topic JCM...RP naming neoconservative butt-holes..you guys always want to distract from the issues...all you have is inane rhetoric...
          • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -8/+4And all you have are childish comments that prove nothing except that you're just treading water and hoping that no one will notice how ignorant you are. You're just a pathetic little man trying to make yourself look like you're something other than a total loser. You failed.
        • ZZeke, on 05/16/2008, -0/+3One of these days, you morons will stop trying to equate Zionism with being Jewish. You're doing the Judaic community a true disservice by lumping them in with the Zionists who control Israel the way the neo-cons control the US.
          Actually, NPR's Terry Gross just did a full hour today on John Hagee and the Christian Zionist movement, uncovering what the whole premise of what Zionism is really about, and how Christian Zionism is actually working against the peaceful people of Israel in hopes that their ***** doomsday prophecies will come to pass. I'm sure that you could pull it up from NPR's site - but I'm also sure that would be too much for you buttnuggets to handle, you might actually learn something useful, and stop making yourselves look like uneducated idiots - and we wouldn't want that...
      • MarkusGarvey, on 05/15/2008, -4/+29meant to digg you down JCM...there was only truth in what RP said, troll boy....
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -67/+9You dumb ***** are all sheep.
      Heil Ron Paul!
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -6/+30STFU Troll
      • XanderDee, on 05/15/2008, -4/+15So much evil in the world where you come from? I wish we could some how exterminate you. But I know it would only make us just like you.
        • catfish182, on 05/15/2008, -24/+8so you feel that all non paul supporters should be exterminated?

          hitler felt that way also.

          interesting.
          • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -19/+6He's one of yours, dumbass. He wants to exterminate everyone who doesn't support your failed candidate.
          • catfish182, on 05/15/2008, -8/+1herkimer
            I do not nor have i ever supported paul.
            so do not call me a dumbass when you have no clue.

            I can not stand how paulites want to call anything evil. It can not be a different opinion it has to be evil.
            Paul and his band of oxygen thieves are always the first ones to stamp a label on a person for processing.
            none of them can live with the fact that someone can think for themselves.
          • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -4/+8Wrong. the entire concept of liberty is based on self accountability. You are creating sterotypes here while you condemn them, very hypocritical of you.
          • catfish182, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1I am creating stereotypes? jesus you love to judge people quickly. you seem to love to tell people that they are wrong also. Is that cause i disagree with you? It has to be since this is my opinion and nothing more. So anyone that disagrees with you is a dumbass?

            I am pointing out that a lot of paulites seem to be ok with saying they would love to have anti paul people killed.
            Is that a stereotype? pointing out some jackass that wants to see people dead only because they disagree with him?
            Or is it that i said hitler felt the same way? Well he did. It seems funny to me that many of pauls supporters seem to have things in common with him. you speak of self accountability and i am pointing out that xanderdee is a *****.

            as for me creating while i am condemning - well i dont feel that its that way. So i just disagree with you there.
      • kemp34, on 05/15/2008, -3/+10How is this XXXXXXXX guy not banned? All he ever does is post hateful, curse-filled, disgusting language and dirty attacks. How is he not banned?
        • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -8/+8That's all that "Lady"K does and you love her. Hypocrite.
          • LadyKofNYC, on 05/15/2008, -3/+6Whatever you say Mr. "Islam is a gutter religion"
          • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -8/+3Whatever you say Ms. "All Jews should die of cancer."
          • LadyKofNYC, on 05/15/2008, -4/+7I never said that, liar.

            LOL. The only way you can make your point is lie. Pathetic

            NEXT
          • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -5/+2You should be careful accusing anyone of telling lies, "Lady"K. You've no doubt heard the old saying about people that live in glass houses.
        • Pssdoff, on 05/15/2008, -1/+6He would probably just make another account and add another X.
        • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 05/15/2008, -4/+1All you do is conform to the Digg groupthink. How are you not banned?
    • CC440, on 05/15/2008, -37/+11So are all Ron Paul supporters Nazis or something? I have never seen the word zionist actually be used in a legitimate conversation. How can you be blaming the Jews for anything? Are you all really that dense as to buy into the zion propaganda? You know thats all false right? Chirst I hate the Paul brigade and I can't wait for this ***** election to end so I never have to hear ***** from you ignorant, childish fools ever again.
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -5/+31no, you are wrong, nobody is blaming the jews here, we are blaming the zionists who hide behind jews and do their dirty work assisted by neocons. do some research before commenting, please.
      • gandhii, on 05/15/2008, -2/+19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
        "Zionism is an international political movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish People in Palestine (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el, “the Land of Israel”), and continues primarily as support for the modern state of Israel."
        It would be incorrect to group all jewish people under the "zionist" banner. And even if not, it is not inappropriate for a person to love their neighbor despite their political leanings. I don't think many people have a problem with the public intent of Israel. But there is plenty to criticize regarding the methods and execution of that goal.
      • Herkimer56, on 05/15/2008, -26/+9To people like the owl, "Zionist" is a code word for Jew. Whenever the owl, and others of his ilk, talk about hating Zionists what they are really saying is that they hate Jews. Don't believe for one second that owl doesn't hate Jews and the Jewish faith.
        • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -5/+20Anyone who criticizes Zionists is labeled antisemitism. old trick idiot jerkimer troll. your zionism is showing. I suppose these Jews are anti-semitic? :http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/
        • ZZeke, on 05/17/2008, -0/+3Actually, it's only people like you who see the word "Zionism" as a "code word for Jew". You and the rest of the Zionists, as they have been using the peaceful Judaic peoples as a shield for their fanatical ideals for a looong time. We actually see Zionism, as , well - Zionism, of course.
          It's like saying that all Christians are neo-cons or evangelicals. It's simply not true, and I thank the other diggers who are also pointing out the truth of the matter, instead of buying into Herk's ancient line of *****.

          I don't know why he doesn't just come out of the closet already and fully admit that he's an Arab-Muslim hating Zionist who fully supports the illegal and immoral occupation going on in Israel. That would explain all of the blind support for the neo-con agenda once and for all...
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -4/+16As a catholic, who understands the history of the three religions of Abraham, I have the intellectual honesty to differentiate between being an anti-semite, and an anti-jew.

        Judaism is the foundation of Catholicism. All of the apostles, and Jesus himself, were Jewish. Mohammend was a Christian who went into a cave and wrote scripture as told to him by God.

        Zionism is like nationalism. It isn't the total of Jewish faith. It is a subset of judaism, a subset that believes in Jewish dominance in a region that is largely Arabic and Muslim. To be a Jew does not mean you are Zionist. Until the Ashkenazi Jews arrived in Palestine, there were Jews and Palestinians who lived together, worked together, operated businesses together, farmed land together. It was the European Jews, (Ashkenazi) who came onto the scene and created an adversarial situation.
    • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -3/+18"Strauss believed that the essential truths about human society and history should be held by an elite, and withheld from others who lack the fortitude to deal with truth. Society, Strauss thought, needs consoling lies."
  • Stryder81, on 05/15/2008, -46/+190All Zionists, coincidence?

    Wake the f- up people.
    • bjornski, on 05/15/2008, -6/+23Funny how that works, huh?
    • milesdavis22, on 05/15/2008, -52/+19Wake the f- up to what? That you are implicitly blaming all of America's much deeper problems on supporters of Israel? That you are implying the existence of a zionist conspiracy to control America which only exists as a figment in your bigoted imagination?

      Yet, this is digg, so calling out people for what they believe will get me dugg down.
      • bohemianowl, on 05/15/2008, -8/+31no, defending zionists and neocons get you dugg down, traitor!
      • pintomp3, on 05/15/2008, -7/+35perhaps you should read up on the israel lobby:
        http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

        it's not simply about zionism though. privatization of our military and war-profiteering are also major contributing factors.
      • flogistan, on 05/15/2008, -15/+13*****
        • brad3378, on 05/15/2008, -4/+8Reply with factual arguments - no name calling.

          Would your favorite political figure call people names to win an argument?
        • bjornski, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4You know, if he was actually gay, that wouldn't be an insult. So what's the point in using it as one?

          Are you still bigoted enough to consider being gay to be that horrible, where it would be insulting to call someone one?

          It makes you look shallow, bigoted, and stupid. Just stop.
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -1/+11AIPAC, you uneducated and ill-informed moron.

        American-Isreali Political Action Committee.
        • aebo06, on 05/15/2008, -5/+3American Israel Public Affairs Committee. It's not a PAC; you are the uninformed one.
          • b0geyman, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4it is a PAC no matter what they say the letters signify, nit picking ignorant one
    • RedAmerican, on 05/15/2008, -31/+13Zionism has very little to do with Neoconservatism. Or, at least, Zionism which the majority of the jewish people identify with.
      • flogistan, on 05/15/2008, -5/+16RedAmerican. So you're a labor zionist? You guys are the ones who destroyed the real meaning of the word liberal in America. Switch to being a neocon. It's the new thing.
      • gandhii, on 05/15/2008, -6/+6I'm as big a RP supporter as any.. but ya'll are getting carried away. According to wikipedia, zionism is generally a political movement is support of the creation and support of Israel. I doubt many jewish people see it in any more detail than that, or are aware of what some are doing in it's name. Much like most people who call themselves "Democrats" or "Republicans".
        • flogistan, on 05/15/2008, -3/+7Well we simply want them to know. That is a very limited definition of zionism that doesn't explain the complex history of the movement in any way. Asking people to look more deeply into history is wrong? Asking them to do a bit more than accept the surface definition of something is bad? "Knowledge is good." Emil Faber.
      • 911ArtStudent, on 05/15/2008, -2/+9http://www.thenation.com/doc/20041004/dreyfuss
        http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2008/04/why- ...
        http://www.counterpunch.org/green02282004.html
        http://www.antiwar.com/scheuer/?articleid=8827
        • bjornski, on 05/15/2008, -1/+4While I agree with the viewpoints in some of the articles you linked, I was about .1 second away from burying them (which I didn't, I did digg you up) just because you left a bunch of ***** for people to sort out, instead of telling them what was in there.

          At least preface a batch of links with a quick description of what point you're trying to make, or even an opinion. It really does help.
      • CoolHandLuke70, on 05/15/2008, -3/+10Little to do with each other? That is like saying water is not wet!
      • NPodhoretz14, on 05/15/2008, -0/+8Zionism has a great deal to do with neoconservatism. Not all zionists are neoconservatives but ALL neoconservatives are Zionists.
    • kylere, on 05/15/2008, -21/+14Why is it that everyone I meet who uses the term Zionist is the tinfoil hat type? I may get dugg down but most of the people I see using it are prepping for a UN takeover from secret bases and the rest tend to be religious bigots. I would like to see the US moderate its middle eastern stances, but this is ridiculous, the difference between republicans and democrats regarding Israel is non-existent.
      • 911ArtStudent, on 05/15/2008, -6/+8http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article ...
        • sonofblacula, on 05/15/2008, -4/+4a Jewish newspaper talking about how the Bible predicted the war on in iraq? Yeah, really awesome and relevant source. I'm not one for accusations, but that ones cast-iron bosun.
      • CoolHandLuke70, on 05/15/2008, -6/+6You must be new to all of this!
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -2/+10Tinfoil hat type? Stop watching Fox News Channel, dude.

        Zionist is definitely a loaded term. The "protocols of the elders of zion", notwithstanding.

        However, when you investigate AIPAC, you begin to understand that there is a difference between being Jewish and being an Isaeli nationalist.

        Perhaps Zionist is too loaded a word. But there are people, including Evangelical Christians hoping for the Rapture, who believe that a Jewish state will bring about the second coming, and the final battle between good and evil.

        Why should any of us defend these people, or apologize for their policy manipulations?
        • kylere, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1I do not watch Fox or CNN, if have to watch television news I try to catch CBC or BBC stuff. I am not a sucker for headlines so I prefer to actually READ the news. Many of you would benefit from doing the same. My politics tend towards libertarian, and i actually think a good deal of Ron Paul, but many of his supporters make me want to vomit as they disguise racism and ignorance behind a thin veneer of false patriotism

          The poster I commented to was being a religious bigot, nothing more, nothing less.

    • catfish182, on 05/15/2008, -11/+10for ***** sake Stryder, just say *****!
      why type f- ?

      just say *****
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -3/+7He might be a baptist, He might believe that he will go to hell if he says bad words.

        I know, it's a childish, subservient way of thinking. It is common here in America.
        • catfish182, on 05/15/2008, -0/+3I thought more about this. If he was a "baptist" then he would not even type f- .
          He would avoid it as he would not see the point in even hinting to him saying the word.

          I do agree with you though
        • flogistan, on 05/15/2008, -0/+4If he were a baptist, he wouldn't say *****, but he'd vote for neocons to murder hundreds of thousands of people for no reason. That's the real irony.
      • MrXfromPlanetX, on 05/17/2008, -1/+1Well "*****" okay. I know I feel better now.
      • Kajman, on 05/27/2008, -1/+1*****!
    • hammerwoo, on 05/15/2008, -7/+2funny funny:)
    • mike17032, on 05/15/2008, -18/+10No, we want to keep quiet about this. Its best not to alert the Zionists until we have them on the trains and heading to the camps.

      Sieg Hail brother, mein Furor will be pleased! The Final Solution fast approaches.
      • kcdstudios, on 05/15/2008, -3/+4oy vey
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/15/2008, -2/+6Nobody wants them on trains, even though these are the guys who want to put Arabs on trains. We just don't want them over-exaggerating the holocaust to defend everything they do.
    • LCTN, on 05/15/2008, -11/+1I'm a Zionist!!!
    • UltraDavid, on 05/15/2008, -9/+680+ diggs? What the hell people, honestly? Digg sucks sometimes.
    • gentk, on 05/15/2008, -6/+6Christopher Hitchens?

      I don't think he qualifies as a Neocon, let alone Zionist. He has made it clear he does not like Zionists in fact, and has often said they were a big reason for antisemitism in the world.

      He supported the war because of his strong opposition to totalitarianism, theocracies and his support for (and possibly affiliation with) Secular Kurds.

      The fact the he supported the war on those pretenses might make him naive, but not necessarily a neocon... he was just on the same boat with neocons on some key issues like the war on Iraq.
      • PhilLesh69, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1That is funny that he would support the war in Iraq due to his strong opposition to theocracies. Saddam was anything but a theocrat. Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, now this is a country where the House of Saud shares power with Wahhabist clerics. Yet I bet he is a strong supporter of Saudi interests (one of which was the overthrow of a belligerent secularist on their northern border)
  • yellowcakewalk, on 05/15/2008, -15/+47n/c
  • KillaJazzBass, on 05/15/2008, -106/+23Obama-Paul 2008!