What is Digg?Sponsored by CBSSports.com
103 Comments
- AlphaMack, on 09/26/2008, -14/+95Olbermann was right on the money. The Dems have proven once again that they have no backbone to stand up to Chimpus Deciderus and his henchmen. Sadly, it will still be business as usual in DC.
Our soldiers will continue to die, more families will continue to mourn, and the likes of Halliburton will continue to laugh all the way to the bank.
The only recourse we, the people, have at this moment is to grab a bottle of KY jelly and stretch our buttcheeks apart if this is the best the Dems can do. - AlphaEta, on 10/11/2007, -3/+43The Dems were swept into office primarily because people wanted them to do something about Iraq, and they claimed that they would.
Yet, despite this mandate from the public, they've confirmed, once again, that they're unwilling to face of a little pressure from the White House and fight for the right thing.
Politics as usual I guess, can't say I'm surprised. Looks like I'll be voting for another third-party candidate in the next election. - seatech1, on 10/11/2007, -7/+40Our politicians in Washington have proven, once again, that they cannot be trusted to carry out our will. The Democrats were the last chance we had to end this, and they've failed us. How can we expect them to safeguard us from the country-ruining policies of the right?
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -12/+36Write to Pelosi, Reid, and your local Senators and Reps. Tell them what they need to to get your vote in '08 and beyond. Make it loud and clear. I will not re-elect any person of any party who does not oppose Bush, oppose the War, vote to impeach for crimes already committed, and stop crimes on the horizon.
That's all I ask. And it's not too much. It's their solemn duty. - bgtrout, on 10/11/2007, -3/+26Not only dose Keith nail it, he cuts through the politics and "words" of victory and change that the Democrats spew.
I for one have sent my special comments to my Confressional leaders, as well as my thoughts to the Madam Speaker.
What does it take, what do we have to do, to make an impact on our leaders? Is there no accountability?
Imagine a better future and then do something to make it happen! - xenoploid, on 10/11/2007, -4/+23Olberman speaks the truth. Message to the Democrats: Defund this war! You have the power to stop this war NOW! This is what the people want, and YOU represent the PEOPLE!
- jp58, on 10/11/2007, -5/+24Damn straight.
- streetskater, on 10/11/2007, -3/+20Olbermann is practically the lone voice out there in major broadcast willing to voice such a strong denouncing opinion. Even Catherine Crier of CourtTV has now been silenced. The only problem is that Keith is largely preaching to a choir that already sees and agrees with his points.
Can democrats possibly see a victory in leaving this issue so firmly on the table for the 08 elections? Seems a foolish strategy as they are now nearly equally part of the problem---not a solution. - crud3w4re, on 10/11/2007, -13/+27Vote Ron Paul! He's anti-war and wants to eliminate the IRS and Federal Reserve as soon as he gets into office! He also wants to bring the troops home from all over the world! www.ronpaul2008.com
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -11/+24Here's a simple letter any of you can send.
Pelosi (national): AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov
Reid: http://reid.senate.gov/contact/email_form.cfm
Dear [Madame Speaker | Senator Reid],
I'll keep this short and sweet. I would normally support you. But I absolutely will not re-elect any person of any party who does not vote to end the occupation immediately, to impeach any officials for high crimes already committed, and to stop new crimes and new wars being fought covertly.
All I ask is that you do your constitutional duty to uphold the rule of law. It's what we elected you to do last November. People are dying for this nonsense. The least you could risk is your job.
Sincerely,
____
In the case of emailing your local reps, make sure to put your home address somewhere clear, so they know you're a constituent. Or better yet, call. Just google search for "contact [rep name]" and it'll be the 1st or 2nd hit. - RuffRidr, on 10/11/2007, -10/+22List of things the Democrats have accomplished since taking over Congress:
That is all. Hey, we should vote them into office too, so they can accomplish twice as much!! - RuffRidr, on 10/11/2007, -8/+19@bluto
That's not true. Why just the other day he spoke out against poverty. His fee for the speaking engagement was just a measly $55k. What a humanitarian! - bagold51, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13By the way, one of the articles on Digg says that Edwards is with the President all the way on his "War of Terror." He did have my admiration but no more. I'm voting for Ron Paul regardless of the party that he's in.
As for the loser Democrats, well, I hope they all get voted out next election. I have already changed my affiliation from Democrat to Independent.
Olbermann hit it right on the nose. I just wish more people would watch his show than that idiot O'Reilly's show. Maybe then people would start to notice what's going on in this country. - drtyrell, on 10/11/2007, -15/+24This is PROOF that Senator Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate for the people.
- spyda45, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Can anyone actually say anymore that they have faith in our government? I sure as hell don't.
- Min1ster, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10There are other options to "grabbing the KY jelly". Stop voting for the status quo. That means, stop voting for democrats and republicans. Yes, its a two party system. There's no law, ruling, or precedent that those two parties have to be Republicons or Democraps.In fact, lets look at just a little political history. When was the last time a Torrie held office? A Whig? See, it doesn't have to be the same two parties. Want change? Effect it! Stop the status quo.
- Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -6/+14Ron Paul.
- gmason08, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Note:Yes I have posted this before, if you have seen it please ignore if you have not I think it is important for you to consider because I think the truth of this is obvious but not widely known.
For those who think there is a difference between the two parties, some individuals that are R's or D's are different but the party bosses call the shots and the difference between the bosses is all theater, a chimera. Even more important is this list that explains why the bosses are on the same page and who calls their shots:
http://the-bell-tower.blogspot.com/2007/05/whos-at-wheel.html
We are whipsawed by the dual coordinated corruption of the party machines. (again not each and every member R or D is corrupt nor is that necessary). BTW the coordinated corruption should be obvious now to anyone paying attention, the war will continue, amnesty will pass, SPP/NAU is fast tracked as part of the 1000 page "immigration reform" bill, the war on terror(ensuring an ample supply of evil doers for decades) the War on Drugs will continue, etc.
Why?
consider, no problems, no profit.
Example:
1) You have a problem with your car so you take it to a mechanic to be repaired. He is an honest mechanic and performs the work necessary to really repair the problem. You pay him and you are on your way.
2) Same scenario but you take your car to the dishonest mechanic, he does nothing but charges you for a "repair" job. You pay. Car is not repaired. You go back to the dishonest mechanic, do not complain, ask him to "repair" your car again. Same cycle repeats over and over. Dishonest mechanic keeps charging you for not repairing your problem and you keep taking your car back to him so he can charge you for not fixing your problem.
If only mechanics were the ones peddling that scam. With corrupt(dishonest)Government and the folks behind the corruption(dishonesty) the profits and damaging effects are far larger than the scam of not fixing automobile problems.
But what if there are no problems needing "fixing" by a government that has become corrupted? Simple, just create "problems" to fix and never fix them. - IrishJoe, on 10/11/2007, -8/+15Ron Paul is a Congressman not a Senator. The people of Texas aren't quite foresighted enough to vote someone of Ron Paul's caliber to the Senate. So far they've only mustered Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn: two weak willed and purchased politicians.
- knach, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11The lone voice of reason, unyielding and uncompromising about ending the war now is Kucinic. But his calls for withdrawal fall on deaf ears within his own party where he polls at 1% under his own party's tent. Why? Is he off message, out of touch with the 70% of the nation. Nope..... it's the shallowness of people who wrongly deem him unelectable because he's to short,to skinny, not pretty enough, not coiffed enough in this media age of imagery. When will America wake up & realize that voting for the candidate who's more likely to have a beer with you was a misguided colossal mistake of epic proportions.
The Pavlovian dogs of the republican party who voted with their guts for "The Commander Guy" are now witnessing the folly of their decisions. This country needs a Kucinic,or Edwards who's policies align with the will of the people. As Kucinic lays out the unflinching truth for all to see, others stand by silently complicit in their stillness. When will America wake up? As whole world cries , our citizens sleep.The sobs of silence is deafening. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12Cool. One late edit:
"The least you could risk is your job."
would be better as:
"The least you could do is risk your job."
(added the word "do").
Without the word "do," it might get mis-interpreted as a threat. And that's not the intent at all. Sorry about that. But if you already sent it as is, I did too. You can blame me if the men in suits show up. :-) - wiremonkeymommy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8vote for 'outsider' candidates, the Nader/Paul/Gravel types, until the system changes
- mynamis, on 10/11/2007, -7/+142 political parties one goal, to enslave the United States. www prisonplanet com
- tigerbeat, on 10/11/2007, -7/+13So what if Obama didn't have to vote on it in congress. He was an elected official who spoke out strongly against the war before it started.
- the6thReplicant, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9It seems the Dems and Republicans are spending so much time over whether or not the troops should be there for 12 months or 18 months but still no-one is figuring out how to the solve the problem called extremism. America supports it's own extremists and globally supports other extremists. We are going to spend 1 trillion dollars for what? A base closer to Iran? A world that can now point to Iraq and say, "See I told you the Americans hate Muslims..Which is why you should join us. Send no money now..."
This world is getting ***** up and all we do is pour gas on the flames and then debate on which colour our shoes need to be to "support the troops" - sbader, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11@Entropyman
sent! - awesomeface, on 10/11/2007, -11/+17@Ruff
Not entirely their fault. They tried to pull out, and it got vetoed..not their fault. Then they tried to play chicken with Bush recently with this bill. However, I'm pretty sure they realized that Bush is the type of person who will never ever change his mind, no matter how retarded the topic.
But dems definitely got spanked with this removal of the benchmarks. Very disappointing. I really don't understand what's so hard. - FearlessFreep, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10This only comes as a surprise to those who thought the Democrat politicians were any more noble than the Republicans.
It's not about ideals and beleifs, it's about power.
And those of you who voted the Democrats into power this time around believing they would be any diferent were the ones suckered - gmason08, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7BTW, one tool utilized to perpetuate the false perception among the masses that the two parties are in opposition/have differing philosophies, is how the bosses decide who casts what vote.
The bosses know before the votes are cast whether they have the votes needed for passage on any particular bill, just because a particular rep/senator votes against passage is not proof positive the rep/senator in question is against the bill in question. Why do this? If said reps/senators constituents are against passage and they are up for re-election(but the bosses/people pulling the bosses strings want the bill passed) the bosses can let some reps/senators vote against for political/election cover if they already have enough votes for passage. This is manipulation is also used to keep those wanting to go off the ranch/with an independent streak in line and doing what they are told to do. - Skavenblight, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7That was a major burn. He truly is the only one standing against the government in the media.
- TheWretched, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Now this may be a long stretch and I'm not caught up on the legal implications of this....:
I'm at the point now where I would like to see a recall election for each and every senator and representative who is not absolutely firm (and without compromise) that America needs to be out of Iraq NOW, that those who must be held accountable WILL be held accountable. If they can't live up to the promises and reasons why they were elected to in the first place then it's time to throw them out and elect someone who is more in tune with the country than not.
Seriously, these people are living too comfortably as it is. Perhaps threatening their jobs and reminding them their not on a pleasure cruise is necessary.
Again, I don't know if this is legally possible right now. But god damn we seriously need something like this now. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8@btw, I don't actually think amalgamutt is a Ron Paul supporter, despite his assertions. I was hoping some other RP supporters would challenge his claims. Ron Paul is obviously against US intervention in the region and, no, RP is not anti-American, and neither am I.
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8Laws and Customs of War on Land" (Hague IV); October 18, 1907: "Section III Military Authority over the territory of the hostile State."
Art. 42.
Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
You are a sheep because you buy the political 'spin' that refuses to call the occupation of Iraq what it is. I'm sure whenever you hear someone refer to the "surge" as an escalation, you claim they hate america. People like you have a phobia of reality. - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -8/+12"Your letter looks like it was written by an muslim extremist as it makes Americans into the bad guys. I realize the war is b.s., but accusing our military people, who are only following orders, as being the bad guys, isn't a fair representation of what's going on."
Where the ***** did you infer that I was accusing our military of being bad guys? How dare you question my patriotism. I am trying to save our soldiers from dying and civilians as well, and all you can think to do is pervert what I wrote into some sick, anti-American rant?
Peace is patriotic, you twit!
The bad guys are the ones who are eligible for impeachment. The crimes are international -- covert war on Iran is criminal, immoral, and unconstitutional.
If you are the caliber of a Ron Paul supporter, I will change my opinion of the man immediately and say that electing him would allow the brownshirts to rise to power. Don't do it. We can't take the risk. - totorototoro, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4"To all the others-presidents and majority leaders and candidates and rank-and-file Congressmen and Senators of either party-there is only blame… for this shameful, and bi-partisan, betrayal."
exactly. - raymore, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7@chicofaraby
Your entire comment is the ***** that keeps this nation not only weak and a prime target for the world's opinions, but also ensures that it will never change.
For your ears: IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LEFT OR RIGHT, FORGET ABOUT THOSE TERMS FORGET WHO IS REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT OR LIBERTARIAN OR GREEN, JUST ***** VOTE FOR THE RIGHT PERSON. TRUST ME, THERE ARE GOOD AND WELL ROUNDED REPUBLICANS, AS THERE ARE DEMOCRATS, AS THERE ARE LIBERTARIANS, THEY JUST AREN'T RUNNING AND WON'T AS THEY WON'T WIN BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU. - CheckPlease, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Bush won't approve withdrawing from Iraq? Impeach him.
Cheney won't approve, and he's getting a big hard-on thinking about bombing Iran? Impeach him.
Does it have to be in that order? Of course not.
Don't think the Republicans will choose to impeach? It's never too far from the next election. Let'em know their job's on the line, and they just pull a Lieberman on their own party.
Worried that the two haven't done anything impeachable? Really?! Are you serious, or just the token blonde on "The View?"
Get a pair and impeach! - nathanfx, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7We need a new system of government. This partisan BS is the stupidest thing since organized religion.
- kethraal, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Did you hear his voice when he said "And OUR PRESIDENT...."
Holy crap he's an amazing speaker. - Bob_Oliver, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3http://youtube.com/watch?v=qh9rFNPeKx0
- LucidOne, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Bush has screwed this country so badly that it will take decades to get us back on track!
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5"the real question is can we make it better before we leave?"
No. The USA is the problem in Iraq. The Iraqis live there. - TheBogie, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7The only dem candidate who could do anything is Mike Gravel.
Did you hear what he said at the debate? He gave the other knuckleheads the blueprint for getting out. They didn't do anything.
Mike Gravel would not back down to Bush. He has copper plated balls of steel. - GeezerD, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3So, the Democrats, too, are cowards. Shame. Once again congress abdicates its responsibility.
- countrygirl31, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3(speaking to future grandchildren 15 years from now)
Grandma, what is the United States?
Oh, about 20 years ago we use to call the United States this land we live in until about 2008... - lpmiller, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8the only recourse we have, is the same one we always had. We need to stop sitting on our asses and take to the streets.
- sphigel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Dems do need to be responsible for what will happen if we have an early withdrawal. Not one dem seems to have the balls to flat out say that Iraq will be in chaos. That's not saying that it isn't in chaos now but the real question is can we make it better before we leave? Are we really ready to leave Iraq in the midst of a free-for-all for power. If the dems acknowledged the consequences of leaving Iraq I might respect them. And before you reply I do realize that their are consequences to staying in Iraq too and the real debate is which is more important. However, the dems continue to talk as if there is no consequence for leaving early which is *****.
- johndoenumber2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Don't pull any punches Keith.
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4The only thing that can lower the chaos in Iraq is a political solution. Our troops can't accomplish what we want because weapons are flooding in from all sides. And al Qaeda will be there, sowing chaos as long as we are (the flip-side is once we leave, they'll be slaughtered as intruders).
Either the Sunni/Shia thing will explode or it won't. We can't stop it, except by negotiating a settlement first with the Iraqis, but just as importantly, with Syria, Saudi, Jordan, and Iran.
If Cheney would stop his treasonous sabre rattling for a minute, our negotiators might actually get somewhere. - dobaman, on 10/11/2007, -9/+11'Who among us will stop this war - this War of Lies? To he or she, fall the figurative keys to the nation.'
From what I've seen Edwards seems to be doing the best job of the Dem candidates re: Iraq. For example http://www.supportthetroopsendthewar.com.
Obama was against authorisation but never had to vote on it. Hillary voted for it and won't apologise. Edwards voted for it and has apologised for his vote. But that was the past. The key question that Olbermann raises is what are they doing about stopping the Iraq occupation *now*. Here Edwards is doing the best job and Hillary is doing the worst...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 103 discussions
