What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
339 Comments
- MikaelMN, on 10/11/2007, -53/+479Lone Ranger,
Enough with the jingoistic, pseudo-patriotic crap. It is worn and tired. Your 28% approval rating 'resident has long since worn out his welcome with the INFORMED American public. This was a war of choice. It is a war of aggression in direct contravention of the Geneva Conventions and therefore U.S. and International law. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 (Bush/Cheney, et al lied). Saddam had no WMDs (Bush/Cheney, et al lied). Saddam had nothing to do with Al Qaeda (Bush/Cheney, et al lied). Saddam had nothing to do with Osama (Bush/Cheney, et al lied).
The invasion of Iraq was planned by Cheney and his Project for a New American Century Oil Baron profiteers LONG before 9/11.
And THIS inquiry has NOTHING to do with the Iraq debacle. These subpoenas are part of a CRIMINAL investigation (as confirmed by a Federal Court decision) against the Bush Administration for spying on Americans.
YOU are the treasonous rat if you take the side of these confirmed domestic enemies to the Constitution.
IMPEACH! INDICT! INCARCERATE these lying, thieving, hateful cretins - each and every one!
ImpeachforPeace dot org - EFinkelstein, on 10/11/2007, -17/+226@LoneRanger85,
As a Lieutenant Colonel formerly stationed at Abu Ghraib I strongly disagree that it would damage morale of the military as the majority of the troops are not happy to be there at all. Luckily, I got back from there alive and intact and I can tell you that I'm glad to be out. I hope that I never have to go back.
I along with many of my fellow soldiers would love to see Bush and Cheney charged with war crimes or at least contempt if for no other reason than to show us that there is still justice within the American legal system and that the president and his branch of office are still accountable for their actions as are the rest of us. - 726f6e7061756c, on 10/11/2007, -10/+197@LoneRanger85
" "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged."
~ President Abraham Lincoln "
"This false Lincoln "quote" has become a favorite of those who like to accuse critics of Bush's war policy of disloyalty or treason. Our Internet search brought up more than 18,000 references to it. "
http://www.factcheck.org/article415.html - AnaHadWolves, on 10/11/2007, -12/+139Loneranger85, if you're even attempting to equate George W. Bush with Abraham Lincoln, I must tell you that the only thing that Bush and Lincoln share are external genitalia.
Unfortunately, Bush wears his as a hat. - headcase, on 10/11/2007, -7/+91It's not a wartime though. it's an occupation. we aren't officially at war with any nation, we're at war with concepts (drugs, terrorism, so on).
- kurttrail, on 10/11/2007, -4/+77Technically, we are not at "War." No Declaration of War was ever passed by Congress.
- brianbennett, on 10/11/2007, -14/+75Check All That Apply:
[_] Apple iPhone
[x] Bush Sucks
[_] Global Warming - weaksnyc, on 08/14/2009, -0/+57Supporters of President Bush and the war in Iraq often quote Abraham Lincoln as saying members of Congress who act to damage military morale in wartime "are saboteurs, and should be arrested, exiled or hanged."
Republican candidate Diana Irey used the "quote" recently in her campaign against Democratic Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, and it has appeared thousands of times on the Internet, in newspaper articles and letters to the editor, and in Republican speeches.
But Lincoln never said that. The conservative author who touched off the misquotation frenzy, J. Michael Waller, concedes that the words are his, not Lincoln's. Waller says he never meant to put quote marks around them, and blames an editor for the mistake and the failure to correct it. We also note other serious historical errors in the Waller article containing the bogus quote.
Credit for this goes to 726f6e7061756c below, and is found at http://www.factcheck.org/article415.html
It was my opinion that it should be listed as a comment under LoneRanger's original post, making sure that it would be read. - MBHockey, on 10/11/2007, -5/+53It's so embarrassing when Digg headlines are CONSTANTLY misspelled. Come on guys...it's spelled "Criminally" not "Criminaly"
- Pilot85, on 10/11/2007, -6/+53My morale is doin better since this article.
- MikaelMN, on 10/11/2007, -7/+50His Commander in Chief is a criminal. True American patriots know that insisting upon the Rule of Law and upholding of the Constitution is paramount to the ongoing health of our Republic.
Most soldiers would be happy to come home the moment Senator Lugar (R-IN) gets his way and the war begins drawing to a close. - redfan, on 10/11/2007, -6/+46TALK TALK TALK
I'm sick of it. Either take action against the president and this regime, or don't. The posturing is getting childish, and this comes from someone who absolutely hates BushCo. If the Democrats aren't going to do something about the administration, then stop acting like you will and move on to something else. Idle threats that are never followed through upon aren't going to convince anyone. - VIrus9, on 10/11/2007, -14/+52Thank you for showing evidence that even Abraham Lincoln was capable of saying some incredibly stupid things.
- arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+35You think that the president should have the right to do what? Ignore subpoenas? Why?
No one is above the law, not even the President. As a leader, and setting an example for the people, the President must abide by the law, and that means ALL laws. If he is subpoena'd, then he MUST comply with it just as every other American must or face contempt of court. His compliance is expecially important when it relates to activities such as warrantless wiretapping of every american citizen. If the president thinks he has legal justification for such actions, then he needs to show his proof, and back up his claims. If it's legal, then why does he have a problem showing why he thinks so?
I'm sorry, but there is no excuse for this. - scorchedearth, on 10/11/2007, -5/+39Thank you for sharing this with us, EF. Don't mind the haters. There are always those who think that they know everything from the comfort of their armchair.
Thank you for serving our country. I am sorry that your boss is a ***** retard. - ConservoHippie, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37I don't see how this damages the morale of the military.
- Aokami, on 10/11/2007, -2/+27Hey keep Vader out of this- -Cheney is pure Palpatine.
- Rfriaz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20NO! TOO MUCH ELLIPSIS!
- reed311, on 10/11/2007, -5/+24So, the military can risk their lives daily in combat but if someone criticizes the President then there's serious business!
- brianary, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19Are you serious? Are we recruiting 12 year old girls to fight for us? I very much doubt The Troops are at all shaken by the political storm Bush has brought on himself.
- arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19That's a ***** cop out. Hurt the troop morale? "He would not enjoy seeing his commander in chief be charged with a crime"... What if the president murdered someone in cold blood? Would it not be right to try him for his crime? This is no different. A crime is a crime. If the president has broken the law, then he should face justice for it. If a soldier cannot see that a criminal should be tried for a crime no matter who they are, then they have no business being in the military.
- Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -6/+22After six years of listening to the other side(Because this side was shouted down as being anti-american, pro-terrorists, terrorists-sympathizers, etc) people started to realize there was another side to the official story. The more they checked it out, the more they saw that the "unofficial" side has more evidense than the official side, while the offical side is still clinging to their usual fear mongering/ charactor assassiniations.
People are just listening to the side that hasn't lied to them repeatedly, and that doesn't make them uninformed - wuite the opposite really. - darny, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18I didn't even have to RT whole FA.
"According to the Washington Post, Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, says that a contempt charge is not out of the question if the White House refuses to turn over subpoenaed documents."
That's hardly "close". pfft. damn sensational digg.
AMAZING!! - dijital, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20Bravo Mike.
- tHePeOPle, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16You're right. That's why I'm so happy that congress is being so diligent in collecting the evidence. Of course, it's kinda hard when everyone lies to you and refuses to turn over documents, but I'm sure we'll get through that soon enough.
- ebolaworld, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16So you're saying, if a President wants to be corrupt and not held accountable for anything, simply start a war?
- DarkDakota, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14LOL, you can't even spell !!!!
- Chubakkaz, on 10/11/2007, -7/+20I could say a million already-known contemporary cliches but I'll go with this
Burn that sucka! - thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15That doesn't mean that he signed away his emotion and conscience.
- arbulus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13What about when you lie to start a war that has killed 4,000 american soldiers and 600,000 Iraqis and Afghanis?
- withincontext, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16Sorry, but despite our problems, it's still an amazing country. Don't be so narrow minded.
- Cerialthriller, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11this war is damaging the morale of the american people
- specialK16, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11I'm not american so I have the right to ask, what happens if you ignore a supoena?
- NerdyNinja, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12I find myself in the interesting situation of being proud of our troopers even more, for the simple reason that they don't belong over there but are doing their best. Nothing sucks more than having to do something like this with the support of your country, or even vehemence from an incredible number of people all over the world, and yet it wasn't your decision to start this war, you were just doing your job. And it's not like you can walk out of the office and drive home or something. I think Scorchedearth put it best: I am sorry your boss is a ***** retard [, too]
- Ncrypt, on 10/11/2007, -14/+25Just do it.
- CourtesyFlush, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16[x} Headline is Inaccurate
[x] Teens should not write legal commentary - Sparkster185, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13Bypass the blogspam:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/01/AR2007070101192.html?nav=rss_nation/special - Derrekito, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Well there you have it, thank you.
- tHePeOPle, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12How could President Nancy Pelosi POSSIBLY be any worse than the current administrations?
- an0nymous, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14@Lone
Now that you've been proven wrong, retract your lies. - tHePeOPle, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Dude, seriously...
"The supposed quote in question is not a quote at all, and I never intended it to be construed as one. It was my lead sentence in the article that a copy editor mistakenly turned into a quote by incorrectly inserting quotation marks."
-J. Michael Waller, email to FactCheck.org, Aug. 21, 2006 - tHePeOPle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11If congress isnt willing to hold the commander in chief to the same standard as the soldiers themselves, then what the hell are they even fighting for in the first place?
- kurtwinter, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14Take that George Washington! No seriously - we aren't at war because Congress hasn't declared it. Go ***** yourself.
- tepidpond, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10LoneRanger85, you are an idiotic piece of *****, and you defame and slander President Lincoln by posting a false quote cherry-picked from some blog. Face facts, pal. "Your" thug-in-chief is breaking and has broken and will continue to break any law he thinks he can get away with. The US is roughly democratic. That means when 85% of the US disagrees with you, YOU'RE WRONG.
- OneEyedParrot, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13Erm... sounds a bit like Marbury v. Madison to me. Shouldn't people be more excited to see him impeached for something like war crimes? I don't really see anything other than predigested Bush hate going on here... nothing really that relevant to the actual situation.
- gthrank, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Hear Hear. Let's see some action, not the constant talking and getting nowhere. My impression of the dems is they don't know how to fight. Bush/Cheney are DIRTY fighters, and if you try to engage them with restraint expecting them to act nicely, you'll LOSE.
- Shadowkahn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11I hate to put a damper on the 'hopeful' possibility of criminal charges brought against the current administration - it certainly would be a wonderful moment in History to live through - it just will not happen. Too many politicians have their hands dirty. These postulations on the reason for criminal charges will never see the light of day, mainly due to the incompetence in the Senate and Congress - we will assuredly see another 'dropping of the ball.'
We need to keep in mind no one in the Government wants another Watergate - where many individuals went off to prison - and Tricky Dicky was saved by a pardon. The situation was embarrassing to everyone and to have another Impeachment in the history books of America for some reason presents a problem for a lot of politicians. They like to vomit out such wonderful promises, yet it is tactful rhetoric.
Nothing will happen, things will just continue as they are - people will become more despondent with the government. America is no longer the land of the free, the few brave souls that fight for the ideals are being butchered by policy makers who don't give a damn about the individual.
All in all the American public are "government issue" - objects that have served out a purpose. There are people that care about this country but they are too few to do anything, or to set in the mindset of 'this too will pass...' to stand.
So yes, let this wonderful dream of criminal charges be suggested, like many hopes and dreams of what this country could have accomplish, it too will die on the table. - Arcnite, on 10/11/2007, -8/+17I keep seeing statements like "enough is enough" or "he hasn't done anything that's really impeachable" ... since when did we become a nation of pushovers? Isn't once enough? We've been laying on our backs for nearly a decade while this man destroys our country. I can only hope some justice will be served.
- zestyhedgehog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Congress (or Attorney General, which is hardly to happen in this case) can appoint a special prosecutor to investigate president's misconduct. The same happened with Nixon back then - Archibald Cox and Leon Jaworski were special prosecutors for the Watergate scnadal.
- mccrusc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9why is George Bush wearing Abraham lincoln's genitalia as a hat?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 342 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is