What is Digg?Sponsored by openforum.com
The Art of the List -- Guy Kawasaki view!
openforum.com - A post that contains an ordered or bulleted list is probably much better conceived and organized.
247 Comments
- walkingdogs, on 10/12/2007, -5/+195This is comical. Scratch my back but forget about me scratching yours. Veto the latest spending bill but expect the congress to pass legislation that allows him to strip even more of our civil liberties. What a joke!!
Oh the de-habilitating effects of rectal-cranial inversion! - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+145@rcronk,
Funny you should ask. Because I could suggest a few things:
1. Invest in human intelligence -- don't drive good people from the CIA over politics
2. Fight the existing terrorists -- don't create more by stirring up new hornets nests.
3. Make allies around the world -- don't alienate everyone, even Britain and lose the support we gained after 911.
4. Have the most open society in the world -- don't let the terrorists achieve a mirror image of their dreamland without firing a single shot.
5. Tell the truth -- don't con us into following you out of fear.
6. Most importantly, invest in ending the root cause of terrorism -- injustice, or at least the perception thereof. - wild, on 10/12/2007, -4/+134There is no way he didnt do crack in college.
- guichetroo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+115Makes perfect sesne: War(s) going nowhere. World hates us. Administration falling appart. 28% approval ratings. ...He's got nothing to lose...might as well try to pass some of that neocon agenda while everyone is focused on your major failures.
- Arainach, on 10/12/2007, -0/+84rcronk: If we suspend our liberties to ensure "security", then we've become a totalitarian dictatorship and this country is no longer worth defending or fighting for.
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+59Indeed. What did Bush think he was swearing an oath to protect and defend?
FYI, here's the full list of constitutional amendments that this administration acknowledges and/or defends:
2nd
And, maybe I'd add the 10th to that list on occasion, but only where States would limit or ban abortion more than the Federal gov't. - werther138, on 10/12/2007, -2/+58@rcronk
...a better way to stop terrorists...hmmmm
eureka!! Stop supporting them and the nations that harbor them (Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc) - AhmedF, on 10/12/2007, -2/+54I love how people talk about terrorism and third-world people without ever having been there.
If I was ever lucky with something was that I moved around a lot as a kid (and no - not a military family).
You don't know what oppression is like there. And I'm not talking about religious oppression - I'm talking about a boot that is basically on top of your neck while keeping you to the ground. And the people in power are able to keep this power (and mow down others) due to Western backing.
I'm not hating on the US (it would make me as bad as people who equate Muslims == terrorism). But seriously - people who think that there are people who wake up one day, decide that they hate America's freedom, and then go blow themselves are *seriously* deluding themselves.
Hate doesn't cause you to blow yourself up, hopelessness does. - shellacked, on 10/12/2007, -0/+46I watched Russ Feingold ripping into this on C-SPAN last night in a Senate hearing. I doubt this goes anywhere.
btw that's why I love C-SPAN, you get information straight from the source and unfiltered by MSM. You can watch your public servants at work and it becomes clear very fast who is effective and who is completely worthless. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+40When did these idiots get the idea that they could modify the constitution without using the proper prodecures of the amendment process?
As far as spying... I hear a lot of people say they have nothing to hide. What they don't realize is that it's not spying on Joe Six-Pack where the real problems begin, it's the spying on judges, prosecutors, legislaters and political opponents that endangers our entire system of government. - m0nk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+31Either you're joking, or you're just delusional. Either way I got a good laugh...
- Idgit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29Remember, these are the same people who up until recently didn't believe congress had oversight over the executive branch. So at most their knowledge of the constitution is slim.
- davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29@idgit
Actually I think their knowledge of the constitution is keen, which explains their clever methods of avoiding, subverting, and undermining it at every opportunity. - bjornski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26These are also the same people obstructing an investigation into their own e-mails and phone logs.
- darthpaul88, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27lets just impeach him already
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25The best government is a small government.
- tsf5000, on 10/12/2007, -4/+27All these idiots who're defending Bush should try living in China for awhile since they don't seem to mind having their every move watched. Maybe then they'd gain some appreciation for the freedoms that our Constitution guarantees us.
- bjornski, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26I dug this down because I don't follow random links without at least a few words telling me what it is.
- thcobbs, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29@phis....
Nah, they put it up there because it's one of the least watched and least profitable channels to carry.
Never attribute to conspiracy that which can be attributed to cable profit margins. - 98psuAE, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Benjiman Franklin - crichton101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20I'm an American and I didn't vote for him so suck it.
- EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20@rcronk,
Fair enough. For terrorists already in-country, spying on innocent Americans won't help. It will actually make it worse, because it creates a mountain of false leads to distract law enforcement from the real ones.
If terrorists are hiding out in the US, they won't easily be found, even if we allow door-to-door searches and random public document checks. Those techniques only find sloppy people who break comparatively minor laws -- gun ownership rules, smoking pot, overstaying one's visa. Look at Britain, who had video of four men entering the subway but yet it was only good _after_ the event, if at all.
For people who are trained to evade capture and just blend in, it's not so hard. And especially if they're not making actual bombs or obtaining weapons. The best hope we have is to capture their friends overseas and find the links back, which is what we should have done (all we probably could have done) before the attack in 2001.
Again, we have to look at what works, vs. what merely makes some people feel better. And for most of us here, I'm sure these measures don't even do that. - Nocturnalis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20We are getting more and more like China everyday. Soon all internet will be routed through a gov't ISP. Wait............
- thundacracka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18How about we institute a program where anyone can spy on anyone for any reason. Maybe we can even turn it into a reality show. America's Funniest Home Invasion Videos!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Its about an irredeemably corrupt politician, so YES is is politics!
- jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19"Actually we're probably worse than China now - as far as the president is concerned."
Yeah, at least there economy isn't on the brink of collapse. (BTW high stock market doesn't mean much when the dollar is weak) - melvs, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18I'll make it easy for him to spy on me, ***** YOU BUSH, you are the worst thing to happen to this country in the past 10 years other then 9/11. There, put me on the no fly lists, I ***** dare you.
- PhishPhriend, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17C-Span is awesome for that, which is probably why the banished it and C-Span2 to the upper echelons of cable. I can't watch it on my older set now, unless I pay for another cable box.
- crichton101, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16No one said they can't get spy on suspects, they're saying they have to do it legally and get a court order instead of just randomly deciding person A is an enemy of the state and needs to be spied on. The FBI already admitted it abused the powers the Patriot Act granted them, you really think that couldn't happen again? If so you're an idiot.
- jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14"More Bush bashing makes me miss the HD-DVD whining. "
More bashing of Bush bashers makes me violent. - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@thcobbs, I can get a channel with a grainy black and white image of an empty race track. But I can't get CSPAN without paying more. It costs cable companies nothing to put stuff they don't much want on channels 32-99 without encryption.
- smackywentz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@rcronk
The fact is you are currently in the position of, "Well I'm not doing anything wrong so it's okay." That's a scary position to be in, not only does the office of the presidency now have the powers to declare marshal law at a whim, it also has the powers to declare who and what is a terrorist or terrorist action. That's not just Bush, that is anyone that holds office from now on. What all this is doing is giving the already entirely too powerful executive branch, more powers. Little government intervention and power is what our founding fathers wanted. That is the true definition of America, now we're all about big government and sucking the corporations' titties. Spying on the population is a HUGE invasion of privacy, they already do it, this will just give them more freedom and ways to do so. And I will repeat myself this bill will pass unanimously, in the Senate, the House, maybe 11 or so Reps will be against it.
Edit: Give me a minute I didn't see your post. - ken0624700, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17Actually we're probably worse than China now - as far as the president is concerned.
- davesbrain, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14@GawtMilk
I think the issue is how much danger are we honestly in right now? Personally I don't think the risk of being in a terrorist attack is all that great, nor was it ever. I know, 9-11-01, WTC bombing in 1993. Well, the 1993 bombing was, from what I've read, an FBI sting operation that was allowed to proceed. There was ample evidence that 9-11-01 was being planned prior to the attacks and that intelligence was ignored. The truth is our government does not need new sweeping powers to protect us from terrorists. They could have stopped 9-11 with the information they had through existing laws.
The Bush administration wants us all to believe that we are in imminent danger every second of every day and that we MUST give him the freedom to do as HE deems fit to protect us from this immediate threat. Bush is a conjurer. He's conjured up this phantom menace that he needs us all to fear. This is the only explanation why they drop the "T" word when they want something. - DaWolfman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15I say let's do it! I mean, it's been working for us so far, right?
/sarcasm - FlaG8r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13GawtMilk, FISA allows them to spy for up to 3 days before they even get their warrant. The tired "ticking bomb" argument doesn't apply in any way.
FISA came about because government agencies were abusing their ability to wiretap. This is why it is so widely assumed that destroying or ignoring FISA will lead to abuse. - melvs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13No, I'm not going to beat up a TSA employee, I'll just become yet another person labeled as a threat to America because I speak out against this administration.
No, I'm not going to cry and piss myself when and if the FEDs show up at my house to get me.
The fact of the matter is I can almost garuntee I've had conversations listened in on plenty of times, if not all the time. I have friends in Turkey who call once a month or so, have visited us, I have family who's traveled around the middle east and made calls home from there as well, and for awhile a family member of mine was dating a middle eastern girl who still lived there, so she called daily. Nothing happened to me yet, and it won't. But if it does, it will be a landmark case and would blow up in the face of whoever brought it upon me. Call me cocky, but I know my god damn rights, and speaking to friends who live oversees, traveling the world, and speaking out against an administration who has just about ruined America does not justify having me listed as a threat. Speaking out against the ***** going on daily within the current administration is my duty as a patriotic American who loves my country and everything it stood for prior to 2000. ***** Bush. - MaxK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12@rcronk,
"I support the constitution and constitutional protections of our God-given rights. In times of war in the past, some of these rights were curtailed for the sake of survival. Assume for a moment that we really are in a state of war and are trying to survive, does anyone have a better idea for finding and stopping terrorists? I'd like to hear it."
The fact is that we are NOT in a war for survival. There is no fighting on American land. We went to Iraq over WMDs which never existed and started a war which was declared victorious four years ago yesterday. Why are our soldiers still dying, and why are our taxes paying for it? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Yeah, and the Jews have been poisoning our water for years so we should just make it legal to poison water... only if you're a zionist of course.
- Homerr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15up = down
more = less
war = peace
1 + 1 = 3 - Min1ster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11No bill number yet, but straight from DOJ, who is actually doing the submitting:
http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2007/April/07_nsd_247.html - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@rcronk, let me know when all of the 911 commissions recommendations are implemented, when we have adequate security in the places we've already identified (trains, ports, etc..) Five years later, and we still don't have what were promised in 2002.
And then for BushCo to approve the sale of critical security infrastructure (e.g., ports) to foreign companies/governments, some of whose elite may even fund terrorism, while taking away our liberties is so fundamentally wrong, it's criminal.
And I don't appreciate you saying I'd just sit and wait for an attack. If you re-read this thread, I think I've given you at least 10 solid suggestions of things we should be doing right now but aren't (in some cases, we do the opposite).
If all of those fail to work after they're tried, then talk to us about giving up liberties that won't even help solve the problem.
In the meantime, I'm not going to waste my time on you. You sounded reasonable, but you're not listening. - EntropyMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11@rcronk: "The issue is not security but survival. Time will tell. If a bomb goes off - Darn Bush didn't do enough. If not, Darn Bush, he's taking away liberties for no reason."
First of all, no. The issue is not survival for the nation. There is nothing al Qaeda can do to destroy America other than what we choose to do to ourselves. Plenty of nations are actively trying to destroy Israel, and they're in a much more precarious position, but yet they survive. What we're talking about is stopping mass murder, which is important, but not so critical that we should give up what makes this country special to simply make us feel safer.
The only measures that truly work are the external ones -- stopping the root causes of terrorism. Once someone decides to get a gun and shoot up a school, you can't stop them unless you get lucky. And you shouldn't remake your whole open society into a closed one just to try to prevent the few cases we have. Your chances of being killed by lightning are still higher -- yet we take the risk and avoid living in gausian cages all our lives.
And as for Bush being blamed -- what I blame him for is not trying prior to 911. What I blame him for now is doing the _wrong_ things. Those are not inconsistent. He just doesn't get it, or he's still using this fear to strengthen his position. Either way, it's wrong. We can do much better than this. - jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Like any dictator (or Cartman), he will do what he wants. Citizens, you know what must be done.
- obliviousfool, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Anybody read the article? The reason they "need to change the law" is "too secret to tell ya'll about."
Um, yeah.
I don't think that is how it's supposed to work. - djdole, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Can we submit a bill that would allow American's to Veto the remaining President's office term?
Oh wait, yeah that's basically impeachment.
Lets do that.
Now. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Hes just takes them (dollar bills) from his big oil and war buddies!
- bjornski, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying add a little "this video is about..." sentence. Then I'd watch, if I"m interested.
Without at least a topic? I have less than zero interest.
You're not making a point. Not at all. - djdole, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10American, and didn't vote for him... twice.
Anyone who judges an entire nation on the beliefs of a few of it's individuals is a COMPLETE idiot.
That being said, liquidmass seems to have a lot in common with dubya. - OUChevelleSS, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Too bad the President can't submit bills.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 247 discussions
