What is Digg?86 Comments
- gronne, on 10/12/2007, -8/+35This is why Lieberman lost the primary. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
- verifex, on 10/12/2007, -9/+29If Bush supports the losing democrat to try and give legitamacy to the fringe Liberman is on, and democrats are split between the two democrats, then the republican will obviously win, duh. Bush is playing good ol' fashioned dirty politics.. Look what effect Nader had on the 200 election..
- steveng, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23A boost? This seems negative for Lieberman to me.
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -12/+28@helix400
From Wikipedia:
"Lieberman has been critical of the entertainment media.[29] On November 29, 2005, Lieberman co-sponsored the Family Entertainment Protection Act, which was introduced by Hillary Clinton, S.2126. The act is intended to protect children from what he says is inappropriate content found in video games. He has denounced the violence contained in video games and has attempted to regulate sales of violent video games to minors, arguing that games should have to be labeled based upon age-appropriateness.[30] Regarding Grand Theft Auto, he said, "The player is rewarded for attacking a woman, pushing her to the ground, kicking her repeatedly and then ultimately killing her, shooting her over and over again. I call on the entertainment companies--they've got a right to do that, but they have a responsibility not to do it if we want to raise the next generation of our sons to treat women with respect."[31]"
The guy's a douchebag. And it pains me to say that, because he supports school voucher programs and affirmative action, two things I like. But I can't, in good conscious support someone who's stupid enough to believe violent video games have any more impact on our nation's youth than the nightly news. - martianbob, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20@verifex
Yes, that 200 election sure was something... wait, there was no election in 200, Septimus Severus was still reigning! - invader, on 10/12/2007, -9/+24Goose W. Bush?
- MarkCiccone, on 10/12/2007, -8/+23To any candidate associated with the President: you have been warned. Bush is so unpopular it's political suicide to still tie yourself with him.
- Koopa, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17"It's only negative to the masses that have been brainwashed into believing the defense of our country through overseas military force is a bad thing. This kind of brainwashing is only temporary and will not live beyond the election cycle for which is was created. If you think it's a bad thing, then you're brainwashed and you wouldn't have voted for either anyway. This will help the real middle ground people that aren't falling for the political rhetoric on either side. It shows that democrats and republicans can come together when the country's best interest is at stake."
The uses of overseas military force isn't a bad thing in itself. Its only a bad thing when you use overseas military force against the WRONG ***** COUNTRY.
Its like, if you got bit by a particular pit bull, would you go around euthanizing all the doberman's you could find before dealing with the pit bull that bit you? Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11, and NOTHING about their intentions changed after 9/11--they were no more of a threat after 9/11 than before. Jesus Christ, they weren't even ruled by the same sect of Islam as Al Qaeda, how can you tell me they were related? What has the fall of Sadaam done for you? It has not made you one iota safer than before. If you can prove to me that it has, I'll eat my hat and join the Republican party. - tvc15, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13@dclowd9901
Also, I thought Lieberman was against Net Neutrality. I woulda expected that it would be a big issue with diggers but I don't recall much mention of it here. In fact, I just noticed that one of the google ads is some petition to get Lieberman to support Neutrality. - ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Hillary has weekly meetings with Rupert from FOX, takes loads of money and if you need a clue just google for "Clinton vacations with Bush" or "Bush calls Clinton family". Any attempt to put Hillary up for president will be a manipulation - either to maintain the power of the pardon and keep the agenda moving forward or to force people to choose a poor opponent. Hillary and the ex gov of Virginia, Warner were both at this years Bildeburg conference in Canada along with Pataki - one of those three or all will be in the race in 2008. (Every president going back decades have been in attendance where they are no doubt told what they will be doing while in office). The sad fact is that a large majority of our govt has been paid off, blackmailed or both and no longer represent we the people. This also applies to the top level of most bureaucratic offices all the way down to the cities. The house cleaning required to save the USA is so large it more than likely will never happen. People are just too complacent, un-educated and yes, brainwashed.
- mulling, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12Can we call him Joe Naderman now?
Seriously, Bush isn't endorsing the Republican candidate because he already has one. His name is Joe Lieberman. - Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -10/+17Never happen. America isn't ready for a woman president; especially one that is insane.
- trunkster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11lol now he really isn't going to win.
- sh0k, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11So, now there are two republicans running against one democrat?
Looks good for Lamont... - headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12I love the way people are instantly "brainwashed" when they don't agree with your opinion.
- Slipperymint, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12@mrfoos
You only managed to use brainwash three times in your post. Not very impressive, you should've tried harder. Most political nujobs average at least six per post. - ellingswin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Doesn't this help Ned Lamont. Because this just proves his case.
- sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -8/+13
I'm looking forward to Bill Clinton's role as first lady. - uptown, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Ignoring the Lieberman / Lamont issue, the Republican candidate in that race is a complete freak. I don't blame him for not endorsing him.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Wouldn't his official title be "First Pimp" ?
- cwestpha, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12hmm, I dont think many people are asking for Bush' endorsement. Been hearing of a lot of candidates asking Bush not to come.
- Bioshocker, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8The stupid thing about this whole Lieberman thing is that it allows the neocons to portray their position as the moderate one. "Bush reaches across the party divide. It's the democrats who are responsible for the partisanship! It's the democrats who are the extremists!"
Yet again the Democrats get outmaneouvered by the Republicans. :/ - dmh11686, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Joe Lieberman is in no way a republican when he votes with democrats 90% of the time. The reason President Bush is not supporting the Republican candidate is because of some problems with his past. And he has no way of winning, Schlesinger's poll ratings have gone down from 13% to 6%, with or without President Bush's backing, since last month.
- OwdenBowden, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Can SOMEONE give Bush a Blow Job so he can be impeached!
- spinchange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Actually gang, this was the one thing I was a little disappointed about - I know it's their spin in part, but it sounds like the guy who is running for GOP is actually a disaster too. It doesn't matter ~ Digg for sure. Thanks Aidenag!
- ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I don't think a civil war is the answer - a civil strike may be. During the great depression people rose up and the govt felt the heat - hence the "new deal". Oh sorry, I forgot they don't teach history anymore - a lot of diggers won't understand or know what we're talking about.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Get it back? *cough* civil war *cough*
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5If Bush supports him (by now supporting the Rep.) Lieberman will get the Republican, some Demarcate, and Independent. Lieberman should win hands down.
- steveng, on 10/12/2007, -8/+11If you think Bush is greatly helping defend our country, you have been brainwashed. We are just making the middle east more mad at us. Remove the duck tape from you windows and turn off the Fox News channel. You have been brainwashed, get over is and turn on a real news program.
- fjvwing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5W. not endorsing someone because there are 'some problems with his past'? What, are the Republican handlers afraid the skeletons in both their closest will gaze deeply into each-other's eyes and start a support group?
- dinobot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3All you people talk about Lieberman, but he isnt the only democrat who is all buddy buddy with Bush.
Take for example Henry Cuellar from Texas. He has irked the Dem Party by siding with the Reps on a lot of issues, specially tax cuts and the likes. - davejr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The president should support Joe Lieberman. His own party will not. Lieberman supports President Bush on one issue, the war on terror. His party then black balls him because he does not tote the party line. A good example of the Democratic party is going extreme left. Hope you all enjoy the ride.
- linkinpark342, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7You know, at this point I think this would be a ++ for Alan Schlesinger, that is to not be endorsed by Bush might help at this point...
Of course this _is_ CT... don't know for sure - fufubag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That's what happens when your only plan is "ummm, Bush is the reason the world sucks.... we hate Bush." Maybe if they come up with an actual plan... I don't know.....
At least the libertarians have a plan for many things. It's even posted on their site. I have no idea what specifics the Dems, or 'pubs have in mind (besides raising more money and making sure the other side doesn't win). - aoctavio, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4A lot have made this point, but I can't help repeat it... Doesn't this make him the Republican candidate? Wasn't that what Lamont was accusing him of?
- saigumi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Huh? I thought there were impeachment procedings for that last guy because he told a boldface lie to a Grand Jury.
Oh, I forgot that facts aren't important to the Looney Left. - jpalmer99, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I know it was you Fredo...I know it was you.
- tehnico, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Nah, first mate, or Number One.
- spinchange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2re-reading my post, i realize it could be misunderstood:
what i mean is that Their not giving the nod to Republican in the race so muchfor Liebermans sake, but because the other guy is wreck. Granted that's coming from them, but that the impression I got from the article - saigumi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2ccarigan:
The New Deal? You've never heard of it? Heck, we had that kind of stuff taught before highschool. It's called history. - amoirae, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Since he takes the money on the night stand, he's a whore.
His quacking like a duck thing is just to arouse Cheney. - Koopa, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I don't know why you're being dugg down, thats actually true--if he wins as an independent, that means he has enough Republicans and Democrats who like him to ignore candidates from their own party and vote for him. If he can do that in Connecticut, he might be able to do it nationwide.
But I don't think he'll pull through. Too bad, I liked the guy, especially when he was running as VP. He seems like a good honest guy with storng morals, but I don't like
a) his stand on net neutrality
b) his stand on censoring videogames
c) his obstinate support for the war and the president
d) his new friends (Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, etc.) - BullyJack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Schlesinger, the Republican candidate, is only carrying 6% of the vote.
As an independent, Lieberman's going to retain his Democratic supporters and snag the majority of the Republican voters. Joe beats Ned, the Democrats lose a Senate seat, and Bush gets a Senator who won't vote for impeachment. - Visigoth, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Dorothy we aren't in Kansas, the only way to believe that the Dem party doesn’t have a left is to be standing to the left of Trotsky when you look. As for leaving the Middle East as a solution... as I said before a tactical delusion like living in your parents’ basement to avoid growing up, futile. I guess I am no longer innocent enough to believe being nice will make the problem go away
- Vermifax, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I hope Lamont wins.
- KriLL3.2™, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4If you think the democrats have a "hard left" you're very much mistaken. Demo and Rep policies are almost carbon copies, although I do think that leaving iraq is a very good idea. If the democrats say they leave iraq (and the rest of the middle east) alone if they win, you should vote for them.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A smart political move by the President after a disasterous move by liberals who were led by the lefty kooks.
The RNC wins just as long as Ned whatisname loses, and lose he will. - ekleinunt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2A few simple (albeit smart) political reasons why Bush would not endorse the (R) candidate for the CT seat:
1. Joe Lieberman is worth thousands (if not millions) of political donation dollars every election cycle to the republican party. ie: A Dem. figurehead with a big f'ing mouth.
2. The Devil you know is better than the Devil you don't. ie: A Dem who occasionally votes with the president is usually good for the president.
3. Schlesinger is a political embarrassment to the Republican party and will be even more so if he actually wins. ie. Schlesinger is a political f*cktard with a questionable past. - aindikt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1While it would be educative to have the Dems in the Whitehouse again, I think it would be too destructive. Remember too that that sort of thinking is what Naderism is all about. Better to have a President who is serious about the nation's security and let Congress mess around.
- JK1150, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1At first this seemed surprising. I thought about it, and I think Tony Snow would dodge anyone who asked "Does George Bush support the New Jersey Senate candidate?" This is simply because GWB is not well liked in NJ, and this is the same case in CT. Bush's endorsement would likely hurt a northeastern GOP candidate.
-
Show 51 - 81 of 81 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