What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
Who Gets To Use Unsold Cruise Cabins at Huge Discounts view!
howlifeworks.com - How to access once-in-a-lifetime trips at significantly less than full price
326 Comments
- inactive, on 04/09/2009, -30/+334FTA:
"CALLER: I would like to know why, if you had a car, ma’am, and it broke down and you took it to your dealer and it kept breaking down, and breaking down. Wouldn’t you change dealers? Why do you keep bringing these neocons on? […] This failed! …And you keep on bringing on failed policy. […] I would like you to tell me why we are still using this car dealer who has failed America."
A-*****-men. - inactive, on 04/10/2009, -9/+124"LOWRY: Well, since I wasn’t called a traitor, I think it was a pretty calm and cool call. Given what some of what we’ve heard this morning. […]"
When the highlight of your morning is that you aren't called a traitor by a 70-year-old woman, that's probably a hint that the public disagrees with you in some way. - Bhima, on 04/09/2009, -23/+114This is something that has been going on for a long, long time. Journalists have the aim to cover "both sides of the debate". However, while this does work if both side of the debate are legitimate, it does not work when one side is factual wrong the party proselytizing it knows it is wrong.
It's a recurring problem: Climate Change, Environmental Issues, Intelligent Design, Politics, LBGT rights... - shupy, on 04/10/2009, -5/+91Well most "news" has become entertainment. Putting someone on the air who is radical and causes controversy is their idea of "entertainment. They really arent' interested in presenting genuine news or valid viewpoints.
It is a little like the use of polls. News organizations have become lazy and rather than go investigate news, they can run a poll and report it like it is news. Fill up a couple hours of time, follow it up with some shallow commentary and a couple lame jokes and you got a cable news show.. - Phylter, on 04/09/2009, -12/+63Agreed, brother...
- Rothbardosaurus, on 04/10/2009, -3/+51As Rush said (ironic as it is to quote him in response to this story), "You don't have to give WRONG the time of day just to be 'fair.'"
- arbiter13, on 04/10/2009, -0/+45All this shows is that people really do not understand how CSPAN works. I've watched it constantly for over a year (8hrs a day). They have been constantly accused of being both left-wing and right-wing, depending on what party the person belongs to. The show is meant to connect callers to these guests. The "host" is simply a conduit. They will take pretty much any guest they can get and do not attempt to give them "credibility" by having them on the show. The only credibility they get is the that which YOU give them. This is not a channel for people who want to be told the news but want to watch it intently and study the person giving you the information as much as you can. There is no filter. There is no commentary. There is just you and the information, and the responses I see overwhelmingly indicate that people simply cannot handle this without going bat-*****-*****-loco.
- theberlindoctor, on 04/10/2009, -0/+43Here is the problem: social and political policy has far more than just 2 sides.
- booksnmore4you, on 04/09/2009, -13/+53Hear hear!!
- Malkor, on 04/10/2009, -8/+44You don't need to be liberal to dislike neocons felluh.
- blackinthmiddle, on 04/10/2009, -4/+38"Okay....if you're going to claim neocon policies have "failed" this country...what specific policies are you talking about. Beyond interventionist policy in Iraq, and the surge, both of which are not failures..."
Are you serious? The Iraq war is not a failure? If that's truly your belief, then there's really nothing more to discuss with you. We start a war with a country on completely erroneous intel (intel that we were told was erroneous, yet we ignored) and you call that a success? Again, I'm probably wasting my time here, but I'll continue.
So then if the war was not a failure, that means it was a success in your eyes. What exactly did we succeed in doing? Remember, Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction and had *zero* to do with 9/11. With that as the backdrop, what did we succeed in doing over there?
Let's move off of that and move to domestic policy. Bush creates the "No child left behind" program, then proceeds to take away $14 billion dollars from student loan programs. I guess I'd call that a failure!
Next, if he had his way, he would have privatized social security. I remember when I first heard his idea, my first thought was that he wanted to take the onus off of the government and place it on the American public. Imagine, with our recent economic situation, if he had actually got his way?
Let's continue. Bush Sr. started a project to strengthen the levees in Louisiana and that was continued with Clinton. Guess who decided to get rid of that program? Yeah, that would be dumb dumb, Dubya! The project called for $25 million to strengthen the levees and he wanted to cut them $3.9 million. In the end, congress granted $5.5. He was told by scientist after scientist the mistake he was making and the costs associated with a Cat-4 hurricane hitting Louisiana, but he ignored them, then said afterwards, "Who could have predicted this?" Ugh.
I'll continue. His no bid contracts to Halliburton cost us billions between Katrina and the war in Iraq as these guys simply had an open spigot to government money. His cronyism in regards to placing people in positions where they weren't qualified (Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job) was horrible!
Look, this is like shooting fish in a barrel. Anyone who's been paying attention for the last eight years knows all of this guy's failings. If you refuse to see the obvious, that's on you. Thank goodness, however, that your party has been reduced to a side show circus act. We don't need the GOP controlling *****, right about now. - RansomHoldiay, on 04/10/2009, -8/+41hey i'm from tampa!
but that lady hit the nail on the head. they are quickly becoming the whig party of the 21st century. the republicans' beliefs in their policies is a religious one. they believe that by definition the message isn't wrong. the way they delivered it, or who did the delivering is where the problem lies. therefore, they will never change. - inactive, on 04/10/2009, -4/+33The reason so many neocons get on tv so much is because they are easy to find around Washington. No matter what it's like in the rest of the country, Washington D.C. is still full of these "think tanks" and the majority of them are supported by the right. For all the complaining that the Republicans do about liberal media and "fringe tree hugger type groups", they are the masters of trying to ram their ideas down other peoples throats.
- arbiter13, on 04/10/2009, -5/+33Now C-SPAN is liberal? What the ***** people?
- govsucks, on 04/10/2009, -13/+40Gosh, shes right, we should silence their voices! Lets build some incinerators and kill these people who don't want forced collectivism.
/s
Funny thing, Obama seems to be following many of the "failed" Bush policies. Not that I applaud him, I think Bush was wrong then and I think Obama is wrong now. - noderunner, on 04/10/2009, -4/+30banking and financial deregulation?
torture? - pintomp3, on 04/10/2009, -6/+31Bush was a social conservative who is against abortion, gay rights, and separation of church and state. He was an economic conservative who wanted to privatize social security. He is no different than other conservative gods like Reagan who expanded the military industrial complex. The only time they want to conserve money is when it comes to taking care of the citizens.
- minorthreat, on 04/10/2009, -4/+27I see what your saying, but come on man... how long does this debate have to drag on. One side of the debate has not only failed at the debate, they have also failed in practice. I don't think they should even be getting anymore attention.
- skeptictank, on 04/10/2009, -10/+31I can understand bringing on real journalists, liberal or conservative but why does CNN continually bring on dirtbags like Tom Delay? or Grover Norquist? Those guys don't belong anywhere but Fox, they are just too extreme.
- inactive, on 04/10/2009, -5/+26If you want to wake us all up, you might want to work on your grammar and spelling first.
- inactive, on 04/10/2009, -5/+26Dude's relieved to have someone disagree with him without being called a traitor? Huh, sounds a lot like the past eight years for a lot of us. I guess Jon Stewart was right, it really is supposed to taste like a ***** taco.
- arbiter13, on 04/10/2009, -0/+19Sorry, 4chan is back that way.
(It's on TV at work, I don't really have a choice) - serif69, on 04/10/2009, -23/+42Hi guys, longtime listener, first-time caller. Please never feature a guest with whom I disagree. It makes me uncomfortable. I only like your show when your guests say things with which I agree.
- MacEnvy, on 04/10/2009, -2/+21@jedicurt
Yeah, that one member majority in the Senate really allowed for the possibility of a Democratic agenda.
/facepalm - AgeofMastery, on 04/10/2009, -3/+20You consider where 8 years of Bush and the neocons got us to be a success?
- inactive, on 04/10/2009, -15/+32I think the democrats are just letting the republicans run off at the mouth because they just sound more and more like idiots with no solutions and no common sense.
- curtisag, on 04/10/2009, -5/+20How about the spend spend spend and don't tax policies of Bush? At least the liberals are willing to tax the people for their spending. But the neo-cons tell the people who hate taxes, no problem, we will just deficit spend to gain power. Then they tell the liberals, no problem, we will pass no child left behind and prescription drugs to quiet your concerns about social spending. And somehow this is all considered conservative when you wrap it all up together? No one wants to vote for a true conservative, because they are regarded as heartless, uncaring souls who want to starve the poor and help the rich.
How about our failed policies in the middle east, like propping up Saddam and then dumping him, our proxy war against the soviets in Afghanistan, and the way we tried to manipulate Iran's leadership with the Shah of Iran. These have all failed and lead to us being hated in the world. - Pippers, on 04/10/2009, -8/+23Was he asking for his show to be booted off the air?
- inactive, on 04/10/2009, -5/+20"I've watched it constantly for over a year (8hrs a day)"
Go get laid, immediately. - inactive, on 04/10/2009, -19/+33Neocons...I can't stand Neocons.
- gasoline, on 04/10/2009, -7/+21Trolling is generally not considered a debate.
- WiseGuy1020, on 04/10/2009, -0/+14@jedicurt
You are mistaken due to the arcane rules of the senate one must have a 60 person majority to get anything done.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloture
check out the graph on the bottom, notice the years. - Eorster, on 04/10/2009, -8/+22C-Span in the mornings is hilarious sometimes. People call in and really say what is on their mind. I remember back in November someone calling in and belittling the female host by saying she sucked big ^%&$&^% because she was talking about Obama too much. It was pretty harsh, and I felt really bad for her, but she didn't skip a beat and just moved on to the next call. I really don't think they screen any of their calls. Nothing like lush limbo and all his canned calls. lush's biggest fear is someone getting through that he wasn't planning for. He goes ballistic when it happens.
- pcpimpster, on 04/10/2009, -1/+14That was his point. You don't have to stop them, they hang themselves with their wingnut ideals.
- inactive, on 04/10/2009, -5/+18But can't we just keep ignoring Libertarians & paying off the huge Visa bills with even-bigger Discover charges?? Those Libertarians who say 'no' to more spending are so "extreme," after all. And they're really snotty on the 'net about media bias against them & having told us so, repeatedly, during the boom times about this bust. Sigh.
- yarcod, on 04/10/2009, -6/+19I'm pretty sure that lady wasn't "Liberal" at all. War mongering is not a conservative policy... it's a neo-conservative policy (as the caller pointed out).
My guess is she is an angry member of the republican party who is truly conservative. The republican party isn't the conservative party any more. Bush expanded government more than any other president in history.
I'm nowhere near Liberal. I hate subsidized health care, I hate this stimulus bill, I hate govt bailouts etc (Which the neo-cons support, bush started the first round of bailouts, not the conservatives)
I am also for a non-interventionist foreign policy. A very conservative ideology (study your history, your founding fathers, and your constitution). - jiggawatt, on 04/10/2009, -10/+22My favorite part was when he said "well since I wasn't called a traitor..."
I'm sorry, who's been using the "traitor" line? The neocon and blind bush repubs continually shouted that at those of us who tried to wake you up to the truth of your stupidity, now they think they're entitled to some pity for concocting some BS about being labeled traitors?? Those of us who got called traitors very much disagreed with it's use and are of a high enough intellect to recognize how silly it would be to do the same. - Dalhectar, on 04/10/2009, -2/+14A) They have an opinion.
B) They have a constituency.
C) That constituency is large enough to impact national elections.
D) Concerning non-presidential elections, they win a considerable portion elections.
Therefore they have a right to be heard, and news outlets that devote sections of their output to commentary would be wise to air the commentary of neocons. Doesn't make them right or wrong, but I have no problem putting a liberal commentator next to a neocon commentator. Understanding the difference between commentary and reporting is an important aspect of citizenship. I think the caller incorrectly confuses the two.
CSPAN has a right to air all the right or wrong comments from Rich Lowey. A Citizen should be able to compare his comments to reality, and make a decision for themselves if the commentator is right or wrong. - MacEnvy, on 04/10/2009, -0/+12You have no idea what you're talking about, sloppyjoes7. The modern usage of the term "neoconservative" was popularized by Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz, two right-wingers who worked for and founded projects like the National Review, PNAC, and Commentary magazine. It has a very specific meaning and is generally used correctly when describing the actions of the last Republican administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism
If you're going to think of yourself as an intelligent conservative, at least make an attempt at accuracy. - norman619, on 04/10/2009, -4/+16And loads of corruption. Looking at the approval rating of congress over the past few years it seems BOTH sides are failures. People need to drop the partisian ***** and start being honest and objective when looking at the scum we have in office. Doing otherwise allows this charade to continue.
- Pippers, on 04/10/2009, -8/+19There is no such thing as "neolibs". The people you are seeing that are PISSED OFF DEMOCRATS are what could mostly be called CENTRISTS today. Finding someone on the far left these days is pretty freaking rare!
- inactive, on 04/10/2009, -5/+16Sarcasm?
It has to be... No one can be as stupid as this... - jawshoeuh, on 04/10/2009, -5/+15what's your point sloppyjoes7? I like to call myself awesome when I am, in fact, ***** fantabulous.
- BoxAdorable, on 04/10/2009, -1/+11Comparing a Digg thread to being interviewed on C-SPAN doesn't really work as they are not equivalent in scope or respectability.
- DangerCollie, on 04/10/2009, -6/+16You mean like torture? No-bid contracts? Prisons in foreign countries? Corrupt deregulation? You mean ideas like that?
The surge was not the only factor in reducing the violence in Iraq. But that's the only thing in 8 years that you can cling to as something even resembling a policy victory, if you take it out of context and view in the most favorable possible light.
If that's all you have to show for 8 years, you're pathetic. - r00fus, on 04/10/2009, -1/+11Well, that's the reich-wing psychology... they project their own weaknesses and failures onto other people:
***** like:
* Clinton was really responsible for the GWB failure on 9/11
* Obama is the cause of the GWB's depression
* FDR caused the depression by ignoring "free market principles"
etc etc etc.
The sad thing is, it's a tried and true tactic that usually deceives the masses. - RTFMA, on 04/10/2009, -1/+10Sorry. I didn't realize my sentence could be read 2 different ways. I wasn't trying to say that it had been six or more years since the Republicans had control. I was trying to say that not all of the last six years were Republican controlled. I was addressing the 6 years statement above mine. I apologize for the poor wording.
- madrona, on 04/10/2009, -18/+27Interesting that the caller thinks the surge failed. Maybe they haven't picked up a newspaper in the last year and seen that it appears to have succeeded. Maybe some of the neocons ideas aren't quite so absurd.
- americangoy, on 04/10/2009, -2/+10it also shows that he IS a traitor.
google AIPAC. - DankBuddz, on 04/10/2009, -1/+9@RTFMA
By 6 years, I'm sure you mean 2.5 -
Show 51 - 100 of 331 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is