digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Congress Quietly Approves Billions More for Iraq War

thenation.com — The Senate agreed on Thursday to increase the federal debt limit by $850 billion -- from $8.965 trillion to $9.815 trillion -- and then proceeded to approve a stop-gap spending bill that gives the Bush White House at least $9 billion in new funding for its war in Iraq. Ron Paul is the only republican that votes against it.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • chicofaraby, on 11/05/2007, -9/+166This story has a list of Congresspeople who deserve respect for doing the right thing. It is only fourteen names long. It only has one Senator, one Republican and a dozen Democrats. This list of only 14 patriots out of the 535 who had a chance to end this illegal war illustrates why the Congress is held in such contempt.

    Thanks to these brave few.

    Oregon's Earl Blumenauer, Missouri's William Clay, Minnesota's Keith Ellison, California's Bob Filner, Massachusetts' Barney Frank, New York's Maurice Hinchey, Ohio's Dennis Kucinich, Washington's Jim McDermott, New Jersey's Donald Payne, California's Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Diane Watson and Lynn Woolsey, Texas' Ron Paul, Wisconsin's Russ Feingold
    • DiggLive, on 11/05/2007, -4/+62I'm proud to have voted for Russ Feingold as a Wisconsin resident. Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul will get my vote come 2008. To hell with all the other candidates.
      • inhaler, on 10/10/2007, -13/+5Now if we could only get Kucinich and Paul on the same ticket...

        Unity 08 anyone?
        • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -7/+13Don't think that would out work too well... Kucinich is for a federal health care system, for tight gun control, and a plethora of socialist entitlement programs and federal exertions of power over the states, including abortion laws and others. These are pretty much the polar opposite of Ron Paul's platform...
          • JigoroKano, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Federal exertions of power over the states, including abortion laws.

            I suppose you believe abolition and desegregation fall into that category as well.
          • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2@JigoroKano: Nope. Desegregation is clearly a case of constitutional protection for black citizens. Abortion is not so clear cut. The mother does have certain rights which must be balanced with the fetus'. Where that balance lies is not obvious, so states might try various options as long as they are within the bounds of the constitution. The federal courts up to the Supreme Court should still be able to knock down unconstitutional state laws, but the states should be free to determine their own policies within these bounds.
        • TwistedSheep, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Gore - Kucinish '08?

          ohhh happy place...
      • fentanyl, on 10/10/2007, -12/+9Gravel > Paul.
      • byrdgang, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7And I am glad that you, as a Virginia resident, voted for Russ Feingold. He stands out among his fellow politicians.
      • caferrell, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9As another Wisconsnite, I am also glad to have voted for Russ Feingold and I will also be voting for Ron Paul for President.
        • JimDinger, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5As another Wisconsnite, I am glad to have voted for Russ Feingold and I will also be voting for Ron Paul for President,echoes caferrell thoughts perfectly but it is the truth.
    • p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2Of course Ellison voted against it, he's a terrorist plant.
    • gbarger, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I came into this war with open arms thinking it would be another Desert Storm...but come on. This is rediculous. At least I can say I'm a Missouri resident.
      • DavidBGie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1"Congress Quietly Approves Billions More for Iraq War"
        I am glad that most of the people in charge have some common sense! The radical left says it is a "illegal" war. I'm glad the laws that were broken are the laws that the terrorist enforce.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 11/05/2007, -0/+16I can't believe they just did that....

      I can't ***** believe it... I told them no. Everyone told them no. We don't want this war... Yet they did it anyway. We're poor here at home. Jobs are dissappearing and you've got white collar workers joining the Illegals picking cherries... Yet you can throw away OUR money!

      ... I can't believe this... It's just a bad dream...
      • icono1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is not a bad dream; it is the current state of affairs in the good ol USofA.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5... At least We have Ron Paul...
      • schoeffeljp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Yes, we have Ron Paul...but that one poor man cannot do it all by himself. Maybe if we live in other states who did not vote no, we should do some writing. Not that it would do any good--but by not writing, we are the same as those who voted yes.
    • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Congress could stop the war. All they have to do is stop funding it. But it's apparent that most of them aren't any better than Bush and want to keep the war going.
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I am glad I voted in hinchey in NY
    • grbruner, on 10/10/2007, -0/+015 actually if you include the senate .... yippee

      /sacasm
  • blorc, on 11/05/2007, -5/+126"The 'no' votes in the House, all cast by anti-war members, came from one Republican, Ron Paul of Texas, and 13 Democrats: Oregon's Earl Blumenauer, Missouri's William Clay, Minnesota's Keith Ellison, California's Bob Filner, Massachusetts' Barney Frank, New York's Maurice Hinchey, Ohio's Dennis Kucinich, Washington's Jim McDermott, New Jersey's Donald Payne, California's Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Diane Watson and Lynn Woolsey."

    Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich.

    If you're eligible to vote this election, I hope you're voting for Paul or Kucinich. The other candidates won't put their vote where their mouth is. They're pandering to you, and if you elect them, they're going to do a complete 180 like Bush did in 2000, ***** you and America in the process.

    Me? I'll take Ron Paul. Kucinich seems like a genuine guy, and if you feel socialist policies are the answer... well... that's your prerogative, but at least you'll be voting for someone who does what he says--someone who isn't double-talking like the rest of the Republicrats and Democrublicans.
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -0/+30Hopefully this vote will get more press. Iraq is a hot issue at the moment, and if the public realizes that Dr. Paul and Kucinich were the only two candidates voting against extra funding, it's a lot of good publicity for them.
      • xister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Well I just copied that article and e-mailed it to a few of my close friends that are politically minded. I encouraged them to send it to others and I encourage all here on digg to do the same.
    • FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -22/+2Or you could just flush your ballot own the toilet, because sadly, that's about how much a vote for Ron Paul of Dennis Kucinich will matter.
      • shylanac, on 10/10/2007, -18/+1Excellent, truly excellent! It would be a wasted vote and very well put.
      • lasenorita, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16By that logic, waking up in the morning is a wasted effort. We're all going to die anyway ...so why bother trying to live?
      • TWINFM, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Kucinich 4 Lyfe!
      • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Wrong. A vote would be flushed down the toilet if it were cast for someone that you didn't support. You don't understand the point of democracy, do you?

        It's not about casting a vote for the winning candidate.
    • tnoy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+34Just a reminder to everyone you'll need to vote in the primaries if you want a fringe candidate to have a chance in hell at the nomination. Make sure you're registered in the party of the candidate you like the best, too. E.g. If you're not registered as a democrat, you cant vote for Kucinich in the primary (some states allow independents to vote in the primaries, not not all). Turnout in a primary is largely pathetic, somewhere around 30%. The *ONLY* way to shake things up in an election is to push the underdog to the top in the primary. Also, since the primary is only within your registered party, it doesn't matter which way your state swings. To those outside of our country, the winner of the primary gets the nomination and ultimately is the one to run for president in the general election next November.

      Another thing, with voter turnout in a primary being as low as it is, it will take a smaller amount of people to make a difference. Your individual vote makes more of a difference than it would during the general election.

      Register to vote before its too late. Make a difference. Generic voter encouragement slogan.
      • Nysul, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Anyone know how to register as a republican in AZ before the primaries? I'm currently registered as an independent.
      • xister, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't know how it is in other states, but CA lets you absentee vote without an excuse- (handicap, out of state, etc.) This is a very convenient way of voting- the ballots get mailed to you every time an election is held.

        "PERMANENT ABSENTEE VOTER: CA State law now allows any voter, who so requests, to be a permanent absentee voter. Once enrolled you will automatically receive an absentee ballot for every election in which you are entitled to vote. Failure to return an executed absent voter ballot in two consecutive statewide general elections will cancel your permanent absentee status (not your voter registration) and you will need to reapply for permanent status."
    • LuluBean, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5I like Kucinich but I am voting for Ron Paul
      None of the other candidates are worth anything
      Love, Lulu
    • MistySteele, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Oh if it were only so that we had to make a choice in the general election between Kucinich and Paul. Sigh. We can dream.
      • dimebonics, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1That would be the most bitter-sweet decision of my life.
    • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9I highly disagree with some of Kucinich's socialist aspects, but if I can't have Ron Paul as president, I'd much rather have Kucinich than any of the CFR Democrats or any Republican besides Paul.
      • notque, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I highly disagree with Paul's domestic aspects, but if I can't have Kucinich as president, I'd much rather have Paul than any of the Democrats or Republicans.
  • bratpack8, on 10/10/2007, -5/+81So are the Democratic voters NOW convinced that they were suckered last year by the Democrats who got voted in based on their promises to get us out? Democrats, neocons, is there a difference between the two?
    • Shigglyboo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+56it's a one party system bro. our government has been hijacked by thieves.
      • expat001, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9Please don't ever use the word bro again. Thanks.
      • brjndr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11I say we tase 'em.
        • seventoes, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8I would say "Dont tase me, bro", but expat told me not to.
    • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4I voted for Democrats in 2006 and I never believed they would end the illegal war. But frankly, the Republicans had been so incredibly bad at governing they had to be let go. They show no signs of getting any better. So in 2008, if I only have a choice between a Democrat and a Republican, I will vote Democrat. The difference is that the majority of Congressional Democrats voted against the illegal invasion, the majority of Congressional Republicans voted for the illegal invasion. I know the Democrats are right of center and will never be liberal. I'm not voting FOR them.
      • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11You have to look more closely than just the political party. Get informed about the candidates you're going to be voting for ahead of time, do some research, and pick the one you support based on their record and actions, not based on whether they have an R or a D next to their name. The problem is that there's scum in both parties, and you need to make sure you're not contributing to the kind of corruption and lack of integrity we're so upset about.
        • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -8/+5I have noticed that the right doesn't want this to be about parties anymore. But the fact is that, as bad as they suck, the Democrats provide better government than the Republicans. There is scum in both parties, but one party has clearly led this nation into a very bad place. I am unwilling to let that slide.
          • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4It's not about left or right! It's about informed decisions and accountability for representatives that fail us, regardless of your economic policy leaning. EVERYONE needs to inform themselves before they vote for someone, from either party.
          • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3"It's not about left or right!"

            Yes. It is.
          • WiseWeasel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, it's not JUST about political parties. Remember that Joe Lieberman called himself a Democrat until just recently, and look at what a neocon scum that guy turned out to be... Whether you are generally left or right-leaning, you need to watch who you're voting for so you don't end up getting some worthless piece of crap who calls himself a Democrat or whatever. Remember, there are a lot of decent politicians at various levels that call themselves independent as well, so don't be afraid to inform yourself on ALL your options, not just the one with a D next to their name.
      • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Seriously, it's ***** retarded in ANY situation to just blindly vote for a party. Especially if it's only to spite the other party.
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -1/+26It's not about the parties anymore, it's about the individual people.
    • LuluBean, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8If liberals choose to be deceived by Democrat politicians, it's because they choose to put hating Republicans ahead of the truth
      • notque, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I see what you're trying to say there, but it just doesn't make any sense. If liberals fail to see both parties are business parties that are not for their interests they will fail. Hating republicans has nothing to do with it, and certainly doesn't harm it.
    • MistySteele, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3That would explain the 11% approval rating.
  • pedrovoltaire, on 10/10/2007, -5/+13KM - What do you see for the future?

    AS - Chaos, confusion and ultimately a battle between
    the individual and the State. The individual is the
    stronger; and will win. The state is a fiction sanctified by
    Hegel and his followers to CONTROL the individual.
    Sooner or later people will wake up. First we have to
    dump the trap of right and left, this is a Hegelian trap to
    divide and control. The battle is not between right and
    left; it is between us and them. The message is getting
    through. ASE has sold for 15 years, small but steady. No
    advertising. Its an underground work. But the breadth of
    interest is amazing. From Black Africa, to Russia (12,000
    copies), right, left...it cuts across all ethnic, political,
    social lines...The spirit of God is within us as individuals.
    Skull & Bones represents death. It has no life spirit and
    pretends that the State "is the march of God on earth".
    The thinking of immature juveniles, deadly and
    destructive and has almost totally infected Washington.
    What to do? Find yourself and then go to work.....tell
    your friends and put out the message. The answer is
    within you. _____ Antony Sutton, is the author of 26
    books, many of which can be purchased on-line at
    Amazon or Barnes & Noble.

    http://www.freedomdomain.com/secretsocieties/sutto ...
    • shabumike, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2The battle is not between right and
      left; it is between us and them"- ***** Yes
      • Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1 You know it.
        And look how long it took us to realize that we really do not have a two party system? it's a one party system that pretends to be otherwise...Going to kick myself for not realizing this sooner.
  • Shigglyboo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+23hell in a handbasket. how are we gonna pay off all this *****? how are we gonna convince the world we're not really a country full of war mongering egomaniacal people who only care about money and power? all this war and spending don't make me feel safer. and I'm sure it's pissing off our enemies even more...
    • schoeffeljp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I am sure it is, but once we get out of the States--we REALLY begin to realize how unpopular we are and oh, yes...did I say hypocritically arrogant and judgmental?
    • stateofdreams, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Well.. pissing off all of our enemies even more? hmmmm.. Did you know France has grown some balls.. and now agrees with us about IRAN?!?! not bad, eh?
    • blackjack75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1France hasn't grown balls. They just have a new president based on the fact that the other one candidate didn't seem better.

      Trust me if France ever votes to go to war with Iran people will be down in the streets of Paris and will never return home until Sarkozy gets hung. The pro-american stance of the new president might have got him respect in some parts of America but definitely didn't help him in his own country.
  • syroncoda, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10sick *****.
  • gene1102, on 11/05/2007, -2/+19Not surprised. This current administration has a worse spending habit than Paris Hilton.
    • thewump, on 11/05/2007, -1/+15Worse. Paris is spending her own money - and she's not going into debt.
      • rnwen2750, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Paris is spending her granddaddy's money.
        • thewump, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You know what I mean.. she isn't spending OUR money.
  • ninjasteeve, on 10/10/2007, -25/+10I swear Ron Paul would vote against a bill that said he was Ron Paul
    • mmmcookies, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18I would vote against such a wasteful bill too. Damned congresspeople, want to make laws for everything.
    • WolverineBlue, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18Correct, the Constitution doesn't grant the power to name people.
  • 9Digits, on 10/10/2007, -32/+9***** Ron Paul, and ***** Ron Paul's SPAMMY supporters.
    • Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6 Yes,I'm truly sick of the Ron Paul fanboys.
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9So then I presume you support Kucinich, then? You only have 3 choices it seems: Support Dr. Paul, Kucinich, or spending more money on the war.
    • matador3, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4***** you

      That is all
  • diggdallas, on 11/05/2007, -8/+35***** Bush, ***** Congress, ***** America
    • 9Digits, on 10/10/2007, -10/+7Dallas: Then move to Afghanistan, you miserable piece of *****.
      • Plinkotic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Why should he when you're slowly going to get there anyway?
        • quraid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1long time since i read a genuinely witty comment in digg. dugg.
    • makingspace, on 11/05/2007, -2/+7Do something about man! Support and/or vote for Ron Paul.
    • MistySteele, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Agree with you on Bush and Congress, but not on America. America has the power to be great if it plays its cards right, spend some time traveling abroad if you don't appreciate that. In the mean time, what are you doing to help get America back on track?

      Remember, better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.
    • camino262, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4When you make comments like this you are showing how spoiled Americans are. You are living in a country that lets you make comments like that without immediate death. Try saying that in Cuba about Castro.
      • stateofdreams, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agreed.... (From one who has lived outside of the US for years..... ) ***** LEAVE then, Dallas!....
  • satanatnmtedu, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4The Senate does not equal Congress.
    • uninvolved, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1uhhhh...
    • aerogant, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The United States Senate is one of the two chambers of the bicameral United States Congress, the other being the House of Representatives. Actually despite that I understand what you mean, I guess the house has not decided on that yet.
  • binaryspiral, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Great, I'll get to explain to my ten year old why she'll be unable to afford the luxuries that most congress people have today because her freaking taxes will be so high.

    I voted for Russ, he was the only person to vote against the war the first time.
    • satellitespin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Agreed. I wish Feingold was running for president.
  • Upperdeck, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Right?... Step right up flip flopper's.... errrr Democrats.... We are against the war! Bush is crazy! We need to get out of Iraq! Hmmmm? What other Democrat lies have we heard????? Oh by the way Mr. President.... here's your money! Wake up America! They all are lying! It just matters on who's lies you want to believe. Democrats or Republicans. Take your pick.
    • FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Flip-floppers? As if a rational human being should have no ability to change his or her mind in the light of new information. So we should "stay the course," right? Idiot.
      • stateofdreams, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1They don't realize that IF we LEAVE NOW.. it will only be a bigger mess.. and nasty wars will explode all around that country as many other countries will get involved.. and we'll have to come back to something even worse that it is now...
  • uptown, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15....and here we thought that "Shock and Awe" was at the beginning of the war.
  • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/10/2007, -14/+6Ron Paul isn't in the Senate. He's in the House of Representatives. Just so his supporters know who they're blindly following [by the way, Ron Paul voted against net-neutrality which allows him to have such a powerful Internet following]. Now I will patiently wait to be dugg down.
    • UtopiaInTheSky, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Does it matter if we "blindly follow" a senator or a representative? The point is, we're following him. And these vote results just give us +1 more reason to follow him. The only people who can bury and flame this article are A) Kucinich supporters and B) Iraq War supporters. To everyone else, welcome to the Ron Paul Revolution. You flamed Paul in the past? It's okay, you were wrong. Welcome to the good side.
      • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I guess it's easier to imagine what your opponents believe rather than actually trying to understand the points of disagreement.
    • ScionAltera, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10It's pretty sad, I know, but I've gotten so fed up with all of the candidates that I'm willing to settle for one who will do something as simple as doing what he says he's going to do. He says he's against the war and he votes against the war. I like that. In fact I like that so much that I'm willing to overlook the abortion thing, the religion thing, the net neutrality thing, and all the other things I disagree with him on, because at least he's told me up front how we're going to disagree and he seems to be sticking to what he said instead of stabbing me in the back like everybody else I could vote for.
      • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Well hopefully if Paul makes it into office, your differences in opinion won't matter, because he should be for returning more rights to the states. So if your state disagrees with Dr. Paul, they can still allow abortions because Paul doesn't believe the federal government should dictate that.

        That's one of the best things about Paul. Most of those decisions should be allowed to be made at the state level, and if done so, would allow a greater degree of freedom for people to live as they choose within their own state.
    • DjLoTi2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Stop with the NN talk. Go watch RPs interview with G4, he explains his position on it. w/e... if your ideas about the internet are going to prevent you from making changes in the real world, you've got more problems.
      • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Seriously. There is certainly a need for people to make their own decisions on certain subjects, but you have to be able to prioritize the importance of individual issues. We're all concerned about net neutrality, but is that really so important in the face of the fact that we need to get our troops home as soon as possible?
      • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Which is why I vote for Democrats. It's not like I have to choose between getting out of Iraq and supporting Net Neutrality.
    • matador3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10You're a moron, the Bill passed the House too where Ron Paul was the only republican who voted against it. Get it? He was the only Republican that voted against it, period.

      Yes, Ron Paul votes against regulating the internet in any way, everybody knows this, especially since there's always a liberal dummy around to bring it up in every thread. We are well aware and I assure you we don't care.
      • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1So I'm a moron because I know he's in the House and not the Senate. Oh, but he's a Republican who voted against it. Except he's a Libertarian who couldn't get elected if he wasn't a Republican. But I'm glad you don't care. It just shows how little you understand your own candidate.
    • gottadiggit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1At what point does someone like you realize that contrary to your innate drivel, you are indeed the one who is blind.
      • GunsGermsSteel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Just after one more comment like this one. Please, tell me more about my innate drivel and blindness.
  • ReneRuizJ, on 11/05/2007, -3/+44Kudos to Mr Ron Paul. As soon as I began to read the article I thought to myseld "Ron Paul better have voted against it." To my delight the man didn't let me down. He still has my vote 2008.
    • Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -28/+4Blocking all Ron Paul fanboys...Starting now.
      • rv36116, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Go get another beer and watch some more football, media worshipping goon.
    • ScionAltera, on 11/05/2007, -1/+21Yep. Kudos indeed. I'm gonna go send him another donation.
  • davidg11, on 11/05/2007, -3/+23Donate to RON PAUL! Show the media and the world that he is a serious contender! They only give him press and credibility if he can raise more money than all the 2nd tier candidates and John McCain!! Show the Republican neocons that there is support behind his movement. EVEN IF Ron Paul doesn't win the nomination, the Republicans CAN NOT ignore Ron's influence on politics!
  • merlintg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Our next top story!!!

    Congress approves to imprison all working class Americans. These individuals will be sent to work camps, and to our newly finished torture chambers.
  • cheeseysynapse, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2welcome to reality marxists
  • FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12It's funny how that, for all the wealth this war and the big industry these politicians support brings in for them, their policies are making our money more and more worthless each day.
  • joshua5, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I'm interested to know how Congress could have approved this loudly.
  • fuel997, on 11/05/2007, -1/+30Can we just impeach everybody?
    • tbyron666, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4What America needs is a PROPER revolution, line up the congress and whitehouse, and then shoot them.
  • Wargalas, on 10/10/2007, -10/+15Ok, so everyone here is in agreement that raising the federal debt limit is bad right? No one wants our country to go further into debt then it has to.

    So, you should get the thought of universal health care right out of your head. The war in Iraq is expensive, yes, but eventually, it will end. Universal health care is something that will go on forever. And according to Hillary's plan, it will cost $110 billion a year to start with. You can bet your sweet ass it'll get a lot more expensive as time goes on.

    If you don't want to be in debt up to your eyeballs for the rest of your lives, your children, and grandchildren's lives, then STOP ASKING FOR MORE NANNY STATE SERVICES. When you get out of debt, you tighten up your belt and stop spending. simple as that. That means no universal health care, no long term welfare for those who are able to work, no public services for illegal immigrants, no federal dollars for "performance arts", no funding for "bridges to nowhere", no massive tax breaks for oil companies to exploit, none of it.
    • FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4$10 billion for health care sounds a lot better than $10 billion for war, doesn't it?
      • Wargalas, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Didn't say $10 billion, I said $110 billion. And we're not paying for the Iraq war now. The Chinese are by picking up US war bonds by the truckload. So would you like to bankrupt us by trying to pay for healthcare programs that already exist? Do a little bit of research before you spout of liberal catch phrases of the day.
        • alwilson, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2Are you talking about the health care program that 47 million American citizens can't afford, or are discluded from buying? Oh, I thought so... you are a complete *****. Other countries can afford to help their citizens because they don't waste money fighting wars that they can't win or have no business fighting in the first place.
          • Wargalas, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3We already have a health insurance program in just about every state for the poor. Perhaps if those 47 million could be bothered to actually look into it, maybe they'd be having health insurance. You're an ***** for not even bothering to read up on the subject.

            Secondly, who says we can't win in Iraq? We DECIMATED them. That's what war is all about. Fight to win. Currently what we're doing there is rebuilding under fire. There's a major difference. Besides, why should Europe bother to fight? They have their American friends to bail them out every time.
    • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6*****. Europe has better healthcare than the USA and they spend less per capita.

      And this isn't about healthcare. It's about stupidly continuing an illegal occupation of a nation that never attacked the USA.
      • Wargalas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7And they have a higher tax rate then the US. Thank you for pointing out Europe.
        • chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3And they have lower infant mortality and longer lifespans. You're welcome.
        • alwilson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3... and they are not hated as much as Americans currently are.
        • quraid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3and they have Amsterdam....
        • blackjack75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And to be honest, we don't need to brag about how we are better or worse in Europe. Personally I think I am fine with a state that provides me with free education and decent healthcare. I just wish more people on this planet could enjoy it. Including those who have been trained to think they will become rich one day, therefore they must protect the rich more than themselves.
    • twomeyw23334, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Well said, too many diggers bash war spending and then turn around and use the exact same "end justifies the means / for the greater good" arguments for their socialistic programs. I think we should figure out how we are going to pay for social security in a few decades when there are 2 people working for every one retired before we start coming up with new ways to spend massively more amounts of money.
      • blackjack75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1With the difference that healthcare, education are actually good. War is not.
    • stylerm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Healthcare doesn't work like that. The point of it is that people get problems checked out early, when it is cheap to fix. Instead of costing a ton of money later because they couldn't afford to go to the doctor. Drug companies shouldn't be able to gouge americans when they have to compete fairly everywhere else.
  • uselessexpert, on 11/05/2007, -0/+20It goes to show that the Democrats for all the ***** the left talks about, is in the same bed with the republicans, oil companys, big pharma, weapons manufacturers, etc, etc, etc....

    Who watches the Watchmen?
  • zyklon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Spines? What spines?
  • Laodicean, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Our government is in dire need of some house cleaning! Who ARE these morons running our country? They are so SO crooked... I want my country back =(

    I guess it's fine, we can just print off more money and lower the value of the dollar even more and keep trying to fight an unwinnable war - as long as I can drive my H3 and live comfortably who cares?!?!

    The problem is that most Americans don't realize that this negatively affects them. Not to mention that their children will have to pay off this ENORMOUS debt. Oh and loads and loads of people die every day...

    This is really sad.
  • pilot101, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4You know I'm beginning to wonder what does the American people really want??? I mean in the next election it would be nice to have someone like ron paul voted in. But does the fact that the person will be the best candidate for presidency even matter? In the end, its going to boil down to who markets themselves better and invests more money. That's why its usually the case the president is either democrat or republican. The fact of the matter is I don't think the American ppl in general give a damn about nething unless it will directly affect their lives atm. In addition, they usually focus on only on one characteristics or issue that candidate holds. How many Christians voted for Bush just because he was christian? and said he was. So in the end, we only know what diggers want, but what American people in general want are different. Sad.... T_T
  • KanosWRX, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2I say thanks to those who voted for this, this money goes to supporting our troops over there. If people want to stop the war create a NEW bill that would end it, but don't cut funding that would take armor, bullets, and food from our troops over there.

    And to all the people that say Bush is Hitler obviously you don't watch enough History Channel or heard of the Holocaust. If he really was that bad somehow I don't think Canada or Mexico would like us because we would be there right now. So get a life people.
    • rv36116, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You idiot, what do you think our troops would do with no ammo or equipment? Throw rocks and make slingshots to keep the war going?

      If they have no ammo/equipment/food, then the military has grounds to call it quits and the generals will be handcuffed on what else to do EXCEPT stop fighting. Angry soldiers with no food won't give a ***** about what "Prez'dent commando in chief" says the mission is... If they ain't eatin', they ain't fightin.

      Get Ron Paul's ass to the front of the line, then we'll get some real results instead of this ***** that's going on now.
      • qolque, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0"what do you think our troops would do with no ammo or equipment?"
        Die under the onslaught of the insurgents, who want very badly to kill them all. That is no way to treat Americans, even if they are soldiers that you hate. Give them orders to come home, but do not leave them defenseless.
        • rv36116, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hey slapnuts, I don't hate the soldiers, they're following orders, and I'm sure there is some God awful abuse of power being used by some deplorable soldiers, but the key is, get them HOME, not keep them safe while fighting in a war, which, if you look at it, that's a ***** oxy moron in and of itself...
    • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The only way to stop the war is to stop funding it. This is a very basic fact of war: it cannot exist without funding.
  • reed311, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6***** Ron Rolled again.
    • Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2 I'm blocking all the Ron Paul fan boys...Enough is enough.
  • FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9It really makes me sick how all of you assholes immediately blame the Democrats for this, when it's just as much the Republicans fault, if not more so, that we are even in this mess to begin with.

    YOU elect Bush, he gets us into this ***** position, then YOU complain when we elect democrats to replace the republicans YOU put in office, and they don't do the job. We're all in this together you douchebags. You got us into this mess, and our guys won't get us out. It doesn't help to keep up the ***** partisan stuff right now.
    • matador3, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10The Iraq invasion was planned in 1997 when Clinton was still in power. It's true, there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. If Gore won we would likely be in the same position we are now except Republicans would be the "anti-war" party playing the same cards they were when Clinton was in Kosovo. What we need are honest politicians, party doesn't matter.
      • Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2 And the chances of us ever getting honest politicians is virtually null and void.
    • zephc, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5And yet... Lots of people from either side voted for it. This isn't a left/right thing anymore, so get over it. And no, I've never supported Bush, not for one second.
    • rv36116, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I voted for the douche in 2000, but he ain't my friggin president, and I'm no longer a republican or democrat... it's high time we step up and vote for who's going to not ***** on our doorstep as soon as we vote them into office...

      I feel a revoluation coming on if this doesn't change...and soon.
      • mdoggy2dope, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Yeah, it's called the Ron Paul revolution!
  • yaryarhumphump, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2why does he have such a following.... no choice in this election is looking good but he is a republican..... you know the party that took away your freedom... are you that brain washed? oh hes a republican but he'll be ok cause he voted against some things... I swear if someone put something shiny at the edge of the grand canyon you people would run your asses right off the edge...
  • shamgar03, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Preface: I hate how much the government spends. I will vote for Ron Paul even if he runs on the libertarian ticket because I think we should stop throwing money at freaken everything, now here is the problem with not increasing the debt (for the time being).

    If the united states did not increase the limit, then the government would have stopped. What do you mean stopped shamgar? I mean ***** STOPPED. You know the services you get from the government? What services? I don't know THE FCC, the POST OFFICE, the FEDERAL BANK, the STATE POLICE, the MILITARY (aka no more guns for the soldiers, no more way to get them home, no more support, you remember clear and present danger, its like that). The government would then begin to default on loans. You think you have seen bad financial times, wait until the fed defaults. Lets see, bank runs (no more FDIC insured) would result in loss of even more funds as everyone tries to then bank run the GOVERNMENT. All those federal bonds become paper, and what about that people that green we all carry around, whats that, we don't take dollars here?

    Now you say thats all far fetched but its not. If this congress which hasn't done ANYTHING had failed to increase the debt limit, they would then have had the impossible task of quickly cutting spending which would have taken too long. They would have reached deadlock, do we cut funding for the military and and just forget about the soldiers there, the Iraqi people? Do we cut funding to Steven's Pork? The question isn't which is the right answer, the question is which would actually be able to get through. If it failed to get through then we would literally be in the situation I described.
    • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The FCC, the Fed, and some would even say, the police, are not services that I benefit from. I don't need my tax dollars going to them.
  • weztex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4 When will we stop this *****?! WE have the power in our hands if we would all wake up! STOP IT NOW!
    • blackjack75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I have a better idea: le'ts blog about it!
    • mdoggy2dope, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0yeah, vote Ron Paul 2008!
  • joebob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10"Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right here I am stuck in the middle with you"

    There should be a referendum to change the national anthem.
  • Genetico, on 11/05/2007, -0/+19I just got off the phone with eight congressmen/women and or their secretaries. What have YOU done? Enough Blogging, Enough Digging, Enough witty comments, Enough empty cries for revolution. DO SOMETHING. Call your State officials, join your local organizations that work for peace and resolve. If you don't have one where you live, start one! Whatever you do make sure it's something, but please don't keep commenting and complaining if you do nothing. Prove Stephen Colbert wrong and actually show that you give a *****.
    • alwilson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The problems is; no matter how much you plead and beg, you won't be able to organize a herd of sheep. Too bad because that would be a powerful thing. The organized common man was the tipping point for getting us out of Vietnam. But back then, people cared about social issues. Now people are too busy watching the media while the drool runs out of their mouths.
      • Waterrat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1 Trying to get the people of this country to do something about this is about as productive as herding cats...And the powers that be know it,hence the funding.
    • donttaseme, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Sorry I'm out of wool. I sold it in for my Halo 3. No wool left for you.
  • mozzer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15FTA: "The five senators who did not vote, all presidential candidates who are more involved in campaigning than governing, were Democrats Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden and Republicans John McCain and Sam Brownback."
    I see FIVE COWARDS afraid to take a stand one way or another. Pathetic, spineless cowards.
  • KenC411, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11Rather than actually vote for or against the war, certain presidential hopefuls decide to take the undemocratic route and not vote. Ron Paul, however, has the integrity to stand up for what he believes in and goes on record with it.
    • rarson, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3And it serves to show that he really is the anti-war candidate he says he is (and traditional Republican, as well).
  • heystoopid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Oh well , looks like the Canadian Dollar , will be worth a dollar fifty by Christmas Day 2007 at this rate !
    The Blackhole of debt is getting bigger by the minute , soon it will be large enough to swallow the entire country lock stock and barrel .
  • thewump, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Are we going to put this on the Amex or the Visa card?
    • zephc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The MasterCard, which we're using to pay off the Visa, which is paying off the Amex.
  • johnathanr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Unbelievable...when are we going to do something about this...
    Make a difference now, DIRECTLY to congress...
    http://www.calloutcongress.com
    • norman619, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Maybe if we send congress a butt load of peanuts.....
  • alwilson, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Rome is burning and Bush lit the match.
    • norman619, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Your ignorance is blinding.
    • Smight, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Who cares who lit the match?
      All but 14 representatives and one senator are pouring gas on the fire.
  • MaximusIGN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Jesus..Bush is going to bankrupt this country.
  • norman619, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3"Ron Paul is the only republican that votes against it."

    Since when is this guy a Republican? Dugg down as inaccurate.
    • blackjack75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Maybe it's all the other republicans who aren't anymore...
  • bbear, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Democrat ***** suckers continue to do what they do best: suck Republican *****. Stay tuned for another round of ***** sucking when this passes the Senate. Unfortunately the Democrat bill to spit and not swallow was fillibusterd by the Republican law makers. News at 11.
  • cklol, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3GOOD JOB CONGRESS YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY PAYING ATTENTION TO THE PUBLIC!
    Thanks!
  • battlerex99, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ahem. I think this is a completely retarded measure, that this war needs to stop, and I am a Ron Paul supporter... but enough with the ***** alarmist "Our economy is dead!" statements. Our economy is not great right now, but it is very solid. There is certainly inflation, but then again there was also horrible inflation in the 70's and we got through that. And do you know how to actually get rid of inflation?

    If you guessed "raise taxes," you are correct sir! Simple economics. However, no one wants to pay taxes obviously and all everyone wants is very little government spending along with very little government taxing. I'm sorry, but this just plain does not work when there is either inflation or high unemployment. This goal is only feasible when the economy is stabilized (which it is not right now). If anything, our economy is TOO hot right now (which is the cause of inflation in the first place). We need to slow it down, not speed it up.

    Also, dollar fluctuation is very normal. We have a volatile currency that constantly changes in price. Granted, the war isn't helping it, but soon it should re-establish itself back to normal and then become even stronger.

    Economics is fun ^__^
  • falseleftright, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Sigh, my screen name says it all...

    Ron Paul is Chuck Norris imhotbh...
  • geddon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3We seriously need to consider withholding our taxes in '08...
  • reaver, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I really don't understand this at all. Our government reminds me of a ***** drug addict, but they're addicted to war. Instead of getting the ***** out of there and digging out of the $9 trillion debt, they keep borrowing more. Now, if any of us kept borrowing money everyday and spending it on stupid ***** we'd be homeless in a month.
  • mclumber1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Not funding the war (as bad as it is) is necessary in order to prevent a full blown civil war which would end up killing many, many more Iraqis than now. Genocide.

    I think it's sort of funny. Some people want us to intervene militarily in Darfur to stop the genocide in that small part of Africa. But the same people who are advocating military intervention in Darfur are the same ones who are screaming for us to leave Iraq. Do they realize the hipocrisy in that?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 82 of 82 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.