What is Digg?Sponsored by Activision
Band Hero view!
guitarhero.com - The biggest event music event of the year is now in your living room.
173 Comments
- autosovereign, on 12/06/2008, -3/+174I watched this on CSPAN yesterday and it was very depressing. Nearly all of the ***** hypocrites who spoke talked about how this "compromise" will protect our civil liberties. Dennis Kucinich did a great job, though. He even quoted Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Kucinich speaking: http://youtube.com/watch?v=lM2HLbcUafA - jcani, on 06/21/2008, -4/+73*comforts The Constitution*
there there, don't cry - inactive, on 06/22/2008, -3/+66RE: new FISA legislation
Dear Congress,
You suck.
Signed,
America - GhostyBoy, on 06/22/2008, -6/+57GOBAMA!
...oh wait....he completely caved on this one..... - palewook, on 06/21/2008, -5/+46USCL. United States of Corporations & Lawyers.
- RoadWarriorPat, on 06/21/2008, -3/+39I am so disgusted with my government right now.
"The new, improved language instructs a federal court to grant immunity from lawsuits to any telecom that received a written directive from the attorney general, regardless of whether the company believed its actions to be lawful."
Isn't that completely illegal, and a total abuse of power? Oh, right. Bush has been abusing the power of the Executive branch for so long that no one cares about the separation of power anymore. - stinkymonkey, on 06/22/2008, -1/+36Nancy Pelosi MUST GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! She continues to lead the pack to cave to an unpopular President!
- compu73rg33k, on 06/21/2008, -3/+35Where can we get a list of who voted what? I need to check my rep so I can call up and remind her the principles of liberty. This is disgraceful.
- Ajajadude, on 06/22/2008, -0/+29He could've said both. Either way, they both mean the same thing. Congress is full of bloated career politicians who have everything but the peoples' best interests in mind.
- WiseWeasel, on 06/21/2008, -3/+32Yeah, gee, because the Democrats have sure demonstrated that they care about civil liberties (well, half of them, anyways)... Obama actually released a statement in support of this legislation, so it looks like we're screwed either way, but thanks for playing.
- godslayer, on 06/22/2008, -1/+29I love the first comment on the page.
"Fascism is when corporations and governments merge as one"-Mussolini
"The easiest way to gain control of the population is to carry out acts of terror the public will clamor for such laws if the personal security is threatened." - Joseph Stalin
"Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death." - Adolph Hitler
"There comes a time when your silence become betrayal." - Martin Luther King Jr.
minus the one of MLK Jr. He wasn't a dick tater tot - chevyorange, on 06/22/2008, -0/+20I know and I'm bitterly disappointed. This was a very important issue to me and now the person I've been supporting just shot us in the back.
- Devotia, on 06/22/2008, -0/+19It's no use; he's dead, Jim.
- crapmatic, on 06/22/2008, -1/+19Damn, I wish I had a big corporation so I could make my vote count.
- infinitely, on 06/21/2008, -2/+19I'm disgusted to see that my representative Don Manzullo voted yes. What an idiot. Everyone, make sure you send your representatives scathing e-mails, letters and phone calls if they voted yes. They represent YOU and if they know YOU have a problem with this type of behavior, they will need to change.
- jreinstedler, on 06/22/2008, -2/+18ooooh... bitch got served.
- Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 06/22/2008, -0/+15Franklin did say that, but all the founding fathers shared the same view:
"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - T.Jefferson
Ideals that essential to liberty have surely been said more than once, so that should clear up some of the confusion. - nicktx, on 06/21/2008, -1/+15Here you go: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll437.xml
- lechtellhavel, on 06/22/2008, -1/+14This is what I have sent to my Senator who is up for reelection. I suggest that everybody get busy on their keyboards!
I just made an interesting discovery as I was examining the recent House vote on the FISA “compromise” bill, i.e. it is a bill that I feel strongly enough about that it is a litmus test—the first in my life! As written, I consider it a direct assault on the Bill of Rights and criminal pandering to monied corporate telecom interests! Please be advised that a vote for FISA will translate to at least one vote for your opponent in November and probably more. “Those who would give up liberty for a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” Benjamin Franklin - Ajajadude, on 06/22/2008, -10/+23Yeah, a fruitless convention is way more important than voting on this.
- Mardala, on 06/22/2008, -0/+13Johnson (IL) ... person in bold in the Nays section.
- DownwithDisease, on 06/22/2008, -3/+15Sellouts. Say sayonara to our 4th amendment.
- one2gamble, on 06/22/2008, -3/+14How did so many traitorous people get elected at once...thats the real question
- danandre, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10That one republican who voted "nay" must have some balls. Does anyone know who it was?
- nicktx, on 06/21/2008, -17/+27How do you think Ron Paul voted? "Nay" perhaps? Oh wait, he didn't bother to vote!
- chc131, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10Obama is a Bilderberg goon
- Phennim, on 06/22/2008, -0/+10It's unbelievable that one criminal can immunize another for a crime they are both guilty off.
- woofers07, on 06/22/2008, -4/+14I wonder how many congressmen and women coincidentally had a nice payday yesterday.
- Carl306, on 06/22/2008, -3/+12I'm assuming that the majority of Digg users are not terrorists or any type of threat to the national security of the United States. Therefore I suggest, just to give those at the NSA a run for the money, make your phone calls as raunchy, dirty, and filthy as possible. And to make sure they do pick up on your phone call, start and end your conversations with "Jihad, Muslim, Terrorist," etc...
But in all seriousness, Kucinich did a great job in at least attempting to stand up to these measures. - inactive, on 06/22/2008, -2/+11What good is paul's famous NO vote anyway in this scenario. Did you see the spread?
Did you see how many sleezebag democrats joined the neocon army? - TakeMyCrabs, on 06/21/2008, -7/+16Hopefully when someone gets caught red-handed in a warrantless wiretap, they challenge the bill as unconstitutional and the Supreme Court will have the balls to dismiss this crap. Unless of course we get another republican who will decide the next Supreme Court Justice....
- XternalHD, on 06/22/2008, -0/+9Oh give them a break guys, I mean don't you see? They just want to help protect you by stripping you of all your rights and privacy. Thats worth it... isn't it?.
- cynicist, on 06/22/2008, -2/+11Look at the votes... Do you really think one nay would make a difference? At least in the GOP convention in Montana, Paul could spread his message and hopefully gain more supporters.
Seriously, he didnt get to say no to ONE bill which would have passed anyway. I guess that cancels out all the good he has done in the past. - Thyris, on 06/22/2008, -1/+9Sick. I've never contacted my state reps until I saw this. Now I have, and if you haven't, you should now.
- bxblox, on 06/22/2008, -2/+10Funny how you're all hating paul for not being present to add one more dissenting vote that would oppose whoever it is that you all support.
- Frostman3D, on 06/22/2008, -0/+8This country needs a revolution.
- RyeBrye, on 06/22/2008, -1/+9A while back, I wrote my senator about this issue. He wrote me back and he had cleverly framed the issue that they were just helping the telecom companies who "only were helping our country in a dangerous time" not be punished for their help, and that not providing them immunity would only "benefit the trial lawyers."
I wanted to scream. - etherreal, on 06/22/2008, -1/+8And the rest of the world.
- luciferin, on 06/22/2008, -1/+8"Rep. Jane Harman... then explained why she planned to ignore (the voters in her district's pleas against this bill)". What a blatant mockery of the ideas of a Democracy or Republic! The people were said to vote for change last November and didn't get it; they will vote for change again this Fall and from the looks of things we won't be getting it. How much do they expect a nation founded on rebellion to take?
It seems every 20 years we have a "cleaning out" of the "corruption" in Washington, but it just keeps coming back, now worse than ever. - chevyorange, on 06/22/2008, -0/+7I like and respect what you say, but ANY retroactive immunity for big telco is WRONG.
To say that this is the only way we could have gone, the only thing that could be done is wrong. Big business should live with their decisions, they can take care of themselves. Its time our elected officials look out for the little guy and start protecting our privacy. - locojones, on 06/22/2008, -1/+8According to the article, his spokesperson said he "voted that way, consistent with all of his past votes on the FISA bill, because he's worried about its impact on civil liberties, and he believes that the necessary authority for the intelligence agencies already exists. He's talked to people on the front lines, and the system works very effectively now." Good man!
- padraic2112, on 06/22/2008, -0/+7I will. You're, um... totally wrong.
If you read the amended notice, it essentially turns the FISA court from a "star chamber" into a rubber stamp - the court does not get to review all of the documentation that it used to review. Before, those seeking a FISA warrant had to establish probable cause, in the eyes of the court - that the target that they were going to wiretap was likely to be a terrorist, or communicating with terrorists abroad.
That is now replaced with, "the Attorney General needs to submit a paper stating this." There is no review of the Executive branch's reasoning by the Judicial.
Yes, before it was possible to abuse this by seeding the FISA court with people who were going to rubberstamp your requests. Now, however, you don't need to suborn people in the Judicial branch if you're an out of control Executive - you just need a compliant Attorney General. - autosovereign, on 12/06/2008, -13/+20He was at the convention in Montana
- pintomp3, on 06/22/2008, -1/+7he apparently had better things to do, like speak at a republican convention.
- ironhide, on 06/22/2008, -15/+21I would think doing his job would be more important than a ***** speech, but yet again the Paulites turn a blind eye to Saint Paul's failings.
- stinkymonkey, on 06/22/2008, -2/+8You are forgetting Bush broke the law by spying on me and you.
So this police state has already happened. Yes, I know you don't feel it or can physically can see it, but it is happening, and it is getting worse. - inactive, on 06/22/2008, -2/+7Ron Paul was a diamond in the rough, but people didn't want him.
One thing is for sure, Rockefeller backed Obama is NOT going to bring about any change to washington.
All of this is supposed to happen, it's the end of times. Do you serioustly think it will stop here? It's been on the way down for how many years now? - Omek, on 06/22/2008, -0/+5Tar and feathers, anyone?
- TheInformer, on 06/22/2008, -1/+6Funny how there was nothing but lavish praise for Pelosi when she became the Speaker of the House. She was going to bring about CHANGE.
Did she? What has this Congress accomplished? - VicHislop, on 06/22/2008, -0/+5We need to catch Steny Hoyer sucking on her limp dick so we can get rid of both of them. (Sorry, but decorum is out the window on this one.)
-
Show 51 - 100 of 177 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is