What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
340 Comments
- euando, on 07/13/2009, -22/+73The forceful merging and acquisition of successful or profitable companies and government is called fascism; government investing in failing or failed companies is called damage limitation. Your government doesn't want or need the responsibility for the very few companies it has assisted. They do however want the damage caused by these dying behemoths to be reduced as much as possible.
This "ism" stuff being spouted to try and attack Obama comes across as nothing more than ignorance, wilful or otherwise. Nothing that is happening in America at the moment has anything to do with socialism or fascism; not the bail-out; not the health care plan; nothing. - ftx437, on 07/14/2009, -26/+75You people do relize that.
1. There are now 32+ czars in the obama administration
2. The report to no one but Obama.
3. We do not have any control over what they can and can not do
it is in fact something to worry about - SirBruce, on 07/14/2009, -4/+30Czar comes from Soviet Russia, you say?
Thank you for showing everyone how truly low our educational system has sunk. - richmomz, on 07/14/2009, -22/+45Yes, and they're also screaming about Obama's Science "Czar" John Holdren who wrote a book where he calls for forced abortions, requiring people to get government permission before they can have a child, putting anti-fertility drugs in the water and forcibily seizing children from people based on their socio-economic status to save the environment! Oh wait that was actually proven to be true...
Link to source (includes .pdf scans of Holdren's book in case anyone doubts its accuracy): http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-science-advisor- ... - lindenwold, on 07/14/2009, -22/+45Also just in, Diggers go crazy over FOX News . . . . all the while failing to see the truth in the ridiculousness . . .
- Barackalypse, on 07/14/2009, -22/+44Why shouldn't I be worried about the Czar's? Every new one we get represents the Government's designs and desire for additional control over that section of our lives and the economy. While the Government keeps expanding, and with it our legal code, the liberty they allow us shrinks.
- MacVogt, on 07/14/2009, -5/+27Didn't Czars rule Russia when they weren't communist?
- Hetman, on 07/14/2009, -7/+28I am not down with the czars either. They seem to cause more harm than good. The drug czar has cost this country billions of dollars. The problem with fox news is that they do not recognize america has had czars since Bush SR was in office
- pintomp3, on 07/14/2009, -3/+19Check out Lady Gaga's sales lately? She must make the best music!
- YENK, on 07/13/2009, -33/+49Unfortunately, America is not headed towards a socialist or communist state. Refer back to Mussolini -- The merge and acquisition between government and corporate powers is called Fascism.
- AaronS2000, on 07/14/2009, -9/+25did you really just misspell "to"? jesus christ
- farboo, on 07/14/2009, -2/+17Exactly. What Obama is doing, clearly, is putting czars in place in order to lay the groundwork for a communist revolution that will overthrow them. Brilliant.
- sHockz, on 07/14/2009, -10/+25as much as you want to bash fox news, you cant deny this. (hey i hate fox just as much as the next guy)
but....
these "czars" have no oversight and are given positions of great power without voters getting a say in who and how they want these specific industries run. yes yes....ya'll voted for the president who appoints these people, but even the people who voted for obama *might not* agree with every single decision he makes. so therefore all these people who are now overseeing these industries are geared to do the bidding of the master who appointed them....because lets face it, obama is only going to appoint people with his views.
who cares who appointed the first one, stop the finger pointing. fix the problem, and stop adding fuel to the fire. - jsmith39, on 07/14/2009, -5/+20How can someone read that article and not take away the very simple fact that these appointees are NOT czars... it's just a name that a journalist somewhere gave them, and that others journalists parroted. The government doesn't consider them czars, they do not have magical czar like powers, and their offspring will not grow into little czarletts. Christ people, it's the central point of a 3 paragraph article, let's pretend to pay a little attention.
- Buckwyld, on 07/14/2009, -12/+25You guys should check out John Holdren (the Science Czar) and the book he authored in 1977 called Ecoscience. Want to talk about a scary individual, there you have it.
- ryrocker, on 07/14/2009, -3/+16i like the way you put it better than fox news' overdramatic rhetoric...
simple numbered lists should be the way of the universe - sigmaman2, on 07/14/2009, -2/+13Republicans are the anti-Ghandi. First they lose, then they rant, then they embarrass themselves, then they quit.
- Hetman, on 07/14/2009, -2/+12Digg is not supposed to be a neutral. It is user submitted articles. If there are more liberals on the site we should see more liberal articles. On the other hand Fox news is supposed to be neutral like all media sources.
- WasabiBomb, on 07/14/2009, -8/+18When you guys stop holding him responsible for the problems he inherited from Bush (and which most of you ignored while it was your guy in the chair), then we'll stop comparing the two.
- kbillar, on 07/14/2009, -4/+14It doesn't seem to me that jftitan is defending Obama; jftitan is saying that Fox News wasn't bitching when Bush had created czars, which is hypocritical. Fox News was the agent of the great leviathan when Bush was in power (just like the Republican party), and now is suddenly rediscovering their "libertarian" roots now that Obama is in power. Just like Democrats were pretending to be pissed off about Bush taking a dump on the constitution and is now defending Obama doing the same things. Where is the "they all can go ***** themselves" party?
- qiaohua, on 07/13/2009, -22/+32I wonder if it's fun to work at Fox News. Seems like most of the work is holding the megaphone.
- foucaultsvac, on 07/14/2009, -10/+19Why shouldn't ANYONE be worried about these creepo czars? They are appointed and have very little accountability/oversight - miniature, self-directed bureaucracies. What happened to checks and balances?
- dirtybully81, on 07/14/2009, -3/+12You're right 32 is a lot of 'czars'. They report to the President. They offer their recommendations, and he ultimately decides the policy. But WE do have control as the President then must report to Congress to ask for the money to enact these policies. The Congress decides whether to fund it. Then the Judicial system has the authority to determine whether those policies are legal. WE also have control over who is or isn't in Congress. It's basically how our government works.
The President is the Chief Executive Officer of our country. Doesn't he need people to be in charge of the many different sections of our government.
Really 'czar' is a bad name though. - zip000, on 07/14/2009, -4/+13I'd be a lot happier with Obama's health care plan if it was a bit more socialistic actually.
- MacEnvy, on 07/14/2009, -0/+9I'm sorry, but the politics of peaceful protest do not apply to corporate entities.
- jftitan, on 07/14/2009, -14/+23and now they bitch? they forgot about a few czars in place long before Obama... Bush. had a few.
I loathe the news still, and this just makes it even better I don't watch the ***** either. - FredFredrickson, on 07/14/2009, -4/+12Yeah, czars gone wild. Obama has appointed people to help him better understand and react to issues! We should all be so scared.
- ftx437, on 07/14/2009, -3/+11and that is your problem. You can find 1 spelling error and you dismiss the entire point all together. Just because you may be able to spell (or in this case just a mistype) doesn’t automatically make the argument false.
- ryanvo, on 07/14/2009, -2/+10How biczar.
- Cputerace, on 07/14/2009, -1/+9Do we have to have one or the other?
I would rather have neither one. - homercles337, on 07/14/2009, -1/+9Progressive liberal train to communism? Do you not realize how god damn stupid you sound?
- warhol15, on 07/14/2009, -0/+8Sure, as long as you also realize that this "czar" concept did not originate with the current administration but the Nixon administration. But I'm sure you were just as aggrieved with the concept then as you are now.
- kebabDylan, on 07/14/2009, -0/+8"appointing czars as if he weren't communist enough already" ,, um, wasn't it the communist's that killed and overthrew the czar?
- inactive, on 07/14/2009, -4/+11But Fox isn't complaining about the number as much as they are about the word, which, in true Fox fashion, is retarded.
- StaticThunder, on 07/14/2009, -0/+7Yeah, that's it. Fox news is brilliant. /s
- gdo01, on 07/14/2009, -5/+11Look at where the term history and many of our scientific terms came from...it was from Ancient Greece. What happened to them? God have mercy on this country...
- Rhendal, on 07/14/2009, -6/+12You don't watch Fox News, but you practically quote Glenn Beck.
- Jareth86, on 07/14/2009, -9/+15I'm sorry, but am I wrong in remembering that Bush created the position of WAR CZAR?
In fact, if I remember correctly, Fox didn't think it was un-American at all. They though it was the greatest idea ever. - calypsoschnitzl, on 07/14/2009, -0/+6If you knew better, you would know that rampant capitalism leads to communism.
- rocknog, on 07/14/2009, -3/+9Funny how all of the people screaming about government expansion now kept their mouths shut for the past eight years.
- Bartboy919, on 07/14/2009, -0/+6Im sure all the left wing moon bats digg those Ron Paul stories
Oh wait... - vbullinger, on 07/14/2009, -14/+20Wow. Lots of Obama fanboy apologists on here. We're not support Faux Snooze here, guys. We're just speaking the truth.
Do you guys really think this czar craze is a good idea? Any more czars and we'll need a czar czar!
@euando: boy, you sure can rationalize and explain away everything. You consider all these bailouts and "stimulus" a good idea? "Damage limitation?" Wow. Didn't know that was the federal government's - and thus our - responsibility. It was a bad idea under Bush, and it's still a bad idea under Obama. A pile of ***** doesn't all of a sudden start smelling like fresh cut roses just because your guy won the election. And, no, I didn't vote for McCain and I don't watch Fox News. - FredFredrickson, on 07/14/2009, -1/+7The only people who call Obama "the messiah" are sad, bitter conservatives who still don't understand how they lost the White House.
These people do not have absolute power. You're an idiot if you think that they do. - kemp34, on 07/14/2009, -2/+8No, fool, it is well documented FACT that Obama has expanded the use of "czars" far beyond any other president in history.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements ... - strad2, on 07/14/2009, -4/+10tman84: I think jftitan's point was that there were "czars" under Bush, but only now under Obama is it a really big problem. You know, the whole double standard thing...
- dmbchris, on 07/14/2009, -7/+13From a scientific perspective, these are all great ideas. He also recognizes the almost insurmountable social barriers to such ideas. I applaud him for at least being honest- this is a solution that would cut off many of our society's problems at the source.
Also, it's not like these ideas are not new, but thousands of years old. In the past they have been rigorously enforced by the church, by requiring marriage and therefore an implicit desire to raise kids. Having too many children was mitigated, on average, by death of the mother during childbirth (20% chance!) and by high infant mortality rates. - Shinpah, on 07/14/2009, -3/+8Couple issues; that book is a textbook and an update of an early work that Holdren was not involved with, it is fairly commonplace for textbooks to explain arguments even if the authors of the textbooks do not entirely agree with them.
You're also citing like 4 paragraphs out of a 1000+ page book
Lastly, some countries have decided that population control was necessary.... - ThatsNotPoetry, on 07/14/2009, -2/+7Yep, you get right up there, Huckabee, and play the game. Dance around. Sing a little song. Act like a child. Manage to do nothing but mock and titter and become a part of the children's circle.
How does this still constitute as news on a news station? Digg is allowed to be biased because we are a website of users posting favored content from all over the web. We are not a news site. Fox is a news station. News is supposed to be unbiased. It doesn't get much more biased than laughing and dancing and singing fake songs about the president to make him look foolish and untrustworthy. When Bush was in office, news stations didn't undermine him *quite* like this. They reported news on him, even if it was bad news and people therefore *thought* it was biased (hint: reporting negative news is not the same thing as being biased about how you report it.) How is *this* allowed? - omgwtflawl, on 07/14/2009, -14/+19Well it sounds like Fox News actually got something right for once. Shouldn't we be concerned with an ever-growing body of unelected individuals with massive edict power, fascist/socialist/communist roots and bloated budgets?
- jsmith39, on 07/14/2009, -3/+8You have to wonder though, does anyone at Fox with a higher paygrade than the mail clerk actually buy any of this ***** they're selling? I guess logically I can see spewing this kind of garbage if my job in life is to whip up the uneducated and scared into a feeding frenzy but I can't quite reach the part where I could doublethink myself into playing along outside of work hours.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 345 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is