What is Digg?60 Comments
- phunlee, on 10/12/2007, -13/+40yes.
- manfrin, on 10/12/2007, -13/+39Please god yes.
- stimcaps, on 10/12/2007, -8/+27MiddleGirth et al: Don't you guys get it yet? It's your freaking unquenchable longing for some fantasized impossible "true conservative" revolution that continues to put people like this in power in the first place. They sell you a bill of goods, and like Lucy goading Charlie Brown to kick the football, every time you say, "This time it's *really* going to work!" And every time, the ball gets yanked away from you.
Get this through your head: It will always get yanked away from you! Every. Single. Time. - MadKennyP, on 10/12/2007, -9/+22... and lower deficits. sweet.
- oyourmom, on 10/12/2007, -10/+22sweet jesus yes
- enki25, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21Higher taxes for the top .01% of America? Amen to that!
- rhawk301, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17I'm with MiddleGirth and the explanation by snipehack. I want a government that works for us, and wards off all these evil corporate enterprises. I don't want these large "campaign contributions". We should abolish all the lobby groups, and start from scratch, without the ability to influence government through money. They need to influence Congress the old fashioned way through action.
While at it, lets start going around the country using the "American Idol" method, and choose our next President. Screw the current method of "who has the most money wins", but a true President loved by the people and who really cares for our values. They would be given the chance to continue through the competition and then given a generous salary once President. 1 year before re-election, we go out and find another one and then see if they want someone else or the same guy again. Choosing the Vice President should fall to some other contestant in the same race.
The way it looks today, this is a fantasy, but we can hope right? - flamingmb, on 10/12/2007, -10/+19I think people have pulled their heads out of their asses, so yes it is over.
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14It is symbolic that Newt Gingrich, who started this revolution and championed family values, had his own little affair with a House aide. Any high school kid who has read the Scarlet Letter has seen this before.
It's like there was all this hope and optimism, all this talk about smaller government, lower taxes, no nationbuilding, moral leaders. Then we got lower taxes but big government, nation building like we've never seen and a pedophile in charge of helping disadvantaged kids and a coverup. Good riddance.
But with diebold in control, don't count the GOP out. - enki25, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Not only is your vote wasted, but you're exhibiting a cynicism about your role in our political process. To simply vote for a candidate that has no chance is ridiculous and simply ignores how voting in this country works. You've got to vote for the lesser of the two evils, or you might as well vote for your dog.
That is, until we get instant run-off voting passed in this country... - Whosawhatsis, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Bush has been pushing for a small government all along, the problem is that he wants to take it to the ultimate extreme. The smallest government is a single dictator, for which "The Decider" is an obvious euphemism.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9well i know my dog couldnt do a worse job than most of these asshats.
- Conwaysb0718, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14amen brother. I registered Libertarian leaving the republican party two months ago. yea, i might be "wasting" my vote right now, but at least its a statement.
- theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Uh, hold on there pardner. Clinton RESISTED Welfare Reform! It was Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich that wrote that law!
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1295/is_n1_v59/ai_16038797
Clinton was DERIDED by the Dems for signing the bill. The mainstream dems litterally thought that people would turn to crime and there would be begging in the street. - tehbishop, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I too left the GOP and am a Libertarian now also ... of course, this was back right after Iraq, but still ...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I left the Republicans in favor of the Libertarians over 2 years ago. There are more and more like us every day. Hopefully it will bolster the Libertarian party enough to push us into a fully visible and accepted major party.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8he really sounds like one of those paid political submiters
i know a guy here that writes for them
but he really gets the party bullets down while at the same time trying to seem bipartisan. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6You may have your wish, the amazing growth in the federal government could be due to a few republicans who want to spend so much that the federal government goes bankrupt, resulting in your wish, no government. I think a lot could be solved by a better government that doesn't spend so much, maybe gets medicare under control, but that never seems to happen.
- davebrook, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10I second the first post "Please God yes" ... LOL
- Meadow113, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@ thebloom
Clinton campaigned in 93 on welfare reform, he resisted the republican version because it called for too deep of cuts, a compromise had to be reached before he would sign it.
Clinton also campaigned on the balanced budget, and kind of the same thing happened, the republicans hijacked that issue too, and pushed for too deep of cuts, so he had to look like he was against balancing the budget. Many of the republicans also pushed for a balanced budget amendment, the same republicans who are raising our debt ceiling constantly now. - 3DPeruna, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7What none of these stories from the MSM take into account is that most conservatives are fed up with the Republicans for not being principled conservatives. But they're not going to go over to the Democrats, either. I'm a conservative republican who's disgusted with the current congress and frustrated with the current administration. But there is no way in hell that I'd vote for Al Franken (who's considering a run in my state).
There MSM is missing the point that conservative Republicans aren't going "over to the other side." The point is that there will be a revolt within the party ousting the self-serving, selfish oafs who have made sure that they're no different than the Democrats they replaced in the 90's.
I don't like what the Republicans in government are doing now, but I know I won't like what the Democrats would do, either (and this ain't about abortion or marriage, either). Damned if I vote "R", Damned worse if I vote "D" and waste my vote if I vote "L" because most of the country is too stupid to know the difference.
*****
The only way out this is to remove the local political operatives...these are the "grassroots" guys that make sure that the incumbents stay that way. It really is a "good-ole" boys network...on both sides of the isle.
My fix: 1) Instant reporting (online) of all contributions. 2) Term limits. Ideally, we'd repeal the 16th and 17th amendments, too! (which just proves I'm a complete wacko, I'm sure). - rickbauls, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6The news now is reporting the Nintendo renamed it to the Republican Wii
/bad joke - LunarOcean, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Yeah, try that again, since a plutocracy is a government ruled by the wealthy and an autocracy is a government ruled by one person with virtually unlimited authority. They kinda cancel each other out, unless you're saying that a republican president has all or the majority of the wealth in the nation.
Which none ever have. Whoops.
Let's play the 'say something generally thought of as negative about republicans, get dugg up' game! - Chordonblue, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Yea, I never understood this idea that somehow one Republican screws up and that makes Rep voters turn to the other side... What's up with that?
Dems need to present a plan - a REAL plan with like... Uh... Details. Constantly harping on what's wrong with the Reps isn't getting them anywhere. - ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If the Dems are decisive and don't waver on the Iraq debacle, they should achieve a solid backing.
- deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4What revolution? The fact that Bush lite was in power for 2 terms by using fear and 'so called" morality. Unfortunately, it took some time for the other half of Americans to understand that this was all ***** from go.
Now everyone is seeing what the Republican Party truly is all about. It's the party for the top 1% elites (and war profiteers) that is filled with deceit, corruption and keeping power at what ever cost. They used the lower and middle classes (the majority) to get them into power. By using their rhetoric of gay amendments, smaller government and securing our nation.
But in reality, they were the exact opposite. Mark Foley was among them and it was known of his indiscretions since 1994. Our government is bigger than ever (not only in size but also in spending). And because of Iraq, we are creating more terrorist than ever before.
So, you could put a fork in this one. Because it's well done.
http://www.democratgiftshop.com/cgi-bin/store/store.cgi/571511948/irregulargoods.72171743 - ig33k010011, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2if you want a liberal revolution, i would think twice. look at what happened before the fall of rome.
- Trublmakr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@mrteacup: Good to see an someone is finally seeing through the ***** fog to the REAL pressing issue of our time. It's not as Bill O'reilley puts it: a "culture war between secular progressives vs. conservatives,.. thats a smokescreen and complete garbage. The real culture war ought to be between an arrogant self-indulgent and inconsiderate boomer generation vs. angry disenfranchised American youth - only just now waking up to the fact they've been sold out.
- chris_moritz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Let's hope so.
- ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Republicans had their chance and they blew it, reminding people why they were out of power for 40 years.
- concertina, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@Chordonblue
WHICH civil rights act? There've been eight of them in US history. If you're referring to 1964, when a group of southern dixiecrats (who would become republicans shortly thereafter) fillibustered the act, well yes. A particular sect of republicans in sheeps clothing did damage race relations in this country quite a bit. Yes, this country has a very poor record of dealing well with different races. Maybe the reason minorities support the democratic party has nothing to do with affirmative action, and everything to do with stated ideals about economics and social justice. - ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -11/+12No pro-slavery Republicans? You're delusional. What about all of Lincoln's detractors within his own party? Were they "not-quite-anti-slavery Republicans?"
1861: Civil War started.
1863: Emancipation Proclamation.
So while the Republicans were in control of the oval office and only one state in the Union still had slaves, why did it take two years after the entire confederacy had seceded to finally free the slaves ... and then only in confederate states!
The last time Democrats had control of Congress and the Presidency (Jimmy Carter), Democrats kicked Jimmy Carter's ass when he swung to the right in '79. We police our own. Conservatives throw themselves in the line of fire. - ig33k010011, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@MiddleGirth
I second that! - mrteacup, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I think there's a pretty good chance that Democrats will soon become the party of fiscal responsibility, and the single biggest issue will be over health care.
Its projected that in 10 years, we'll be spending 20% of GDP on healthcare and getting worse healthcare than other countries. The majority of the money will come from large companies who have to pay health costs of all the aging baby boomers, and the costs will be passed on to customers, i.e. you and me. So if we're paying for health care from every American anyway, why not go ahead and make the government do it. The benefits are pretty obvious:
- The cost to taxpayers of paying for the uninsured would go away.
- The more people who are insured, the lower the costs are, so it follows that having everyone under one big group policy would be cheaper than millions of smaller, company-wide group policies. Your taxes would go up but the price of goods would go down by more.
- Potentially, the government could mandate increases in efficiency to further drive down prices.
The Democrats since Clinton are in the best position to take on the mantle of fiscal conservativism, partly because Clinton pushed welfare reform, balanced the budget and passed NAFTA, but also because fiscal conservatives know that social conservatives that really make up the Republicans' base have no problem at all with profligate spending, as demonstrated by the current "conservative" government. Meanwhile, the Democrats have an issue which the Republicans already violently oppose, but that the Democratic base loves and Corporate America is warming up to. - carlosglz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Nana na na, nana na na, hey hey hey, goodbye...
- mrteacup, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@theblooms: We're talking about Bill Clinton, who declared that the era of big government is over, right? According to your link, Clinton CAMPAIGNED on "ending welfare as we know it." Who cares who actually wrote the bill? Sure, a lot of old-school Dems flipped out, but the new generation of Dems are pretty cynical about government, no matter who's in charge, but also cynical about corporations. Blind faith in the free market or in government is stupid -- we need to see results before trusting that big schemes, private or public, are going to work.
The Right has a good relationship with Business because they see Business as embodying traditional values of hard work and self-control, but the Left wing will soon wake up to the fact that corporations are potentially a much more powerful agent for improving people's lives. A company can be both profitable AND people-friendly, and in the near future, such a company will have to be people-friendly. So the difference is between "We like your values," and "We want you to succeed." The latter is a much more powerful union. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5"but you're exhibiting a cynicism about your role in our political process."
Pot, meet Kettle. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3"and waste my vote if I vote "L" because most of the country is too stupid to know the difference."
It wouldn't be a "wasted vote" if everyone who said they would vote "L" ACTUALLY VOTED "L"! - dohidied, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1As George Will so eloquently put it, if the Democrats can't win back the house this year, they're in the wrong line of work.
I hope we can win this year, but I'm afraid if we mess up worse than the Republicans have then we'll lose our chance at the presidency in 2008. - enki25, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Cliched stock phrase, meet the guy who thinks you're a point.
- sriracha, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Let's fix that:
Republican rule = Plutocracy + Theocracy + Autocracy; - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5"Please God yes" is not a very good agenda for America.
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8There's a difference between "I still love the KKK" David Duke and "that was really stupid of me" apologizing 1,000 times Byrd.
- sriracha, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Plutocracy == Republican rule
Theocracy == Republican rule
Autocracy == Republican rule - mywindow, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Democracy==Consencious of idiots rule.
Republic==Majority group of states rule.
I long for the good ol days when personal responsability ruled man and a constitutional republic ruled the land. A land where the fit became stonger and the weak were destroyed.
The modern thinking of working till 65 and the retiring to nothing but a SS check is going to be the end of the good old industrial revolution that needed skilled workers and decent wages. Now its really going to suck being and ignorant and weak white man.
Too bad America sold all of its citizens to the world bank over a hundred years ago! You can now consider yourself nothing more then a commodity or corporate asset complete with papers and no single party has the streighth to stop that! Thay can only delay the inevitable crash of the American system. After all. No empire lasts forever! - ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1While I think I agree with some of what you say, it's hard to be sure since your spelling is so atrocious as to give doubt to your meaning.
Are you even an American citizen? - jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Oh, sweet jesus, please make it be so... the world can't take more of them
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Time and again, Democrats have overplayed their hand. The polls are very close. If history is any indicator, then the incumbents will pull ahead as things get closer. Most Americans do not have a 30 day memory of the news. The Foley story will come and go and Democrats will be left wondering, "what happened...I thought we were going to win."
"Democrats have no agenda, no plan for the future, and no sense of leadership."
Jeff Miller - BadassCheese, on 10/12/2007, -14/+11As long as the american use their eyes and have a brian stem? Hopefully
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4Foley ***** my pooch!
-
Show 51 - 56 of 56 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