What is Digg?195 Comments
- quidpro, on 10/13/2008, -4/+205Be careful with all the "landslide" business. I'd just keep working from the assumption that the polls are fraudulent, and that Republicans don't care about any of the people on this list. Vote early or be prepared to stand in lines no matter how long, keep your cool, leave the tacky t-shirts at home (hell I might even wear a suit for this election. It was good enough for marchers in the middle of summer in the hottest southern states back in the day, then I can certainly pull it off for making a vote in November), make your vote, get your sticker, hope for the best, and look forward to the big "I told you so" while having enough class to not actually say it. A dignified win would be the best win possible...for either side.
- meese, on 10/13/2008, -7/+106Now that it's been revealed that McCain not only was associated with ACORN but was the headliner at one of their immigration events in 2006, many more conservatives are probably going to jump ship:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Acorn_ ... - meese, on 10/13/2008, -3/+65Agreed. Let's keep working like we're 2 points ahead.
A resounding Obama win will let him govern better - we need to make sure he gets that resounding win. - johns717, on 10/14/2008, -6/+51Even though the Republicans are jumping ship, let's make sure that we do not take our eyes on the big pictures.
With the dramatic problems this Nation and the World face, John McCain as President would be a disaster.
Just imagine his erratic behavior not only on the national but also on the international level going for months. He would destabilize not only the world economy, the world security.
John McCain cannot even manage his anger within his campaign. His has advisors like Steve Schmidt, Phil Gramm, Rick Davis,... all excellent lobbyists... with a couple of 10's of million $ from lobbying against the people. - simplyintricate, on 10/14/2008, -20/+64Don't forget about Ron Paul, he's been talking badly about McCain for quite some time now..
- inactive, on 10/14/2008, -11/+41Well he's also been talking bad about evolution lately so i'd take anything he says with a grain of salt...
"A doctor who doesn't believe in evolution is like an architect that doesn't believe in gravity" - j4nj1m3n3z, on 10/14/2008, -2/+31Yea. Lets not forget about the Election of 1948 where everyone said Truman had no chance. His opponent, Dewey was told he would win by a landslide so he stopped campaigning 2 weeks early to work on his inauguration speech and pick his cabinet.
- inactive, on 10/14/2008, -8/+30And before some tool predictably comes along to say "but it won't affect his decisions as president!!!", I have some words from L. Ron Paul himself to share:
"I have a Bill in congress I certainly would promote and push as president, called the Sanctity of Life Amendment. We establish the principle that life begins at conception. And someone says, 'oh why are you saying that?' and I say, 'well, that's not a political statement -- that's a scientific statement that I'm making!"
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Ron_Paul_Abortion. ...
Yep, he's a fundy who justifies his desire to force his religious dogma upon the country as "scientific" - inactive, on 10/14/2008, -6/+28Criticizing McCain's campaign is NOT jumping ship. You really think Michelle Malkin would vote for Obama? HAH!
- Th3Wh1teRabb1t, on 10/14/2008, -7/+27http://i36.tinypic.com/qyicfm.jpg
- duggdowncatisad, on 10/14/2008, -2/+17They may be jumping ship, but it's not like any of these people are going to vote for Obama.
- orlandogeek, on 10/14/2008, -3/+17I agree that everyone supporting Obama should not get lazy and should operate as if the race is still very close. One thing I don't see a lot of people looking at though in regards to poll numbers being wrong is this:
Polls are generally conducted by calling people that have traditional landline phones. Barack Obama's main support demographic is 18-35. This age range is or has already abandoned the home phone in favor of cellphones in massive numbers. Factoring in that a good majority of people in that same demographic are Democrats, and I have to ask how many _more_ not _less_ points would Obama be ahead if these people were factored in.
Granted, there are several places saying this is not a drastic difference and I agree with that. I'd imagine it accounts for about the same amount as the average poll's margin of error. So around 2-3%. With the decline in landline use only increasing, this will become a much larger factor in election polling in the coming years. - nedzeve, on 10/14/2008, -3/+16Add Christopher Hitchens
http://www.slate.com/id/2202163/
Vote for Obama: McCain lacks the character and temperament to be
president. And Palin is simply a disgrace.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Oct. 13, 2008, at 10:44 AM ET
I used to nod wisely when people said: "Let's discuss issues rather than personalities." It seemed so obvious that in politics an issue was an issue and a personality was a personality, and that the more one could separate the two, the more serious one was. After all, in a debate on serious issues, any mention of the opponent's personality would be ad hominem at best and at worst would stoop as low as ad feminam.
At my old English boarding school, we had a sporting saying that one should "tackle the ball and not the man." I carried on echoing this sort of unexamined nonsense for quite some time—in fact, until the New Hampshire primary of 1992, when it hit me very forcibly that the "personality" of one of the candidates was itself an "issue." In later years, I had little cause to revise my view that Bill Clinton's abysmal character was such as to be a "game changer" in itself, at least as important as his claim to be a "new Democrat." To summarize what little I learned from all this: A candidate may well change his or her position on, say, universal health care or Bosnia. But he or she cannot change the fact—if it happens to be a fact—that he or she is a pathological liar, or a dimwit, or a proud ignoramus. And even in the short run, this must and will tell.
On "the issues" in these closing weeks, there really isn't a very sharp or highly noticeable distinction to be made between the two nominees, and their "debates" have been cramped and boring affairs as a result. But the difference in character and temperament has become plainer by the day, and there is no decent way of avoiding the fact. Last week's so-called town-hall event showed Sen. John McCain to be someone suffering from an increasingly obvious and embarrassing deficit, both cognitive and physical. And the only public events that have so far featured his absurd choice of running mate have shown her to be a deceiving and unscrupulous woman utterly unversed in any of the needful political discourses but easily trained to utter preposterous lies and to appeal to the basest element of her audience. McCain occasionally remembers to stress matters like honor and to disown innuendoes and slanders, but this only makes him look both more senile and more cynical, since it cannot (can it?) be other than his wish and design that he has engaged a deputy who does the innuendoes and slanders for him.
I suppose it could be said, as Michael Gerson has alleged, that the Obama campaign's choice of the word erratic to describe McCain is also an insinuation. But really, it's only a euphemism. Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear had to feel sorry for the old lion on his last outing and wish that he could be taken somewhere soothing and restful before the night was out. The train-wreck sentences, the whistlings in the pipes, the alarming and bewildered handhold phrases—"My friends"—to get him through the next 10 seconds. I haven't felt such pity for anyone since the late Adm. James Stockdale humiliated himself as Ross Perot's running mate. And I am sorry to have to say it, but Stockdale had also distinguished himself in America's most disastrous and shameful war, and it didn't qualify him then and it doesn't qualify McCain now.
The most insulting thing that a politician can do is to compel you to ask yourself: "What does he take me for?" Precisely this question is provoked by the selection of Gov. Sarah Palin. I wrote not long ago that it was not right to condescend to her just because of her provincial roots or her piety, let alone her slight flirtatiousness, but really her conduct since then has been a national disgrace. It turns out that none of her early claims to political courage was founded in fact, and it further turns out that some of the untested rumors about her—her vindictiveness in local quarrels, her bizarre religious and political affiliations—were very well-founded, indeed. Moreover, given the nasty and lowly task of stirring up the whack-job fringe of the party's right wing and of recycling patent falsehoods about Obama's position on Afghanistan, she has drawn upon the only talent that she apparently possesses.
It therefore seems to me that the Republican Party has invited not just defeat but discredit this year, and that both its nominees for the highest offices in the land should be decisively repudiated, along with any senators, congressmen, and governors who endorse them.
I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that "issue" I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign. - dorfmann, on 10/14/2008, -1/+14Well said. We shouldn't be complacent about this election. Let's stay on point and continue to work for a better tomorrow. Too much is at stake here.
- puncturevine, on 10/14/2008, -0/+13Why not wear a suit....it's a free country and there's not wrong with showing a little class my friend.
- coclarity, on 10/14/2008, -1/+14"# Bill Kristol (Mon Oct 13):
Kristol: "It's time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama's."
I was most struck by Bill Kristol's comment-- that his campaign is "overmatched" by Obama's is an interesting choice of words. McCain has run for president before in 2000, Obama has not, McCain has built a political following for decades longer than Obama, and yet he is somehow overmatched? Obama has run by and large an excellent campaign. He has taken enough of his opportunities when they have come along to change the dynamic in his favor. McCain is overmatched by an excellent candidate who has overcome his political weaknesses of youth and inexperience to successfully persuade large parts of the American people that he will make a more stable, capable, effective president than the elder statesman of John McCain.
I went back and looked at the source, and I think what Kristol said next was more revealing than the quote they had here- "The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync." (http://reframeit.com/comments/2ht98SsDzd0) - that is the real story more so than anything else. - TheHeat, on 10/14/2008, -1/+13Ed Rollins and George Will, and I think other people are on there twice. I'm an Obama supporter, but don't pad the stats.
- ironiridis, on 10/14/2008, -0/+12Use your brain? You're a tool. Show some class? You're a tool. Vote for Obama? You're a tool.
Vote for McCain? Why, now you're a MAVERICK. - Lhandroval, on 10/14/2008, -4/+14How many of them have electoral votes? That's most important.
- ansatsu29, on 10/14/2008, -0/+10aptly said. supporting is ok but VOTING has the more power to elect OBAMA for presidency...
- OnShakedown, on 10/14/2008, -0/+9oh, that's so sweet you're so considerate of the digg servers! i mean, on one hand people might think that the country would be better off knowing who these terrorists that you speak of are, but on the other hand, we wouldn't want to strain the digg servers. what a dilemma!!!1!!
hmm, perhaps there's another possibility, which is that you're just full of *****. no, that's unpossible! - iguana99, on 10/14/2008, -0/+9I'm assuming by "Hussein" here you mean BHO.
Actually, the terrorists want the biggest war-hawk to win, whoever that might be. They want a "clash of civilizations" - they want a fight between the Christian West and Islam. If you don't understand this, you're playing right into their hands.
They're not stupid - they would say and do what ever is necessary to get Americans to vote for McCain at this point, because he is the most likely to fan the flames of war. Think about it: if you had an enemy you despised, would you go on record supporting the person you actually wanted to win, knowing this would only hurt his/her chances in the eyes of voters? They're not clueless idiots simply because their skin is brown.
And referring to Obama as "Hussein" shows you're a relatively simple person who believes somehow the coincidence of his name and the name of the former Iraq dictator implies something important or deep. - MLisa, on 10/14/2008, -3/+11Few
- Dabaum, on 10/14/2008, -1/+9Wow, I had never actually seen the clip of the woman accusing Obama directly to McCain of being a Muslim, etc. Truly appalling.
- Gutterpunk, on 10/14/2008, -0/+8Yes, why don't you go and find out. We'll wait for your report.
- Anonchrist, on 10/14/2008, -4/+11for high school class president?
- meese, on 10/14/2008, -1/+8Indeed, there's a great website for that too:
http://mccainslobbyists.com/ - meese, on 10/14/2008, -2/+9If you don't mind me asking, do you plan to vote for Ron Paul or Bob Barr?
I'm curious how much of the dissatisfied GOP vote they're going to get. - SkinnerBox, on 10/14/2008, -2/+9Dugg for the really harsh video
- digitronix, on 10/14/2008, -4/+11I'm debating with myself whether I should vote for Chuck Baldwin or write in Ron Paul.
- richirwin, on 10/14/2008, -0/+7In 2004, Karl Rove talked about a "permanent republican majority."
In 2006, Democrats took control of the Senate and the House. No Democrat incumbent lost.
In 2008, Democrats stand on the verge of recapturing the White House, getting up to 59 members in the Senate, and getting up to 247 members of the House. No Democrat incumbent is currently losing.
The republican brand is on the verge of total collapse. - aftern9ne, on 10/14/2008, -1/+7Buried as inaccurate. Abandoning McCain is not the same as criticizing him. Do you really think Bill Kristol won't vote for him?
- inactive, on 10/14/2008, -0/+6Dude...I have friends who work on the Hill that deal and have dealt with McCain directly. The anger "rumors" are true. The guy is a loose cannon. There is no way on God's green earth that I'd want him with his finger on the button.
And no...I'm not a liberal. I'm a lifelong Republican turned Libertarian...which means I'm probably more conservative than you.
Bush and the rest of you Neocons can go play in traffic for *infecting* my GOP. That's right...you people are a disease. You are the cancer killing the GOP. - inactive, on 10/14/2008, -2/+8What part of "and I don't accept it" do you not understand?
http://www.notjustatheory.com/ - JigoroKano, on 10/14/2008, -0/+6The same Michelle Malkin that thought Rachelle Ray was wearing a terrorist scarf on her Dunkin Donuts billboard?
She wouldn't vote for Barrack Hussein Obama?
You're pulling my leg. - Zarchon, on 10/14/2008, -0/+6McCain IS a non-conservative Republican.
- Turambar, on 10/14/2008, -3/+9I'm doing my best to add North Carolina to the list
- manjas8, on 10/14/2008, -2/+7@getabrain
you're the dumbest thing i've ever heard - ramiro, on 10/14/2008, -1/+6Too much stretching in this article. See below:
# Mickey Edwards (Mon Oct 13):
Republican Mickey Edwards, formerly a congressman from Oklahoma, distances himself from McCain, saying "today, thanks to a campaign apparently managed by Moe, Curly, and Larry, he comes across as erratic (Obama's word, but it fits), impulsive, befuddled, and ill-tempered, and apparently unable to utter any words other than 'surge' and 'earmarks.'" Edwards also plays the blame game very explicitly: "If Obama gets a big win, it will be McCain himself, and the Three Stooges calling the shots at his headquarters who will deserve whatever blame is attached for transforming a viable and energetic Obama campaign into a steamroller grinding the Republican Party into the ground."
# David Frum (Mon Oct 13):
David "axis of evil" Frum gets his "I told you so" ready at the National Review and rebukes his critics who complain that he isn't cheerleading for McCain enough. He concludes: "Perhaps it is our job at NRO is tell our readers only what they want to hear, without much regard to whether it is true. Perhaps it is our duty just to keep smiling and to insist that everything is dandy - that John McCain's economic policies make sense, that his selection of Sarah Palin was an act of statesmanship, that she herself is the second coming of Anna Schwartz, and that nobody but an over-educated snob would ever suggest otherwise."
# Ray LaHood (Mon Oct 13):
Rep. LaHood, who has represented Illinois' 18th district for seven terms and is retiring in January, told WBBM Radio that Palin should control the racially-charged heckling at her rallies: "Look it. This doesn't befit the office that she's running for. And frankly, people don't like it."
# Michelle Malkin (Mon Oct 13):
Michelle Malkin expresses her disappointment in McCain after learning that "John McCain had no problem calling ACORN members his friends during his ill-fated illegal alien shamnesty crusade." She concludes, "We're Screwed '08."
# Erick Erickson (Mon Oct 13):
Erick Erickson, "editor in chief" of RedState.com, is giving up on McCain: "With only a few weeks left until election day, let's be blunt: McCain-Palin '08 does not seem to be making headway against the polling." He suggests that McCain needs to choose between himself and senate/house Republicans, and suggests that his readers focus on downballot races: "The Republican numbers in the House and Senate can be salvaged, but in the next few weeks there must be a realistic assessment from the McCain campaign regarding winning his own race versus helping Congressional Republicans mitigate their losses."
# Ed Rollins (Mon Oct 13):
Rollins, who managed Reagan's 1984 campaign: "And while chaos and disarray reigned supreme in Sen. Barack Obama's opponents' campaigns, the steady, disciplined and strategically driven Obama campaign marches forward toward likely victory."
# Bill Kristol (Mon Oct 13):
Kristol: "It's time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama's."
# Lee Terry (Mon Oct 13):
In Nebraska, a Republican representative, Lee Terry, ran a newspaper ad featuring support from a woman who called herself an "Obama-Terry voter."
# Linda Smith (Sun Oct 12):
Linda Smith, Republican chairwoman in Clark County, Ohio. "I have to blame the McCain camp for not pushing it hard enough," added Smith, whose rural county lies between Dayton and Columbus. "It's so ingrained in people's minds that Republicans are good on national security, but Democrats are good on the economy, and it's very hard to counter that."
# Tom Ellis (Sun Oct 12):
Tom Ellis, GOP chairman in Butler County, Ohio, a key Republican stronghold in 2004, said there had been "some slippage" for McCain in recent weeks. He said Republicans were finding it "hard to penetrate" the torrent of bad economic news and deliver an effective pitch to independents. And the Arizona senator's attacks on Obama's past links to former radical William Ayers, he said, "do not garner him any advantage" with swing voters. "There's a sense of frustration at this point," Ellis said. "What I hear is people are expecting more of the Republican ticket. They've got to speak directly to the economic issues. People want to hear specific solutions from Sen. McCain."
# Roger Stone (Sun Oct 12):
Roger Stone, a longtime McCain supporter, said the state party and the national campaign bear almost equal blame. ''This effort lacks coordination and a cooperative spirit and it's showing,'' Stone said. "But it's more than mechanics. The campaign has no consistent message.''
# George LeMieux (Sun Oct 12):
George LeMieux, Crist's former campaign manager and staff chief, said McCain erred in not choosing Crist as running mate. ''If Gov. Crist was the vice presidential nominee, John McCain would be winning Florida,'' he said.
# Charlie Crist (Sun Oct 12):
"Saturday, he skipped a McCain football rally and instead went to Disney World."
# Bill Kristol (Sun Oct 12):
On FOX News Sunday, Kristol said the McCain campaign was "stupid...pathetic...flailing."
# Patrick Ruffini (Sat Oct 11):
Conservative columnist Patrick Ruffini argues that the RNC needs to give up on McCain and try to save Republican house and senate seats, and that "McCain should start explicitly making the argument for divided government, with him as the only hope of preserving it. This is unlikely to be a voting issue at the Presidential level, but we need to get the idea percolating that we are about to elect Obama with unchecked, unlimited power." That is, Ruffini wants to sacrifice McCain to save congressional Republicans.
# Mitt Romney (Sat Oct 11):
Mitt Romney said McCain, who has offered scattershot proposals on the economy, should present a broad vision of how he would lead the country through the economic crisis. "I'm talking about standing above the tactical alternatives that are being considered," Romney said, "and establish an economic vision that is able to convince the American people that he really knows how to strengthen the economy."
# Robert A. Gleason Jr. (Sat Oct 11):
Robert A. Gleason Jr., the Republican chairman in Pennsylvania, said he was concerned that Mr. McCain's increasingly aggressive tone was not working with moderate voters and women in the important southeastern part of a state that is at the top of Mr. McCain's must-win list.
# Tommy Thompson (Sat Oct 11):
Former Republican Governor of Wisconsin, said it would be difficult for Mr. McCain to win in his state but not impossible, particularly if he campaigned in conservative Democratic parts of the state. Asked if he was happy with Mr. McCain's campaign, Mr. Thompson replied, "No," and he added, "I don't know who is."
# Saul Anuzis (Sat Oct 11):
Saul Anuzis, the Republican chairman in Michigan, said "I think you're seeing a turning point, you're starting to feel real frustration because we are running out of time. Our message, the campaign's message, isn't connecting."
# Norm Coleman (Fri Oct 10):
Coleman bails on McCain rally: "[Norm] Coleman told reporters that he would not be appearing at a planned rally with McCain this afternoon. Could it be McCain's sliding polling numbers in Minnesota? His attacks on Obama?"
# Christopher Buckley (Fri Oct 10):
Christopher Buckley, son of National Review founder William F. Buckley, and columnist for the National Review himself, endorsed Barack Obama, saying "this campaign has changed John McCain. It has made him inauthentic."
# Bob Eleveld (Fri Oct 10):
Bob Eleveld, former Kent County Republican chairman who led McCain's West Michigan campaign in 2000, said: "I'm not supporting either of them [McCain or Obama] at this point. I think the straight talk is gone."
# William Milliken (Fri Oct 10):
Former Republican Governor of Michigan William Milliken, who endorsed McCain during the primaries, said: "He is not the McCain I endorsed; he keeps saying, 'Who is Barack Obama?' I would ask the question, 'Who is John McCain?' because his campaign has become rather disappointing to me. I'm disappointed in the tenor and the personal attacks on the part of the McCain campaign, when he ought to be talking about the issues."
# Ed Rollins (Fri Oct 10):
Ed Rollins ran Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign in 1984, so he knows a thing or two about landslides -- and he's predicting one for Barack Obama. At this point, he says the only question left to answer is whether John McCain will take the Republican Party down with him.
# Joshua Trevino (Fri Oct 10):
Joshua Trevino, co-founder of RedState.com, wrote on his blog: "In the end, I couldn't do it...I opened it fully intending to vote for John McCain...Do I believe in John McCain? Not as much as I used to. Do I believe in Sarah Palin? Despite my early enthusiasm for her, now not at all. Do I believe in the national Republican Party? Not in the slightest -- even though I see no meaningful alternative to it. So, my choice for President in 2008, scrawled in my ballot as an act of futile protest, is Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana."
# Matt Lewis (Fri Oct 10):
Matt Lewis, a contributing writer for the conservative Web site Townhall.com, told CNN the plan only further riles conservatives upset with McCain's backing of the massive government bailout plan passed last week. "Fundamentally, the problem is John McCain accepts a lot of liberal notions, unfortunately. There is somewhat of a populist streak," he said. "Most conservatives really did not like the bailout to begin with, and this was really kind of picking at the scab."
# Michelle Laxalt (Thu Oct 9):
Republican Laxalt slams the McCain campaign's tactics.
# Michigan GOP (Thu Oct 9):
The Michigan GOP is in disarray, and said the following about those jumping ship in an email they sent to local supporters: "In the meantime, there have been several individuals, including some disgruntled former employees, who have tried to take advantage of the situation by stealing cell phones, and other electronic equipment, as well as substantial amounts of collateral materials. In at least one instance there was an employee who vandalized their victory center on the way out the door."
# National Review Editorial Board (Thu Oct 9):
"We never thought we would defend the Frank-Dodd legislation, which we bitterly opposed last summer. But it looks downright prudent compared to what McCain has proposed. McCain's plan is a full bailout for lenders."
# Perry Diaz (Wed Oct 8):
Perry Diaz, chairman of the National Federation of Filipino-American Republicans, resigned from his post and withdrew his endorsement, saying "I endorsed McCain before the California primary believing that he was the right man for the job. I was wrong. His selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate and his decision a few days ago to resort to personal attacks on Obama's character and integrity run counter to my personal beliefs and core values. I have lost my respect for McCain and I believe that a McCain/Palin administration would only worsen the economic situation in the country."
# David Brooks (Wed Oct 8):
David Brooks rips apart McCain's pick for VP, saying "Sarah Palin represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party."
# George Will (Wed Oct 8):
George Will laments McCain's campaign and quotes an Orioles manager: "Are you going to get any better or is this it?" His takeaway? "Obama in a romp in November? Don't be surprised"
# Lilibet Hagel (Tue Oct 7):
Lilibet Hagel, wife of Republican senator Chuck Hagel, appeared with Susan Eisenhower to endorse Barack Obama, saying that this election is "not about fighting phantom issues churned out by a top-notch slander machine. Most importantly it is not about distracting the public - you and me - with whatever slurs someone thinks will stick."
# Michelle Malkin (Tue Oct 7):
Malkin is outraged by McCain's new mortgage giveway plan.
# Kathleen Parker (Fri Sep 26):
Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wrote in the National Review that Sarah Palin is "out of her league" and should step down for the good of her country.
# Wick Allison (Mon Sep 22):
Wick Allison, former publisher of the National Review and current editor-in-chief of D magazine, endorses Obama and writes "I made the maximum donation to John McCain during the primaries, when there was still hope he might come to his senses. But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history."
# George Will (Sun Sep 21):
"I suppose the McCain campaign's hope is that when there's a big crisis, people will go for age and experience," said Will. "The question is, who in this crisis looked more presidential, calm and un-flustered? It wasn't John McCain who, as usual, substituting vehemence for coherence, said 'let's fire somebody.' And picked one of the most experienced and conservative people in the administration, Chris Cox, and for no apparent reason... It was un-presidential behavior by a presidential candidate."
# WSJ Editorial Board (Fri Sep 19):
In a crisis, voters want steady, calm leadership, not easy, misleading answers that will do nothing to help. Mr. McCain is sounding like a candidate searching for a political foil rather than a genuine solution. He'll never beat Mr. Obama by running as an angry populist like Al Gore, circa 2000.
# Peggy Noonan and Mike Murphy (Wed Sep 3):
Noonan and Murphy get caught on an open mic griping about the choice of Sarah Palin. Noonan says "The most qualified? No. I think they went for this, excuse me - inactive, on 10/14/2008, -3/+88m4ck, perhaps you are in denial, or just a little slow, but what just because he says "states rights" doesn't make it so.
When human life is LEGALLY DEFINED as starting at conception (as this bill would), then after conception, the clump of cells would be given the same rights. That means any form of abortion (even birth control) would be tantamount to murder aka a federal offense. This bill is a DEFACTO ban on abortion of any kind.
And the best part? He removes the jurisdiction of the Supreme court, you know, an ENTIRE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. You know, as outlined in the constitution? I know some of you paulitie kool-aid drinkers like to pretend we live in the days of the Articles of Confederation, but we don't. We have a supreme court, and a 14th amendment to make sure that states can't independently chose to abridge upon individual rights. The reason this bill is flawed is the same as the concept of "leaving slavery up to the states" is/was flawed.
This is all under the charade of "scientific" of course. That's how these religious wingnuts justify this kind of fascism.
@getabrain
Your name is apt. The concept of evolution allows us to understand germ theory better for instance. Or explains why we need a new flu shot every year. It is perfectly relevant. Denial of it (especially after attending medical school) is indicative of a close minded and dogmatic individual. - ronmexico, on 10/14/2008, -0/+5I must have missed the part about Republicans abandoning McCain. Why must headlines to articles make stuff up to get Diggs?
- SoulDrift404, on 10/14/2008, -0/+5George Will is on the list twice.
- JigoroKano, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4Christopher Buckley is intelligent and reasonable.
- londubh, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4She's on the list twice. The only reason why she gets away with her racist rants is because she's Asian. If she were white, she'd be Ann Coulter. Blech, and double blech!
- moomza, on 10/16/2008, -0/+4Romney might have stood a slim chance. He certainly has good facial bone structure, and sadly, that's a huge asset in our image driven culture of dumb. It would have been more fun for me as well, because Romney deeply irritates me in a way that I can't fully describe, and I thrive on irritation.
"Moomza" is an Arabic word for "Troll". I am surprised that you didn't know that, since you are such an absolute know-it-all. Here's a blurb about it.: هوىيءآأؤإابةتثجحخدذرزسشصضطظعغفقكلمنهوىي"Moomza"ءآأؤإئلمنهوى
I have sad news mr. Mighty - I am no longer getting pleasure trolling conserva-threads on Digg. It's like beating a dog when it's down. And watching the debates last night reminded me that I used to really kinda like McCain. Truly. I admired the man, maybe all the way up to the point when he claimed Obama promoted pornography to Kindergartners. He's not much of a Maverick, but he truly is a hero. I'm glad he was never Swiftboated in this election. I literally wanted to murder those putrid chicken hawks in 04. (I bet you participated in that slander, but I'll give you a pass just this once)
Back to the subject. So ... it is with regret that I must tell you Mighty Man, my favorite semi-neocon Digg pal, that I am pulling out of the race. I don't have your thick skin. Trolling makes me feel bad. Since I started this, my aura has darkened, my karma has turned black, I've lost my sex drive, and I've developed acne, foot odor, warts and hairy knuckles. Not to mention, it's a terribly unproductive waste of the precious time we are given in this life. And then, I am most ashamed to say, I have 2 kids, yet I've spent at least 3 hours each day for the last 2 weeks vomiting garbage on Digg in the hopes of irritating a few dullards on the Right. So very pathetic. I am better than this. My troll phase must end.
I'll still check in on your malevolence from time to time, out of sheer admiration for your skill at pissing off liberals with that signature dry style. You got game, baby.
Typing this one final comment to you Mighty, and only you, serves as my therapeutic release from these last few weeks as a swamp dweller. I will now go wash my hands.
Don't be sad. I'll always be somewhere out in the cloud, an angel above the fray, floating at an orthogonal projection.
Farewell dear sir,
Moomza
The hippy liberal chick, with a gun. - dupswapdrop, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4Time to stick a fork in them the republicans are done!
- elduquex26x, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4Is it better to early vote or vote on Nov. 4?
First time voter from FL voting for Obama. I truly hope Obama takes FL. It has probably been about 50/50 bumper stickers/lawn signs in my area. - wastelander, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4It was was a collection of quotes listed chronologically (rather than a list of republicans).
I don't think it was intentionally misleading. - entropy71, on 10/14/2008, -0/+4@*****: did you create an account solely for the purpose of harrassing onetimer? Let it go man, let it go...
- sweetbwaoy, on 10/14/2008, -2/+6And $10 billion a month spent on occupying Iraq isn't a waste of money to you? 1 trillion dollars in total. 99% of that money just goes in the pockets of Blackwater, Halliburton, and Bechtel. You complain about a measly $600 to a working single mother who is going to turn around and immediately spend that money in a grocery store IN AMERICA. But I don't see you complaining about the multi billion dollar no-bid contracts received by Halliburton and Blackwater for the occupation of Iraq. They bill the government $20,000 to replace a toilet seat and $500,000 for one mercenary. And they turn around and hoard that money in an off-shore bank account and then invest it in foreign currencies because they know he U.S. dollar has no real value.
Wake up! -
Show 51 - 100 of 198 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 