What is Digg?138 Comments
- afx1, on 10/12/2007, -10/+78Ok, I'm at his YouTube page in another tab. Now what's the trick I do to get him elected?
- mthe0ry, on 10/12/2007, -7/+60You might disagree with what he says but you have to appreciate his honesty. He doesn't give a ***** about politics.
- Jazzisnotdead, on 10/12/2007, -8/+42Listen, I'm a long time reader - first time poster. Does that make a difference? Not at all.
My message to the Digg community and those who are aware/pessimistic of Mr. Gravel's campaign is this:
The chances may seem slim for him to be elected President because of our outlook of society and those currently inhabiting it. But because of this assumption and doubt, we are already creating failure in our own minds and those who read it. We MUST realize that we, as a nation - and above all else - a society of equal human beings - is that his presidency IS POSSIBLE. We as a nation are in a disastrous war BECAUSE OF OUR APATHY AND PASSIVE ATTITUDE - we must not let this continue any farther. Whether you're a Republican, Democrat,or a human being - I am positive you can all agree upon the value of life - no matter what your definition of it is. So if you truly value Mr. Gravel's candidacy PLEASE express your voice, your power, you individuality. If you do not, then please express yourself to those who you feel properly represent you. The message here is less of "Go Gravel! Go!" but a message in hope that individuals such as yourself will triumph through even when the odds "appear" to be stacked against you. We must NOT FAIL OURSELVES.
We may be weak alone, but there IS strength in numbers. It all starts with one person, one moment. Let us bring a better future for our children, and our children's children. We CAN do this. For the sake of society as we hope it, we NEED to do this. - Koray, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33I'm not exactly a Gravel fan, but this country was founded by a few "crazy old men with unrealistic ideas". Never discount a person because they buck the trend. Political innovators are what keep a bloated empire from collapsing in on itself.
- n0sferatu, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22@lemon67, Mike Gravel hasn't been a U.S. Senator for the last 26 years...
- nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18i agree, but then again this guy has proven he's done good things once in power (pentagon papers)
- keithburgun, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17People, we have to keep a positive attitude and do OUR BEST to get this man elected. It is WITHIN the realm of possibility, for god's sakes, if George Bush can get elected, this man can. So keep a positive attitude about it and just do everything in your power, it's far too easy to throw your hands up and say it's futile. Good work, diggers who keep his name up high. Let's keep this going, you'll keep the diggs coming from me. and EVERYONE must sign this petition!
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/283054100
Thanks! - PaulRClark, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Mike Gravel discusses National Initiative: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOKTyOvmGOs
- nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13good idea, instead of supporting someone that says what they mean, we should support the one thats best at selling out.
no wait a second, shouldn't we vote for who we agree with the most? and besides, if all the politicians are to afraid to speak their mind or act according to their true beliefs then wouldn't it be a good idea to show support to those that do that now? then the others might not be so afraid. its how politics always work in this country, the mainstream attaches itself to counter culture popular beliefs (to an extent) in order to stop the counter from gaining power.
you think we have min. wage and a 40 hour work week and social security because the politicians were noble good people? no, we have it because socialism was gaining popularity in this country in the 20's and 30's and if they threw the dog a small bone it would stop barking. - VBShadow, on 10/12/2007, -11/+21I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Digg is a bandwagon. Hurry and get on before you get dugg down.
- TheRealNojo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+19Gravel is the best candidate for president hands down. He wants what's best for our society.
Gravel For President '08!! - ganjadude4391, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18most likely wont happen but it would be pretty sweet
and digg is helping. i have heard these names in the past but the MM is doing them no justice - SiliconBadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8He and Ron Paul are together only insofar as they recognize that the current system is very corrupt and requires drastic change. They would not agree on a "fair tax." Ron Paul believes that NO income tax or national sales tax would be a good thing. The federal government spends far too much money as it is, and tax reform is merely suggesting we get the money for federal government from a different system. Ron Paul seeks to eliminate federal spending to the point that no income tax is necessary.
They would also disagree on the idea of direct democracy. Neither would the Founding Fathers agree with Gravel on the issue of direct democracy. This is supposed to be a constitutional republic. The core difference here is that Gravel thinks the federal government is right to make any number of laws regarding the lives of individual citizens. Ron Paul recognizes that legislating citizen behavior was never within the constitutional powers of Congress, and in any event, it is not a desirable thing. Laws should be made at the most local level possible, in order to keep laws and legislators more in touch with the people. Why do you think lobbyists spend billions per year trying to get politicians in their pocket? It's because politicians have power. If you remove as much power from the politicians as possible, you have less reason for anyone to buy them out, and less severe results if it does happen.
"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators." -- P. J. O'Rourke
Ron Paul would also disagree with the notion of nationalized health care. Being an obstetrician himself, Dr. Paul has insight into the complications of national, taxpayer funded health care. I won't get into the details here, but he would attack the health care issue more by getting government regulations that make health care so expensive out of the way, rather than trying to rob Peter to pay Paul (no pun intended).
Essentially, I feel that Gravel does not have any underlying, coherent philosophy driving his decisions. He seems to advocate what he feels will work best for the given situation. I'm not saying that's bad, but it's different than Ron Paul's libertarian philosophy of striving to promote the most freedom for every individual as is possible through lower government spending, sound monetary policy (i.e. sound money), and promoting free markets. - RonPaulPres2008, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Mike Gravel/Ron Paul ticket would be amazing. Simply amazing.
- kodek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8So you don't support him because he's not well supported?
- nico623, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14agreed. it seems like a hard strech but from what he said in his video's posted on youtube he is the only one with the cajones to say what alot of the now lower-middle class are experiencing every single day.
- nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8we are home.
oh wait, i forgot, only conservatives are true americans - nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I dont care what color my president is as long as he/she/it (?) cares about a color other than green
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Actually, what I like about Gravel is that he seems (for the most part) honest and principled, but he also seems to know how to work within the machine and has already accomplished something as a senator (according to some, at least. I'd want to fact-check that more). As much as I dislike politics and am cynical about it, I must admit that it seems like a good idea to vote in someone who knows how to get the dirty stuff done.
Also, Ron Paul has expressed himself in favor of cutting taxes considerably, which kind of seems like a bad idea considering our massive deficit at the moment. - klaymen2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6i wouldn't say "hands down". i still like ron paul better.
- bradleyland, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7How in the HELL could anyone be a Mike Gravel fan _and_ a Ron Paul fan. I keep seeing the same comments posted in every Gravel/Paul story. It's absurd and discouraging. Ron Paul and Mike Gravel are as different politically as turkey gravy and corn flakes.
- gooddaysunshine, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8spot on
- DigitalOmnivore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5What Ron Paul and Gravel Agree on:
1. The war in Iraq/Foreign Policy
2. Military industrial complex
3. Patriot act?
4. That there must be tax reform
Things they would disagree on:
1. National Heath Care
2. Social Security
3. Details of tax reform.
4. Social issues (Shoult they be settled by the states, or to the fed)
Overall disagreement:
Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist who believes in federalism. He believes the states should be unique entities who should settle most social issues, and are free to self-govern to solve problems (ie making statewide healthcare, welfare). Our founding fathers felt the same way. The federalist even mentions how some states might adopt socialist schemes for income redistribution, and if they did the free market would decide things...the citizens would start moving out of state...but the states were free to try such things. The feds were not.
Mike Gravel is a populist. He believes that the people can govern themselves the best, via direct democracy. If this is true or not, it's a far cry from the beliefs of the founding fathers.
There is a large ideological divide between Gravel and Paul, even if they agree on some issues. - kjcdude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8So original - http://www.youtube.com/members?s=po&t=w&g=-1
- SultanTravi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8It could be like the good ol' days when the VP and pres differed greatly. Frankly, perhaps having two minds of different opinions on every issue could be nice.
- oblivinated, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I agree! I just don't like your screenname.
- dragonopolis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Please, the elimination of the IRS is not going to cause economic chaos. First of all, we are already paying a consumption tax. Its hidden. What? you say. Let me explain:
The government taxes us with an income tax and there are several types of taxes placed on businesses. Where do you think businesses get the money to pay all those taxes? It comes from us. That's right we pay those taxes. Businesses make their money selling products to the people and the government takes that money we gave the business from us. Talk about double taxing the people. All the fair tax supporters want to do is get rid of the income tax (which should have never happen) and to stop double taxing the people through businesses. However its more than that. I can't believe Americans support targeted taxes for specific products. For instance, specific taxes placed on cigarettes and liquor and now there is talk of gas guzzling tax in some states - at least we can eliminate this abuse at the Federal level. Yes, States are the biggest abusers of this type of taxation but the Federal Government does it too. At least by Eliminating IRS (which is reducing government by the way), abolishing the wrongly instituted income tax, and by unhiding the hidden consumption tax we already pay, would keep government out of our lives as well as out of the lives of businesses as well. Since there is no Corporate taxation this will bring the cost of operating down significantly meaning more money to work with for businesses. It cost a lot of money to comply with the federal tax code and should also help small businesses, new and old, who don't have as much money as larger corporations. Costs of products should start to go down as businesses start to adjust to not having to work with a tax code and of course faith in the Free market system that some companies will use the freed dollars from taxation to drive their prices down to compete. Also, I believe it is a fair compromise between what American people want (better wages) and corporations/businesses who need to find away to pay for it should it be enforced (for instance a minimum wage increase)
Mike Gravel seems to be a very smart man and doesn't like secrets. His past as proven that he was willing to face prosecution to give the American people the truth like releasing the Pentagon Papers. He has had experience in the Politics of War, namely Vietnam War, and strongly opposed sending troops there and also created a situation that ended the draft (sounds like someone Americans would want handling the Iraq War).
With a fantastic political record, and the idea to treat the rest of the world as equals rather than be the world's Bully....I mean police force, perhaps we can repair the damage reputation we have among the world. Some people say that if we pull out the world would destabilize and that maybe so if your a pessimist or perhaps the world will surprise us. Either way, it is better to wait and let the world Beg for our help rather than bully our way into micromanaging every little thing the world does (it costs a lot of money). Its time for the world to take on some of the responsibilities and the cost for policing itself. Our government has been living in a time capsule since WWII. The world isn't the helpless defenseless place it use to be. We need to place the government's focus back on its citizens and I believe Mike Gravel is the man for the Job. (first Democrat candidate I like since I was born, and no, I didn't vote for Bush a second time).
Mike Gravel for President '08 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Which means he should run for a political office.
- kanned, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Gravel for 2008!
- gsteff, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@Eleo
What?
------
Those of you supporting longshot candidates should read Hunter Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, about the 1972 presidential election. It describes what happened when the longshot candidates, powered by an extraordinarily passionate youth grassroots movement (and a strong anti-war fervor) actually won. Thompson is a brilliant writer and political analyst, and early in the campaign he felt exactly as mrassman does above: McGovern was "too good to win." Thompson provides a pretty good argument that McGovern's victory in the democratic primary was actually orchestrated by Nixon- Nixon basically convinced the moderate democratic leaders to support a longshot like McGovern out of the belief that he'd lose miserably and provide them with the opportunity to pull the democrats back to the center in 1976. Nixon basically exploited internal democratic divisions by trading them the 1972 election for the 1976 one (at least, that's Thompson's argument). And the results were predictable... immediately after the nomination, McGovern alienated all his supporters by toning down his rhetoric and acting like "just another politician" (see: the Eagleton affair) in an effort to win more moderate votes, and then lost anyway in basically the biggest landslide in American history. And then the democrats won easily in 1976, as Thompson predicated (you could attribute that to Watergate, but I think it would have happened even without the Watergate scandal). And several thousand American soldiers- draftees, no less- probably died because Nixon felt no political pressure during the campaign or during his year in office after the election to withdraw from Vietnam.
Anyway, remember, if you think that you're one of the only people who "get it" about American policy, try to show some modesty. Just because everyone believes something doesn't mean it's false. There are good reasons to be willing to compromise sometimes. - AKBryant54, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@noamsml
Ron Paul would cut taxes, but he would also cut spending, which is what the "fiscally responsible" republican party HASN'T been doing in the past couple decades. - bratpack8, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The major difference between Paul and Gravel is Paul believes in liberty whereas Gravel believes in democracy (i.e. mob rule). He wants citizens to be able to vote for laws? This is a dangerous and slippery slope. Just think 2 wolves and a sheep voting for what's for lunch and you'll understand the reason our founders were not fans of democracy and why that word never appears in the Constitution. Liberty and democracy are worlds apart.
- i4mt3hwin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3While I disagree with some of his political views the thing I like about this guy is he states what he wants to do instead of bashing other peoples ideas. During the Bush vs. Kerry election thats all it was, political bashing. I could care the ***** less what the other person did, what are you going to do for me?
- SuckItUp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Dems, you need to do whatever you can to promote this guy. He is a Republican's wet dream.
- evilregis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3 "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." —Margaret Mead
- rmmcclay, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Gravel strikes me as someone who could get some ***** done...like he did fillibustering to get rid of the draft in the 1970's.
- deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don't know where this guy came from, but I'm clearly impressed. If more politicians had a backbone like his, this would be a great country. Dare, I say it, Mike Gravel for President in 2008! Help spread the word ... http://www.democratgiftshop.com/mikegravel
- kbreezy04, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9My thoughts exactly, we either need to elect him or Ron Paul.
- Suplyndmnd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3So wait, you want a president that has the people of the United States voting to make the new laws? The same people who voted Bush into office twice. The same people who voted for Sanjaya on American Idol. These are the people who should be voting to pass laws? Maybe it's a good idea....
sanjaya08.us anyone? - DuffyDirect, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I like digging up comments like these that are dugg down for no reason, just because you blatantly called him an idiot for voicing his opinion. Saying Iraq was a hornet's nest before the war is like saying Shiloh was a hornet's nest before Grant engaged the Confederate Army there for 2 days.
- snlildude87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@poet:
Click [reply]. - Hypermarkalan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@duffy
While I don't disagree about McGovern, I do think you're off-base on the Dean incident. What you've said lends the media far too much insight and discernment than I'm willing to believe. Come on, the media just ain't that bright, and in today's salacious and scandal ridden culture you honestly believe the media could sit on something, or even try to lead the American people to an intelligent decision? Maybe in the seventies, but not now. - jellygraph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2For those unsure, the above was an idiot.
- TSCheredar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If you want Mike Gravel to attend the CNN Debate Help Digg this to the front page: http://digg.com/offbeat_news/Message_to_CNN_Put_Mike_Gravel_on_Dems_Debate_08
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1In a two-party system you DO have to carefully consider your vote. In the past I have advocated that people just vote their conscience but that has yielded 2 Bush administrations that have caused...well we all know what they have caused.
I'm really wary of the dems putting up anyone who has the hint of wingnuttery about him, as Gravel does. I also don't want another DOA like Kerry. I'd rather see some compromise and a candidate that can actually win. In this case I happen to know a bit about Guiliani and I'm not really all that terrified about him winning but I'd still rather see a viable Dem candidate.
Honestly I LOVE the fact that Edwards will actually say that not only should the Bush tax cuts be repeals but we ought to consider nudging rates up on the wealthiest Americans. Personally I think we're not at the optima on the Laffer curve. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll read your essay in its entirety later. I didn't say that the status quo is the way to go, just because the system is broke doesn't mean socializing it is the answer. It's an easy solution, but we will pay the price with an inefficient, less innovative health care system if universal health care is enacted.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 133 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