Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Mike Huckabee clueless on Iran NIE. Hasn't heard About It.
thinkprogress.org — The Politico ’s David Paul Kuhn asked former Gov. Mike Huckabee (R-AR) what he thought of the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran. Huckabee’s response? Hasn’t heard of it: Have you been briefed or been able to take a look at it – Huckabee: No. Reporter: Have you heard of the finding? Huckabee: No. This man wants to be President.
thejoshuablog- 1437 diggs
- digg it
- tubular, on 12/06/2007, -33/+112That's what happens when your head is buried in Bible verses all day.
- OUChevelleSS, on 12/06/2007, -28/+8As opposed to Digg? This intelligence only came out a few days ago and didn't really get big until today.
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -4/+19The president talked about it at a press conference yesterday morning and it was plastered on every web site and broadcast on every news show throughout the day. Huckabee was asked about it that evening at dinner and was clueless. The end.
- mrASSMAN, on 12/06/2007, -3/+16Are you kidding me? It's been huge international news for at least 2 days.
- hittnrun, on 12/06/2007, -8/+2go ask normal, everyday, non-political junkies...NO ONE ELSE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS.
BTW, when did Iran lose it's nuclear ambitions?? 2003? around the time we stopped the talk and started the action with Iraq? Hmmmmm, said the rats, how do we spin this???? Coincidence!!! That's it!- Tippis, on 12/06/2007, -2/+5"go ask normal, everyday, non-political junkies..."
...and as a presidential candidate, one would hope he *was* a politics junkie, so that's not much of an excuse.
- Tippis, on 12/06/2007, -2/+5"go ask normal, everyday, non-political junkies..."
- EditorResponse, on 12/06/2007, -8/+3Iran never gave up on the bomb. They are in fact accelerating it now...this today.
Paste together to get link
www.dw-world.de/dw/function/0,,12215_cid_2989419,00.html?
maca=en-rss-en-all-1573-rdf
News | 06.12.2007 | 00:00 UTC
Iran seeking 50,000 nuclear centrifuges
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called a US intelligence estimate on Tehran's nuclear programme a "great victory", adding that Iran is now seeking 50,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium. Earlier, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice repeated warnings by US President George W. Bush that Iran remains a nuclear threat despite a new US intelligence report that Tehran suspended its secret nuclear weapons programme in 2003. The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, Mohamed El-Baradei, has suggested the US study vindicates Iran "somewhat" and offered Tehran an opportunity to resolve the crisis over its atomic programme.
-----------------
Iran gives IAEA nuclear blueprints in attempt to ward off sanctions
Paste together next two lines for URL.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380808635
&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
After years of stonewalling, Iran has given the UN nuclear agency blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday, in an apparent concession meant to lead off the threat of new UN sanctions.
But the diplomats said Teheran has failed to meet other requests made by the International Atomic Energy Agency in its attempts to end nearly two decades of nuclear secrecy on the part of the Islamic Republic.
-----------------
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071114/ap_on_re_eu/nuclear_iran
VIENNA, Austria - Iran has met a key demand of the U.N. nuclear agency, handing over long-sought blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday. Both the IAEA and other experts have categorized the instructions outlined in the blueprints as having no value outside of a nuclear weapons program. Senior IAEA officials were refused interviews with at least two top Iranian nuclear officials suspected of possible involvement in a weapons program, they said. One was the leader of a physics laboratory at Lavizan, outside Tehran, which was razed before the agency had a chance to investigate activities there. The other was in charge of developing Iran's centrifuges, used to enrich uranium.
- hittnrun, on 12/06/2007, -8/+2go ask normal, everyday, non-political junkies...NO ONE ELSE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT THIS.
- joshblufs, on 12/06/2007, -5/+6is digg running for president?
- RobotCitizen, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4Huckster should have known about it within minutes or hours, not days. He running to be the ***** commander in chief of US armed forces, for *****'s sake! I swear, right now Jesus must be saying, "Jesus Christ, do I have to tell him everything?!"
- garryw, on 12/06/2007, -4/+3Or when you originate from Hope Arkansas and your idea of foreign affairs is leaving the county.
- OUChevelleSS, on 12/06/2007, -28/+8As opposed to Digg? This intelligence only came out a few days ago and didn't really get big until today.
- iching, on 12/06/2007, -10/+52Sheri Shepherd on the view would make a perfect running mate! Huchabee and Shepherd in 08.....go team, go!!!!!
- Nanellen, on 12/06/2007, -57/+13The President said he had just been told of it. He was notified that something had come in but it took months to analyze. This is breaking news. Give me a break.
- mightydavefish, on 12/06/2007, -6/+37Give us a break.
They don't need you to make crappy excuses for them, they'll make up their own reasons why they are ignorant of yet another thing they babble about.- Nanellen, on 12/06/2007, -21/+4Everyone has been talking about Iran getting the bomb sooner rather than later. This NIE report was kept under wraps and then suddenly sprung. Mike Huckabee isn't privy to National Security secrets.
- phnx0221, on 12/06/2007, -4/+9So bloggers and newspapers can find out about this, or get an inkling of it, and a person who is actively running as a candidate for the presidency has no idea?! And that's not so bad because he doesn't have access to national security secrets? This guy, should he win, would be able to dictate foreign policy, and he, nor his staff, are paying enough attention to current foreign policy to be able to figure out how they would handle it in office?
Like mightydavefish said, please, don't make excuses for them. - fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -2/+21He doesn't need to be privy to national security secrets, he just needs to read a ***** newspaper, turn on the TV, or ask one of his aides if anything interesting happened in the news today.
- nigh7dagger, on 12/06/2007, -5/+1Do you think he has time for that?
- EditorResponse, on 12/06/2007, -5/+2He should be briefed every morning by a staff of people supporting his election candidacy.
- bolognium, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1yeah, "everyone" talking about it really means pundits and politicians who don't know what they're talking about.. or have the motive to deceive the fools out there..
intelligence community professionals have been saying otherwise - you just have to actually research the stuff to hear their voices.. this is not news at all.
- phnx0221, on 12/06/2007, -4/+9So bloggers and newspapers can find out about this, or get an inkling of it, and a person who is actively running as a candidate for the presidency has no idea?! And that's not so bad because he doesn't have access to national security secrets? This guy, should he win, would be able to dictate foreign policy, and he, nor his staff, are paying enough attention to current foreign policy to be able to figure out how they would handle it in office?
- Nanellen, on 12/06/2007, -21/+4Everyone has been talking about Iran getting the bomb sooner rather than later. This NIE report was kept under wraps and then suddenly sprung. Mike Huckabee isn't privy to National Security secrets.
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -4/+17Then maybe the president should read the New Yorker since they reported on it a year ago.
- DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/06/2007, -7/+2So why then, if it has been around for a year, is it a breaking story now?
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -2/+8Because it wasn't officially confirmed until the report was made public. That shouldn't matter to people on the inside who have access to classified info and know what's going on.
- subterfuge, on 12/06/2007, -3/+2Iran stopped its nuclear arms program in 2003. it's not breaking news.
- EditorResponse, on 12/06/2007, -7/+2Iran has NOT stopped attempting to get an atomic weapon. That is the entire point. They have stopped trying to acquire parts they have ALREADY OBTAINED.
Paste together next two lines for URL.
www.dw-world.de/dw/function/0,,12215_cid_2989419,00.html?
maca=en-rss-en-all-1573-rdf
News | 12.06.2007 | 00:00 UTC
Iran seeking 50,000 nuclear centrifuges
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called a US intelligence estimate on Tehran's nuclear programme a "great victory", adding that Iran is now seeking 50,000 centrifuges to enrich uranium. Earlier, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice repeated warnings by US President George W. Bush that Iran remains a nuclear threat despite a new US intelligence report that Tehran suspended its secret nuclear weapons programme in 2003. The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, Mohamed El-Baradei, has suggested the US study vindicates Iran "somewhat" and offered Tehran an opportunity to resolve the crisis over its atomic programme.
-----------------
Iran gives IAEA nuclear blueprints in attempt to ward off sanctions
Paste together next two lines for URL.
www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1192380808635
&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
After years of stonewalling, Iran has given the UN nuclear agency blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday, in an apparent concession meant to head off the threat of new UN sanctions.
But the diplomats said Teheran has failed to meet other requests made by the International Atomic Energy Agency in its attempts to end nearly two decades of nuclear secrecy on the part of the Islamic Republic.
-----------------
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071114/ap_on_re_eu/nuclear_iran
VIENNA, Austria - Iran has met a key demand of the U.N. nuclear agency, handing over long-sought blueprints showing how to mold uranium metal into the shape of warheads, diplomats said Tuesday.
Both the IAEA and other experts have categorized the instructions outlined in the blueprints as having no value outside of a nuclear weapons program.
Senior IAEA officials were refused interviews with at least two top Iranian nuclear officials suspected of possible involvement in a weapons program, they said. One was the leader of a physics laboratory at Lavizan, outside Tehran, which was razed before the agency had a chance to investigate activities there. The other was in charge of developing Iran's centrifuges, used to enrich uranium.
- EditorResponse, on 12/06/2007, -7/+2Iran has NOT stopped attempting to get an atomic weapon. That is the entire point. They have stopped trying to acquire parts they have ALREADY OBTAINED.
- Chongo, on 12/06/2007, -2/+2It sounds like you have the attitude of "Well, come on, this is government, sometimes it just takes a little while to filter down to the right people". I'm sick of that mentality... If frickin NPR knows about it then so should ANY government head
- joshblufs, on 12/06/2007, -2/+2Hmmmm potential War with Iran.... could lead to world war 3.... nuclear holocaust... Most powerful man on planet with his finger on the button does not know about most important national intelligence report concerning said holocaust until after I do.... a day or 2 after........ yeah nothing to worry about there.
- mightydavefish, on 12/06/2007, -6/+37Give us a break.
- MoniqueMoniCat, on 12/06/2007, -40/+6Wow, another tail sniffer: Politico’s David Paul Kuhn.
When are men going to be men? I find it very queer to see this type of stalking and tail-sniffing going on. Get with the REAL news dudes.
Honestly, the Iran thing is breaking news and when you're out there on the campaign trail news can take a little longer to get around.
All this obsessive digging of what is not even dirt on a candidate is ridiculous, but the implications are basically just plain tail sniffing.
This is really petty, like Clinton bagging on Obama for writing something in kindergarten.- TantrooM, on 12/06/2007, -2/+12Kucinich Referenced the NIE when trying to impeach Chaney... in case you missed it.
- Destardi, on 12/06/2007, -0/+2The only thing "queer" here is how you can dismiss a PRESIDENTIAL FREAKING CANDIDATE's ignorance of NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES.
You DO NOT scare the populace with words like WORLD WAR III and NOT have knowledge of the NIE report; how much of a sheeple are you?
- ClassySassy, on 12/06/2007, -27/+13I agree! Some ppl just have to make it up or twist it up and try to make it good enough to print. So what if Mike hasn't heard of something that just hit the news. We just hope Bush knows about it.And it shows just how little Billary is to pick out the Obama thing in kindergarten. Man, when you are scared, you will do anything to slam the others. Fasten you seat belts boys, it's gonna be a bumpy ride!! It's just getting started. I hate the mud slinging--who ever does it should have to drop out!! New rule! I'm ClassySassy and I approve this message.
- Flamancot, on 12/06/2007, -2/+6No mud-slinging?? What kind of American are you?
- Djharlock, on 12/06/2007, -7/+1He sounds like someone who doesn't have his head up his ass and is willing to make the well needed strides that our country needs.
- erkokite, on 12/06/2007, -2/+12Huckabee is a government official. He is a presidential candidate. This is a very important document in relation to US foreign policy, which is something that a presidential candidate should be very well acquainted. This is pretty shocking.
- ScottyQuest, on 12/06/2007, -2/+3ClassySassy, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent comment were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it. I award you no Diggs, and may God have mercy on your soul.
- Flamancot, on 12/06/2007, -2/+6No mud-slinging?? What kind of American are you?
- SeethisPass, on 12/06/2007, -4/+37You'd think that the candidates would have a virtually live feed on all of the important events as they come up. You'd be expecting too much.
- phnx0221, on 12/06/2007, -3/+16Especially since it is those very positions, that they seem to be campaigning on. You know, foreign policy, domestic policy, national security, those sorts of things...
It wouldn't be that hard for one or two campaign staffers to do use a search engine for news stories to see what's current.- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -2/+9You don't even need campaign staffers. A chimp that's trained to turn on the radio would suffice.
- phnx0221, on 12/06/2007, -3/+16Especially since it is those very positions, that they seem to be campaigning on. You know, foreign policy, domestic policy, national security, those sorts of things...
- WTC7WasPulled, on 12/06/2007, -27/+15What a cluster *****. Go spend more time in the gym there slim and leave the Presidency to Ron Paul.
Ron Paul 2008!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com- Flamancot, on 12/06/2007, -9/+4I hate, hate, hate Peter Pa--- Ron Paul.
- Djharlock, on 12/06/2007, -5/+2I concur
- EarlOfLade, on 12/06/2007, -2/+3You need to read http://iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=229870
- Flamancot, on 12/06/2007, -9/+4I hate, hate, hate Peter Pa--- Ron Paul.
- DRINKxREDxBULL, on 12/06/2007, -6/+34Don't these guys get briefed on recent events at least once a day? I know they don't have time to read digg, the NYT, watch CNN/Fox, and read blogs for 5 hours day, but isn't that what interns are for?
I was listening to the Dem debate on NPR yesterday, and all the candidates there knew about it.- mattw, on 12/06/2007, -8/+5A debate where they are given the questions ahead of time?
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -3/+2They brought it up on their own without being asked specifically about it.
- dasbebe, on 12/06/2007, -1/+3No, they weren't.
- mattw, on 12/06/2007, -1/+3@dasbebe: Are you sure?
@fonebone2: If you look at the transcripts (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story ... it was an official question asked by the moderator Robert Siegel.- mattw, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1Sorry, I don't know how to use DIGG's comment system to add links.
NPR's .org website + '/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16898435'
- mattw, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1Sorry, I don't know how to use DIGG's comment system to add links.
- mattw, on 12/06/2007, -8/+5A debate where they are given the questions ahead of time?
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -30/+4ITS A ***** REPORT, contaminated by political hacks STOP posting it every second left wing. WAIT UNTIL THE DETAILS COME OUT which is why the MSM is in such a hurry to get their point of view in people minds
- ScottoGato, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4The MSM is trying to restore what little credibility that they have left. They've noticed the drop in ratings for the media that supports the Bush Administration and whatever stories they make up.
- mille716, on 12/06/2007, -3/+14That "*****" report is the most authoritative report on what 16 US intelligence agencies believe. But sure, Bush and Cheney wouldn't lie about intelligence to lead us into war...Its all those political hacks working the intelligence agencies.
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -6/+4Its an estimate you dumb *****, by its very nature it is not fact you stupid left wing goon
- nuvem, on 12/06/2007, -4/+8Right, much better to be a right wing goon. If the report disagrees, it's just an estimate! If the report agrees, it's hard evidence produced by 16 US intelligence agencies, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot! Win-win!
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -4/+4What happened in 03 is they got the ***** scared out of them by the invasion in Iraq, thats what your dem buddies didn't want to say
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -6/+4Its an estimate you dumb *****, by its very nature it is not fact you stupid left wing goon
- Loulou07, on 12/06/2007, -3/+12It is a bs report because it does not go your way. The pro war way. You are the hacks who kept it under cover for a year to push your criminal traitorous agenda. Some people in the CIA must be getting fed up with looser like you.
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -1/+6All 16 US intelligence agencies are run by political hacks? You'd think Bush would have done a better job of managing things since 9/11. Did he just up and appoint a bunch of his political enemies to run the whole show?
- MacEnvy, on 12/06/2007, -1/+2What are you saying? That the head of the Arabian Horse Association isn't qualified to run a spy agency? Pssh, that's what the terrorists WANT you to think.
- ColonelJessup, on 12/06/2007, -4/+1But if this report said "Iran actively seeking nuclear weapons", then of course it would be because Bush and Cheney had cooked the report. Either way, it is *****.
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -3/+6The fact that it goes against what the president has been saying is actually circumstantial evidence of its accuracy, since it's highly unlikely that all 16 intelligence agencies would disagree with him unless they had facts to back them up.
- Destardi, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Sir...you're using false logic. Bush shouldn't have lied to begin with about a little country called IRAQ, then intentionally tied it to 9/11. Ever hear the story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf? Shove it.
At one point in American history, Americans could trust their President somewhat; it's not our fault that we distrust anything the shrub says.
Give me a reason to respect him, and I will...it's too late now.
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -6/+3All of which got India, Pakistan, Syrian, Libyan, N Korean and Iranian nuclear intentions wrong, I would not trust the CIA, DIA, NSA to ***** in a bag, they are political branches who have lost all ability to get real intel, AND now you dumb ***** want me to believe Iran dose not have nuclear intentions?
- MacEnvy, on 12/06/2007, -3/+5If they're so very political, why would they come out with a report contradicting the head of their party? You're not being consistent in your criticism.
- Krabid, on 12/06/2007, -15/+8How many stories can we see from the same site in one day? You may as well just submit the thinkprogress.org homepage and save the spam.
- big65rich, on 12/06/2007, -14/+5He has no money and therefore a small staff, yes he should have read the paper this morning, but c'mon...this doesn't mean he's George Bush
- jerryparid, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4The candidates are not suppose to follow the news? Are the staff suppose to tell what the candidate what is important?
This system worked very well under the Bush regime. /s - Destardi, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1he's a PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.
Basically...this makes him uninquisitive...but hey! He slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night!
- jerryparid, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4The candidates are not suppose to follow the news? Are the staff suppose to tell what the candidate what is important?
- fonebone2, on 12/06/2007, -9/+10LOL @ the National Review blaming Huckabee's ignorance on his not having "teams of advisors." Do Republicans need that much help staying informed on basic news items?
- nastronomical, on 12/06/2007, -26/+6** REPORT IS A FRAUD***
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/1 ...
NIE: An Abrupt About-Face
As many recognize, the latest NIE on Iran’s nuclear weapons program directly contradicts what the U.S. Intelligence Community was saying just two years previously. And it appears that this about-face was very recent. How recent?
Consider that on July 11, 2007, roughly four or so months prior to the most recent NIE’s publication, Deputy Director of Analysis Thomas Fingar gave the following testimony before the House Armed Services Committee (emphasis added):
Iran and North Korea are the states of most concern to us. The United States’ concerns about Iran are shared by many nations, including many of Iran’s neighbors. Iran is continuing to pursue uranium enrichment and has shown more interest in protracting negotiations and working to delay and diminish the impact of UNSC sanctions than in reaching an acceptable diplomatic solution. We assess that Tehran is determined to develop nuclear weapons--despite its international obligations and international pressure. This is a grave concern to the other countries in the region whose security would be threatened should Iran acquire nuclear weapons.
This paragraph appeared under the subheading: "Iran Assessed As Determined to Develop Nuclear Weapons." And the entirety of Fingar’s 22-page testimony was labeled "Information as of July 11, 2007." No part of it is consistent with the latest NIE, in which our spooks tell us Iran suspended its covert nuclear weapons program in 2003 "primarily in response to international pressure" and they "do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."
The inconsistencies are more troubling when we realize that, according to the Wall Street Journal, Thomas Fingar is one of the three officials who were responsible for crafting the latest NIE. The Journal cites "an intelligence source" as describing Fingar and his two colleagues as "hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials." (The New York Sun drew attention to one of Fingar’s colleagues yesterday.)
So, if it is true that Dr. Fingar played a leading role in crafting this latest NIE, then we are left with serious questions:
Why did your opinion change so drastically in just four months time?
Is the new intelligence or analysis really that good? Is it good enough to overturn your previous assessments? Or, has it never really been good enough to make a definitive assessment at all?
Did your political or ideological leanings, or your policy preferences, or those of your colleagues, influence your opinion in any way?
Many in the mainstream press have been willing to cite this latest NIE unquestioningly. Perhaps they should start asking some pointed questions. (Don’t hold your breath.)- goffy59, on 12/06/2007, -3/+11shut up tool.
- fpsbm, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1They buried you! I guess they can't handle to truth.
- pricees, on 12/06/2007, -6/+20His voting base thinks Iran was his answer to how he lost weight.
- fpsbm, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1This doesn't make any sense. Try again with something logical.
- sb66, on 12/06/2007, -10/+16What an idiot. Who wants a president who knows less than the average digger!
- EarlOfLade, on 12/06/2007, -4/+10Americans? I mean, they put Bush in the White House and he is a pretty average idiot!
- ralphie81, on 12/06/2007, -6/+2Given what the average digger apparently "knows", I do.
- EarlOfLade, on 12/06/2007, -4/+10Americans? I mean, they put Bush in the White House and he is a pretty average idiot!
- Flamancot, on 12/06/2007, -9/+8Huckabee is a tool - he will not win, and nobody needs to get excited about what he does and does not know. A ***** minister. I don't mean to be insensitive, but after Bush, sword of God?! Puh-leaze, this guy needs to go back to bed.. or something?
- sb66, on 12/06/2007, -3/+3hey having clerics in charge works for Iran - why not the USA?
- insomniac8400, on 12/06/2007, -1/+3If paul can't get to the top of the GOP, Huckabee better win. We can't risk another bush(i.e. Mitt, Rudy, Fred) in the white house no matter how much of a sure thing Obama is. Remember Bush was voted into office a second time even after everyone knew he was corrupt. Voters are stupid.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 12/06/2007, -14/+9I'm a Ron Paul supporter, and not a huge Huckabee supporter. That said, I don't think it is that bad that he didn't know about it. There is important news coming out every day, and much of it ends up being false. He should know about it eventually, especially before a debate or something, but I don't expect anyone to know about everything the second it hits the "news". Especially with our MSM, a lot of it turns out to be garbage that is not worth the braincells to absorb.
- joshblufs, on 12/06/2007, -3/+6Yeah ignoring the National Intelligence Estimate. Surely its main stream media propaganda, not like the crown jewel of the yearly intelligence community's output or anything. Clearly we need to elect a deep thinker like you...
- TsuruchiBrian, on 12/06/2007, -0/+2There is a difference between "not knowing about it yet" and "ignoring it"
There is a difference between "keeping current with news" and "deep thinking"
There is a difference between "making a comment on Digg" and "running for president"
- TsuruchiBrian, on 12/06/2007, -0/+2There is a difference between "not knowing about it yet" and "ignoring it"
- joshblufs, on 12/06/2007, -3/+6Yeah ignoring the National Intelligence Estimate. Surely its main stream media propaganda, not like the crown jewel of the yearly intelligence community's output or anything. Clearly we need to elect a deep thinker like you...
- miamiman84, on 12/06/2007, -16/+4SOoooo, what does Iran NIE stand for?? Ha-ha, But seriously, If I have to see one more post on digg that has "Ron Paul 08" im going to stop wasting my time on this site. What relevance does your political preference have to do with this post. WE all ready know that 90% of people on here F*ck'in support him, what does that have to do with the issues here. Say something a little more intelligent please. Digg me down you liberal pricks!!!!
- sb66, on 12/06/2007, -0/+14LOL now the right wing big government wackos are calling Ron Paul supporters LIBERALS as an insult!
As a real liberal I think thats ***** hilarious.- hittnrun, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1I think RP supporters are libs. Anyone with a brain remembers Ross Perot and how he gave us Clinton. Don't let Ron Paul give us ANOTHER Clinton. We can't afford it.
- ahoy, on 12/06/2007, -3/+11please don't associate Ron Paul with liberals, for the liberals sake.
- bolognium, on 12/06/2007, -1/+5don't let the door hit you in the ass...
- ShogunWarPig, on 12/06/2007, -5/+5Ron Paul 2008
- orangefly, on 12/06/2007, -5/+3Ron Paul 08 and 12
- erkokite, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1I'm gonna pistol whip the next person who says shenanigans.
- sb66, on 12/06/2007, -0/+14LOL now the right wing big government wackos are calling Ron Paul supporters LIBERALS as an insult!
- Dotnetsky, on 12/06/2007, -14/+4There is something VERY fishy about this NIE thing when the Israelis insist that Iran continues to be a threat and state emphatically that they do not trust the NIE report.
- bolognium, on 12/06/2007, -3/+5i think the fishy-ness is coming from the israelis and neo-cons..
- RoyalPwner, on 12/06/2007, -9/+25Well, Huckabee is no longer a serious candidate.
- onanobj, on 08/07/2008, -1/+2Really? He's leading the polls in Iowa.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/presi ... - ralphie81, on 12/06/2007, -2/+3Kind of like Hillary is no longer a serious candidate after her god-awful performance in the debates a month ago? Riiight...this won't matter folks.
- AtWorkSurfer, on 12/06/2007, -0/+0Just like Guiliani is no longer a serious candidate, ever since an article about his Hamptons getaways made it to the front page of Digg last week and the submitter declared his candidacy dead.
- blackinthmiddle, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1I'm seem to recall Bush looking even more clueless during his first presidential run. Remember the interview where he was asked to name five foreign leaders and couldn't? Bottom line, if dumb dumb Bush can get elected twice, Huckabee can overcome this obvious gaffe. Then again, he has no chance of winning anyway, so who cares?
- onanobj, on 08/07/2008, -1/+2Really? He's leading the polls in Iowa.
- Kikinou, on 12/06/2007, -11/+3Why would he have been briefed? He's a civilian, like us.
- unclerichard, on 12/06/2007, -1/+10Because he's running for president, you *****.
- Kikinou, on 12/06/2007, -0/+2Dude, wtf, I didn't say he shouldn't have heard of it, just that being briefed is something reserved for you know, government officials.
- adooga, on 12/06/2007, -1/+4Doesn't matter if he was briefed, he should know. I knew so why didn't he? Have I got access to better info than him?
- AtWorkSurfer, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1Since when is the concept of a "briefing" exclusive to the military?
- unclerichard, on 12/06/2007, -1/+10Because he's running for president, you *****.
- Djharlock, on 12/06/2007, -12/+6The fact Huckabee isn't concerned with Iran means he isn't spoon fed the ***** that we get on the news. He's paying attention to the real issues.
- EarlOfLade, on 12/06/2007, -4/+7Real issues? You mean like trying to get creationism into schools? Like mixing up state and church? You mean like fighting to make abortion illegal? You mean like making the country into an even bigger theocracy?
- pricees, on 12/06/2007, -4/+2I cannot fathom this country would actually by into that "compassionate conservatism" bull ***** again...
- unclerichard, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4Right. Why read the news when God tells you what to do.
- SouthsideIrish, on 12/06/2007, -3/+5Real Issues? Like sending troops into Iran is not an important issue? If he gets his news from Bible Prophecy then we are in trouble.
- EarlOfLade, on 12/06/2007, -4/+7Real issues? You mean like trying to get creationism into schools? Like mixing up state and church? You mean like fighting to make abortion illegal? You mean like making the country into an even bigger theocracy?
- totorototoro, on 12/06/2007, -5/+3He was waiting for Bush to finish reading his copy, then pass it on.
- dizilbdog, on 12/06/2007, -3/+6 Iran huh yeah I ran this morning 5 miles!!! No Mr Huckabee Iran the country oh oh right where is that again???
- pricees, on 12/06/2007, -5/+3You stole my joke son!
Ron Paul. 2008.- dizilbdog, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4 i did oh sorry man... My bad, but I'm voting for Ron Paul and all is well lol
- pricees, on 12/06/2007, -5/+3You stole my joke son!
- TantrooM, on 12/06/2007, -4/+6He don't need knowledge, he has Chuck Norris... u.u
- MrWhite7, on 12/06/2007, -4/+5Now that we know our reason for wanting to go in was incorrect I wonder if he'll advocate doing so anyway to "preserve our honor."
- ryannnn, on 12/06/2007, -3/+3This is one America, we ignore facts and intelligence together
- ryannnn, on 12/06/2007, -4/+3Stolen comment
"
Reporter: Have you heard of a Country named Iran?
Huckabee: No.
" - mrgreg, on 12/06/2007, -2/+17I suppose him saying that he hasn't heard of it is somewhat explainable, but this is what makes this article really noteworthy:
"I don’t know where the intelligence is coming from that says they have suspended the program or how credible that is versus the view that they actually are expanding it"
So he refuses to believe the National Intelligence Estimate, and latch onto conspiracy theories that Iran is secretly developing WMDs? This guy is a quack.- hittnrun, on 12/06/2007, -0/+3didn't the NIE say, at one time, Iraq had WMD's???? make up your minds, rats.
- skews13, on 12/06/2007, -4/+0clueless in iran
- SocialSound1982, on 12/06/2007, -6/+4Why doesn't he just push "2" on the speed dial and ask god... If he doesn't know, then he could always dial "1" for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
- daxsymbiont, on 12/06/2007, -4/+2STOP HACKING BEES!
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -15/+3DEM AGENTS ALTERED FINDINGS BECAUSE IRAQ WAR SCARED IRAN IN 2003 forcing a shut down in the program. You ain't ever going to hear that
- xartion, on 12/06/2007, -2/+2Alright, get back in the truck Jethro
- URnotheonly1, on 12/06/2007, -2/+2go ahead and make up a bunch of ***** to try and prove it wasn't
- xartion, on 12/06/2007, -2/+2Alright, get back in the truck Jethro
- jkbowman, on 12/06/2007, -4/+5Sounds like Huckabee enjoys the office but doesn't really show up for work..
- garryw, on 12/06/2007, -5/+4The second coming of Jimmy Carter. Like Fred but worse. Meet Huck!
- Todamont, on 12/06/2007, -4/+5It was the top news story for like two days, the guy wants to be pres but obviously doesn't bother to follow internation news? Poor show, Huckabee.
- JusticeAK, on 12/06/2007, -2/+3Definitely A top Tier Candidate! He's got what it takes.
- ponderouspadre, on 12/06/2007, -5/+3Finally, somebody found a chink in the shining knight's armor. (Big flying banana tree WHOOP!!!) Now let's put them in Huckabee's shoes (or those of any other serious candidate) and see how many questions they can get a fully informed answer out for. (Very easy to take pot shots, folks. By the way, I think Huckabee claims to possess faith in God, not >perform< as God. Omniscience is not a personal claim or standard you can hold him to.)
- ricquejon, on 12/06/2007, -6/+9From what I heard in the past debates I once again see that
Ron Paul was right on Iran. He warned us after 9/11, before the Iraq war about going to war with Iraq.
Since HUCKABEE wants to place us under an Evangelical Taliban, I thought I would share with you the latest neo-con rewrite of Biblical history:
The Neo-cons now claim that it was Al Qaeda that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, not God. The Neo-cons claim that the cities were destroyed not because the people engaged in sodomy and other immoral acts, no, it was because “they were prosperous and free”. The Neo-cons cite some obscure passage known only to them as “Giuliani 9:11″ to support their claims.- hittnrun, on 12/06/2007, -0/+3your rhetoric is garbage.
- dickenshit, on 12/06/2007, -0/+3Perhaps more disturbing: http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/1 ...
- thecoolestguy, on 12/06/2007, -1/+2perhaps more disturbing is that another extremist is trying to push for a violent confrontation with Iran for the sake of the Bush cabal.
- daxsymbiont, on 12/06/2007, -3/+1HACK A BEE.
YOU CAn. - babcat, on 12/06/2007, -3/+6Huckabee is a warmongering big government high taxing prohibitionist.
1) He does not want to reduce the size of government. He has not said ONCE that he would want the Federal Government to abide by the Constitution. For example, he would not do anything about the UNCONSTITUTIONAL alphabet agencies that should NOT EXIST according to the 10th amendment!
2) He supports the insane "war on drugs" and wants to ban cigarettes! He does not support YOUR RIGHT to control YOUR OWN BODY!
3) He does not desire to eliminate the IRS and replace it with nothing. He wants to replace it with HUGE 23% sales tax!
4) He does not desire to abolish the unconstitutional Federal Reserve. This means he does not support REAL money and supports the print of money from thin air.
5) He supports the War in Iraq and would support an attack on Iran.
The fact of the matter is that he is not a small government candidate.
The only small government candidate is RON PAUL.- pinchecabron, on 12/06/2007, -2/+0Well, how about all you 'gun'-ho United Statesians who want change vote for someone who isn't a dangerously double-edged sword.
/Ralph Nader 2008 - hittnrun, on 12/06/2007, -0/+23) If you have your entire paycheck for use (Minus s/s & medicaid), 23% isn't *****! Not to mention the paper work you (or your "rents") won't have to do. How much do you (or your 'rents) pay in taxes now??? If you need to know how to figure it up, just ask. I'm always interested in helping those who need it. I bet its atleast 23% of your (their) pay. Probably more. Oh, and the less you spend, the less taxes you pay. cool.
- pinchecabron, on 12/06/2007, -2/+0Well, how about all you 'gun'-ho United Statesians who want change vote for someone who isn't a dangerously double-edged sword.
- thewump, on 12/06/2007, -1/+5He probably doesn't realize that if you want to stay on top of US news, all you need is the BBC and Digg.
- Trindle, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1Look I don't even like the guy as a politician but I don't understand people jumping down his throat because he doesn't know where the facts of the report came from. Christ, I hope my president has the common sense to admit when he doesn't know something and instead asks a ***** expert.
- ElumEnopee, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4I live in Arkansas. Huckabee was Governor of Arkansas. We do not want Huckabee as President.
- redmann50, on 12/06/2007, -3/+4I wonder if Jesus will beam Huck up as a fat bastard or in the new slim version at the rapture. If I ever run into ***** in a dark alley, I swear I willl slip him something hard after I choke him out.
- Homerr, on 12/06/2007, -0/+2In fairness to Huckabee, Bush doesn't seem to care what the NIE says and he's the pres.
- smacksaw, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1These answer like "I'm not mad at anybody" and "I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night"...these have more comedy potential than Rudy and 9/11. I am calling my shot now: we are going to get some fantastic comedy out of this guy and his benign non-answers. If he were any more full of ***** he'd have Rudy Giuliani coming out of his *****.
- graeh, on 12/06/2007, -0/+3I saw him interviewed on TDS a while back as others may have and he came across as a very sincere, likeable and pragmatic guy.
I'm not up for his emphasis on religion, at all, but he does not seem stupid, and his way of practising his religion is the 'right way' compared to others who only give it lip service.
It is surprising that all candidates aren't completely across events of this nature however - considering even lay people like us have a passing knowledge of it. - reaganite, on 12/06/2007, -2/+1the huckster is a moron. how does he not know anything about this report? let's not as a nation elect another person from Hope AR
- Enfilade, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Huckabee is the most dangerous and disgusting candidate of the whole lot. A vote for him is a vote for sending this country back in time to being a theocratic militant state.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by