What is Digg?295 Comments
- duke_nate, on 08/20/2008, -31/+170Its a sad day in america when our choices are a super left socialist, and a corporatist who claims to be a republican. They probobly dont want anyone else in the debates because Bob would make them look like idiots with nothing but common sense.
- kemp34, on 08/20/2008, -10/+131Open the damn debates. It's a no brainer.
- inactive, on 08/20/2008, -10/+98I see we have some "serious" poli-mathematicians aboard this morn. Let's cast aside personal political cand choices fer a sec and consider why it might serve the Amer public to hear all the declared cands' opinions`n´planks: 1)A quick review of Amer pol history shows two-party elections can be easily fractured into real & varied choices. 2)Despite the shrieking of Dems/Repubs, there are cands who offer real change fr/biz-as-usual & who ought rightfully to be heard. Are we so fearful of allowing the Amer political landscape to be a marketplace of ideas? Let the electorate decide!
- Minarchian, on 08/20/2008, -9/+93**What in the world for? Millions of Americans would be dangerously exposed to another point of view. How could busy voters possibly decide among three or even four candidates? Is that what presidential campaigns have come down to now? A diversity of opinion?
Whatever happened to old-fashioned criteria like who has the most money or who looks prettiest on TV?**
That quote from the article is what many party extremists are actually thinking.
By some of the comments here it seems obvious there are people with real fear of Barr getting on the stage with the two goons in the pockets of corporations. The fear of exposing the lies of their favorite hero is real. - RockinRuby, on 08/20/2008, -8/+74Bob Barr should be heard by all Americans in the debates despite attempts by the media and the two party system to stifle his voice on the issues.
- inactive, on 08/20/2008, -5/+69If you are on enough ballots to "mathematically" win the election, you should be in the debate regardless of poll numbers.
- VigRoco, on 08/20/2008, -5/+54Every ignorant, TV watching American deserves to know that they have a real choice besides Democrat or Republican. Thanks corporate media for keeping us stupid!
- inactive, on 08/20/2008, -6/+55Obama doesn't want him to speak either. When's the last time you heard him talking about including other parties? He's not about change. Quit fooling yourself.
- ThinkOutTheBox, on 08/20/2008, -3/+44He should be allowed in the debates and if he not allowed in the debates then everybody needs to take a step back and ask yourself the question, "Who is the government really out here to serve?" If Barr or any other candidate that qualifies to be on the ballot and is on the ballot to run for president, those people should be allowed to debate. It doesn't matter if they are irrelevant or not if they are going to be on the ballot then America has the right to hear what they has to say.
- Hetman, on 08/20/2008, -4/+45You know like I always say. The republicans and democrats can only agree on 1 thing and that is their is no way possible that an independent should have a voice or a chance of winning the election. If that does not anger you I do not know what will. If independence are so pathetic they should easily be able to out debate them on any of their policies.
- StingingNettle, on 08/20/2008, -12/+52Let Cynthia in there as well. I'm so sick of Dems and Republicans. Anything else at this point would be real change.
- btschul, on 08/20/2008, -4/+38I believe you have to have 15% to get into the debates, and last I heard Barr was at 8%. Does anyone know where he is now? Also, you know you are doing well when another candidate sues to have you taken off the ballot:
You can tell we are gaining momentum when the Democrats and Republicans work so hard to keep Bob Barr out of the media and off the ballot. Over the weekend, the Saddleback Church kept Bob out of their forum in California - in what is a clear violation of McCain/Feingold campaign finance laws.
Now, a Pennsylvania Republican Party official working on behalf of John McCain has filed a lawsuit to knock Bob Barr off the ballot in the Keystone state. This action is deplorable and we need to make sure every American knows what is going on, as this is probably just the tip of the iceberg of what is to come next.
This action is especially ironic.
Who said:
''We all know that the Berlin wall is down . . . People should be able to get
on the ballot in states . . . Everybody knows that I am a legitimate candidate.
I should be on the ballot.''
That would be Senator John McCain who was the victim of similar shenanigans in 2000 when he was trying to get on the New York Republican Primary ballot.
Now, in a blatantly hypocritical move, he's using the same tactics to stop Pennsylvania voters from having the chance to cast a ballot for Bob Barr.
Of course, this action doesn't even acknowledge that for Bob Barr to get on the ballot required many more signatures than it took for McCain to get on the primary ballot, and to get on the ballot in November required McCain to turn in ZERO signatures. - Echota, on 01/05/2009, -19/+52What is everyone afraid of? Let Barr speak!
I'm 100% Obama and nothing Barr has to say will sway me!
On the other hand I can understand why McCains bunch wouldn't want him to.
Barr would probably show a lot more knowledge and intellingence then McCain. - Pauleon, on 08/21/2008, -11/+41Obama has stated time and again that he favors the idea of "equitable wealth distribution." One can not bring this about without forcing people to part with their property. When governments do this, it is usually through high taxes and redistribution programs. When government determines how much of your own wealth you can keep, it is considered by most people to be a form of socialism. I don't know what super left really is anymore, given that almost every politician these days is some form of leftist, but if a socialist like Obama can accuse republicans of being right wing with a straight face, I guess that would make him super left. It's rather elementary. When asked what any solution to any problem is, Obama will unceasingly choose a solution that involves government. He will leave no social problem to private minds or entities. That's a textbook definition of socialist. Do you need more explanation?
- oseik, on 08/21/2008, -0/+30I am NOT a Bob Barr supporter but I think he absolutely should be in on the debates. Voters need to see all the serious alternatives -- and yes, even Nader.
- mfc5200, on 08/21/2008, -1/+26They made it harder to get into the debates ever since Perot got into them. His ratings sky rocketed after that debate and I don't think the establishment ever wants to see a third party ever do that again.
- latinjones, on 08/21/2008, -2/+24We really need a third choice. Let's give a third party candidate a chance. We gave the wii a chance when analysts said there wasn't room in the video game market for 3 consoles.....
Bob Barr for advanced motion sensing controls in 08!!! - desotohawk, on 08/21/2008, -0/+20democrat or republican two sides of the same coin. each side takes their turn stripping our rights liberty and freedoms. its time for real change. vote libertarian
- StingingNettle, on 08/20/2008, -3/+21Maybe they never poll that much because they aren't ever allowed in the debates. Looks like we got a chicken and the egg thing going here.
- inactive, on 08/21/2008, -2/+18Our country would be much better served with Libertarians and Greens being the two major parties.
- jackp0t789, on 08/21/2008, -0/+16What?! This guy wants to allow the oppinion of a party that isnt one of the two major power holding parties to be heard nationaly?! What does he think this is a representative democracy?!
- Pixelpaws, on 08/21/2008, -1/+16Please, please, do us a favor and write out the words. You have some good points but it's painful reading it in the way you've written it.
- Minarchian, on 08/20/2008, -4/+18Cry me a river.
Your inane rants belies your true desire to limit the availability of differing ideas.
You're a control freak that wants the status quo to remain in place.
Barr is the only candidate that will bring about change. You may love big government, but the number of those who think (or is it non-think) like you are shrinking. Thank God. - inactive, on 08/21/2008, -0/+14Barr would put both those big-spending, big-government turkeys on ice. He'd eat McBama for breakfast and wash it down with whiskey.
- inactive, on 08/20/2008, -8/+22You get what you deserve. buried beyond hope of ever getting noticed.
- inactive, on 08/20/2008, -3/+16While I wouldn't hesitate to run over CAMcK w/my ol' Shovelhead—`ceptin' I don't want to get her guts on my scooter's paint`n´chrome!—I agree w/you on this. Let ALL the declared cands debate!
- HxChris91, on 08/21/2008, -0/+13The Founding Fathers of this country are rolling over in their graves... the fact that you live in America, a country that stands for true liberty and freedom (although that is no longer evident), and you want to throw away your liberties and freedoms to some money grubbing politician bent on expanding government to the point of bankruptcy is disgusting...go move to China.
- shutaro, on 08/20/2008, -7/+19RRRRR!!! BARR ANGRY!!!
- triferlinks, on 08/21/2008, -5/+17how is it that people dont know who Bob Barr is? Its the guy from Borat that ate the cheese made from Borat's wife's breast milk
- spyd3rweb, on 08/21/2008, -0/+11I rather have Ron Paul than Bob Barr. And for the next 4 years I'm going to be rubbing it in peoples faces that they should have elected Ron Paul when they complain how ***** everything is.
- musleypope, on 08/21/2008, -3/+13Because the Dems and Repubs own everyone's vote.
- ednachman, on 08/21/2008, -4/+14Republicrats and Demicans, they are both the same, don't want to lose a competitive edge against those of differing opinions. They want to foster the idea that two political opinions are enough to make a decision for electing a President.
- Qyasogk, on 08/21/2008, -7/+17I know I'm totally wasting my breath, but here goes anyway....
ALL taxes are wealth distribution. Government is ALREADY determining how much of your money you can keep. Your Republican buddies lowered your taxes sure, they gave you some of your money back, BUT THEN THEY TOOK YOUR CREDIT CARDS AND MAXED ALL OF THEM OUT. That's not small government, the MORONIC government.
All of us favor some sort of socialism. Who wants to read about some poor soul who needs emergency medical care but is tossed out of the hospital because he doesn't have insurance? When a hurricane destroys a vast swath of Louisiana, we want our government to DO something about it.
Don't confuse socialism with communism. And it doesn't matter whether you've got an authoritarian democracy, or an authoritarian theocracy or an authoritarian communist government. All of these governments are dictatorships. - inactive, on 08/21/2008, -16/+26Explain how Obama is a super left socialist.
- makenshin, on 08/20/2008, -4/+14Well, for the reason stated, I can comfortably vote Barr. If Barr loses, I already know Obama will win, especially with most of the vote that would have gone to the main two candidates, come out of McCain.
And you may be right. If a new country is made, should we keep the same name and just pronounce it U-Sa?
No, it isnt too late to save the USA, it is just that it will take a lot of work and time to undo the damage of (well, i'd like to say last 100 years, but can't. That would take a couple hundred years) the last 8 years. - hpvforum, on 08/21/2008, -3/+13are you drunk? or am i?
- SquigglyP, on 08/21/2008, -1/+10you assume too much from Vig's comment. He didn't say every american who watched TV is ignorant, he said every ignorant person who watches TV deserves blah blah blah.
People like you make me sick. You don't care about the country, you only care about winning. You want your horse to win, and you can't see the ***** going on right in front of your face, or you deny it ever happened. I really don't understand how people can stomach the idea of voting for McCain after the past 8 miserable years this country has had. You've got a huge majority of people claiming that they think Bush sucks, but apparently a large percentage of those people are claiming to be McCain supporters. How the ***** is that possible? McCain has demonstrated that he will do the exact same ***** Bush has done, and even made several statements that make it sound like Bush would be a BETTER president.
So what is it. What is it about McCain that you are so excited about? Why do you want McCain to win so badly? I would really like to know. I think you might have some mental health issues or something. - skews13, on 08/21/2008, -1/+10to borrow an old quote, "your entitled to your own opinion but your not entitled to your own facts".
- chopsky, on 08/21/2008, -4/+13Obviously. Ending government handouts to corporations is actually a Capitalist move. Capitalists believe in a seperation between state and economy.
Unfortunately however, Obama is definitely a socialist. There's no 2 ways about it.
For every step he takes to reduce government, he takes 10 steps to increase government. - inactive, on 08/20/2008, -12/+21Don't lie, you are not a Libertarian that is voting for Obama. You are a democrat voting for Obama.
- tnoy, on 08/21/2008, -0/+9Gauge it on ballot access.
If you're on 40 state ballots, you're in. - Nimda11, on 08/21/2008, -0/+8freedom whiskey....
- inactive, on 08/21/2008, -3/+11Ron Paul is not endorsing Barr.
- JigoroKano, on 08/21/2008, -4/+12If we had instant runoff voting, being Nadered wouldn't even be a possibility.
And the primaries wouldn't be a necessary.
When you say things like that, you are choosing short term gains over long term gains.
We have to fight tooth and nail for every inch of ground we can gain against the 2 part duopoly.
Consider that America is barely more democratic than China or Cuba with their 1 party monopolies. - btschul, on 08/21/2008, -0/+6Your information is slightly flawed.
- btschul, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7I don't know. Apparently the same time as the smart, freedom loving LIBERTARIAN crew, since that's what Barr is.
- throop77, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7No, its more important to vote for whom you believe in. Otherwise, you are just one of the herd.
- Pixelpaws, on 08/21/2008, -1/+8I'm all for letting anyone into the debates that meets two criteria
1. They must be on the ballot or registered as a write-in choice in all 50 states and Washington D.C.
2. They must poll at three percent or better. This would exclude the truly out-there candidates but still allow the less mainstream candidates to have a chance at the national stage. - forceuser, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7Protip: Obama won't change much.
- Izult, on 08/21/2008, -0/+7Who makes those kinds of rules and why the hell do we continue to follow them? And who the hell says we must continue to follow them? This is OUR choice to make not the Media's. This government is supposed to be for we the people remember? The media should just cover events not be trying to play the king maker part.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 300 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