What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
273 Comments
- inactive, on 06/29/2008, -39/+145- Obama 2 years ago: "You should always assume that when I cast a vote or make a statement it is because it is what I believe in."
- Obama this past week stated that he supports a FISA bill that strips you of your 4th Amendment rights.
- Conclusion: Obama doesn't give a damn about your Civil Liberties.
I think it's alarming that some people are forming a Cult of Personality around Obama. Especially given the extraordinary powers that the President and the Executive Branch have been granted in post 9/11 America. - hamobu, on 06/29/2008, -51/+108I just realized that Obama has a same vague answer on every issue:
While *insert downside* it is important that *insert upside* - SaraLiberty, on 08/16/2008, -18/+68Mr. Obama also voted to re-authorize the "Patriot Act" via HR 3199. A "YES" vote to adopt a "conference report" that extends the authority of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to conduct "roving wiretaps" and 'access "certain business records" through December 31, 2009, and makes the remaining 14 provisions of the "Patriot Act" *permanent*. What *****. America has a ***** CONSTITUTION we don't need a fascist "Patriot Act" for the elite. Obama voted "YES" on HR 2360: the "Homeland Security Department FY 2006 Appropriations Act", a funding bill that appropriates **$34.55 billion** for the unconstitutional, Nazi-esque "Department of Homeland Security." For what? Get rid of this taxpayer funded waste already it's not doing us a single bit of good. Meanwhile, Americas borders and ports remain WIDE OPEN, unsecured and completely unprotected. Obama also voted "YES" on S 2248: "FISA Amendments Act of 2007" an amendment that states that the so-called 'Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act" is the exclusive means by which surveillance can be conducted on **domestic** wire, oral, or electronic communications. Warrant-less spying on American citizens by the government is now LEGAL.
Does this sound like a man who is concerned about respecting our individual freedoms? Is this a president who will defend Americas precious Constitution? Is he the one to protect our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution as Americans? Is this a person who will fight to protect our Bill of Rights, fight for our privacy rights as American citizens?
Doh.
Obama initially promised to support repealing the "Patriot Act", then voted to extend it. WTF kind of BULL ***** is that. Some consistency. Obama is no different from Clinton, McCain or any of the other bought-out self-serving OWNED by greater masters and "special interests" lobbyist puppets in this regard. They all lie thru their teeth and sell us out just the same. Republic-rat, Demo-crap makes ZERO difference anymore. Both MSM-promoted false paradigm parties are 2 wings of the same bird. They completely fail to represent the people they are elected to serve.
Not since the infamous, wrongly named "Patriot Act" of 2001 has any bill so threatened the constitutionally guaranteed rights of American citizens. This anti-constitutional farce has already given the government too much power to spy on Americans. Now the "powers that be" got their FISA bull ***** approved they're all set to do whatever they please with ZERO accountability to existing laws they're above it all. And accomplice-Telco corporations are immune from lawsuits and court proceedings. How convenient.
The Bush administration and a spineless congress - Republicrat and Democrap members alike - have been chipping away at hard-won U.S. civil liberties ever since the "surprise" "we never saw it coming!" 9/11 events. First, came the draconian "USA Patriot Act" of October 2001, which was rushed though congress with no protest, no outcry and virtually no debate whatsoever. Only one member of the senate spoke out against it (guess). His was a lone voice that was drowned by a shrill chorus of pro-Act voices in congress, as the Bush administration used every pressure-tactic and intimidation in the book to ensure its quick passage.
Next, along came the even more draconian “Homeland (in)Security Act” which, among other things, lumped together more than a score of US federal agencies under the umbrella of a new "Department of Homeland (in)Security" - a bureaucratic billion-dollar taxpayer funded behemoth outranked in size only by the Department of Defense.
Passed on January 23, 2002, the Hitlerian wet dream "Homeland (in)Security" Act' is arguably the most draconian, unAmerican piece of legislation in the history of the United States. Clause (a)(1) of Section 202 (Access to information”) states: “Except as otherwise directed by the President, the Secretary (of the newly created Department of Homeland Security) shall have such access as the Secretary considers necessary to all information, including reports, assessments, analyses and unevaluated intelligence relating to threats of terrorism against the United States and to other areas of responsibility assigned to the Secretary, and to all information concerning infrastructure or other vulnerabilities of the United States to terrorism, whether or not such information has been analysed , that may be collected, possessed, or prepared by any agency of the Federal Government.”
Under this blanket provision, the 'Secretary of the "Homeland (in)Security Department" has the authority to obtain just about any and every type of information relating to any individual, including information of the most personal nature.
Privacy no longer exists in America. It is a thing of the past, and the country is well on its way to becoming a fascist police state. The puppet candidates Obama + McCain who are OWNED by "special interests" and greater masters will only further the plan. They will not defend our Constitutional rights as American citizens. They don't represent us. WTF is wrong with Americans that they continue to be deceived and fooled by these OBVIOUS sold out, con artist slick talking wolves in sheeps clothing and keep voting the same double-talker charlatan trickster-puppets into power?? - FearFactory, on 06/30/2008, -0/+41All politicians must be kept in-line and pressured constantly. They don't deserve a break today or anytime.
- richnojutsu, on 06/30/2008, -5/+44Congratulations, you've just discovered politics.
- phorty40, on 06/30/2008, -9/+44
Surely this is the first time the Huffington post made the front of Digg. - D4N747, on 06/30/2008, -26/+60I'll agree that Obama's support for FISA made it harder to have faith in him and that his actions are at times hard to follow, but I'll take him over McCain any day.
I have to say this, though. Yes, Digg, Ron Paul is an impressive candidate who believes in freedom and many rights that have not and likely will not fly in Washington for a long time, but his time came and (unfortunately, for some people) went a while ago. I think that it's time to let go of his bid for the presidency and move on to what is now the race for the presidency, while keeping in mind that Ron Paul is not gone. He may run for next term and, bar that, he is still a congressman, representing the few of us that choose to let him. - hamobu, on 06/29/2008, -16/+48Responsible consideration does not preclude Obama to stake out position and does not account for ambiguity. There is very little that Obama actually committed to.
Obama, for example, has stated that he is for Nuclear energy as a part of broad energy portfolio. He has recently attacked McCain for proposing 40 new nuclear power plants before 2030 by pointing out problem with nuclear waste. McCain of course cannot attack Obama since Obama has not committed to anything other than feel good generalities. - Akairenn, on 06/30/2008, -8/+28Sorry, I'd rather write in Ron Paul's name and be able to sleep at night. Trying to scare myself and others like me with the Boogeyman that is McCain ... really makes the Obama supporters look like more of the same. "OMG TERRAHISTS!" - that's different from "OMG MCCAIN!" how?
You're saying I should give up liberty and rights because of the 'threat' of a McCain presidency? Thanks, but no thanks. This country can collapse around me; the amber waves of grain can be consumed in fire. Should they be, I will sleep quite well at night, knowing I've done my duty to my country - by pointedly not voting for the mere lesser of two evils. As the tree of Liberty withers and dies, it is on your head, and the heads of all who parrot lines about 'electability' and 'Well, Candidate X is better than Candidate Y!'
As for the rest, I'd ask you for actual sources on your views - but first of all, lumping Barr in with Paul is... I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this lackluster attempt at propaganda. And as for Paul, just as I do when looking at Obama and McCain and the rest - I'll look at voting records over misquotes, misspoken words and media *****. I personally disagree with Paul on many points; yet he's easily one of the most inoffensive politicians there is when it comes to attacking freedom, and has a far better record in those matters than Obama. - Raphae1, on 06/29/2008, -26/+45Some people call that responsible consideration.
- tcbishop12, on 06/30/2008, -36/+55The FISA bill does not strip anyone of your 4th Amendment rights. It is a 1978 law enacted in the Carter administration. The violation and abuse of FISA strips you of your 4th amendment rights. I stand behind the Senator's decision, as do most Democrats in Congress who actually understand the issues involved. There's never been a flip flop on this issue. Wake the F up!
- Hetman, on 06/30/2008, -2/+21This is sad. It was only 60 years ago in this country that everone was granted Civil Rights under the constitution. Yet in that short period of time the democrats and the republicans decided that they should strip these freedoms away from everyone. And no one is doing anything to stop them, actually it seems to be the opposite. Everyone is justifying having there freedoms taken away. Guess what once they are gone the government is not going to give them back for any reason.
- Gryffydd, on 06/30/2008, -2/+21The fact that another mentality has not worked is not an argument *for* any other mentality.
- goodnrg, on 06/30/2008, -5/+24tcbishop12, I agree with your comment, with a caveat. The original 1978 FISA seemed to be fine, until the Bush administration decided that it wasn't and violated it. Many people think the amended FISA weakens some of the 4th amendment protections provided by the 1978 FISA. So yes, we are better off with new FISA than with the current situation where the administration is violating and ignoring the 1978 FISA, but with apparently weakened 4th amendment protections. Having said that, I look forward to hearing a longer statement from Obama on his position on the issue, his further actions on FISA, and his view of 4th amendment protections in the future.
- kolinkoolface2, on 06/30/2008, -8/+25the ***** is starting to hit the fan for obama on digg.
- TotalHalibut, on 06/30/2008, -0/+17Groupthink.
- dalittle, on 06/30/2008, -3/+20The problem is with the Telecom Immunity Amendment that has been included with FISA. It lets the Telecom Industry get a free pass for any kind of criminal behavior under government supervision. You need to read the whole Bill.
- RedPhalanx, on 06/30/2008, -3/+19Yes, it's good to see some new stuff on Digg. I just learned about this webcomic called "xkdc" or something.
- insomniacal, on 06/30/2008, -8/+23Never thought I'd digg an article with Obama in the title, but here we go.
- virtualball, on 06/30/2008, -4/+18So wait, do we like Obama now?
- SQLserver, on 06/30/2008, -65/+79Obama is ROCK SOLID on the issues. No way in hell am I going to support McBomb or Theocratic Paul/Barr.
Here's the Reality, Libertarians:
--Your party doesn't stand a bloody chance. If you are insanely lucky you'll get 5% of the votes.
--Obama is a MUCH, MUCH better President then McCain.
--Conclusion: Vote for Obama to stop McCain.
The Reality is, you are the ones being duped. You quickly are grabbed by Paul/Barr by their promises to 'restore the constitution'.
You hear them talk about rights...
Funny how they talk about rights, when Paul and Barr wish to pass a FEDERAL amendment prohibiting a woman's rights to her own body.
Funny how they talk about rights, when Paul and Barr both are against the basic rights of Homosexuals due to their fundamentalism.
Funny how they talk about rights, when Paul does not even believe in EVOLUTION, and has publicly announced that he would support bills shoving 'alternative views'(AKA his RELIGION) down our children's throats.
Funny how they talk about rights, when both throw away everyone's rights to a government that helps the environment.
Funny how they talk about rights, when Barr voted for the Patriotic Act.
Funny how they talk about peace, when the most peaceful countries in our world are socialist.(Which according to their party, is intolerable)
Lets face it, Libertarians.
If power is given to the states, we will end up with a basic Theocracy in the southern US.
Especially when a libertarian president would support such a Theocracy. - inactive, on 06/30/2008, -1/+14Nope, which is why the two party system ***** sucks. We should NEVER have to resort to a "lesser of two evils" voting scheme in a democracy.
- Tenbatsu404, on 06/30/2008, -1/+14Statement on HR 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments
20 June 2008
Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.
Madam Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.
The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.
In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.
Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure. - inactive, on 06/30/2008, -11/+24I have reminded him by stopping my monthly contributions.
- Tenbatsu404, on 06/30/2008, -1/+14Statement on HR 6304, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments
20 June 2008
Rep. Ron Paul, M.D.
Madam Speaker, I regret that due to the unexpected last-minute appearance of this measure on the legislative calendar this week, a prior commitment has prevented me from voting on the FISA amendments. I have strongly opposed every previous FISA overhaul attempt and I certainly would have voted against this one as well.
The main reason I oppose this latest version is that it still clearly violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution by allowing the federal government to engage in the bulk collection of American citizens’ communications without a search warrant. That US citizens can have their private communication intercepted by the government without a search warrant is anti-American, deeply disturbing, and completely unacceptable.
In addition to gutting the fourth amendment, this measure will deprive Americans who have had their rights violated by telecommunication companies involved in the Administration’s illegal wiretapping program the right to seek redress in the courts for the wrongs committed against them. Worse, this measure provides for retroactive immunity, whereby individuals or organizations that broke the law as it existed are granted immunity for prior illegal actions once the law has been changed. Ex post facto laws have long been considered anathema in free societies under rule of law. Our Founding Fathers recognized this, including in Article I section 9 of the Constitution that “No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” How is this FISA bill not a variation of ex post facto? That alone should give pause to supporters of this measure.
Mr. Speaker, we should understand that decimating the protections that our Constitution provides us against the government is far more dangerous to the future of this country than whatever external threats may exist. We can protect this country without violating the Constitution and I urge my colleagues to reconsider their support for this measure. - Hetman, on 06/30/2008, -2/+14I with Carlin this time around. You guys go and mental masturbate this november. I will just masturbate and least in the end I will have a smile to show for it. That is more than I can say for people who vote.
- bjs3171, on 06/30/2008, -5/+17can we please stop calling John McCain "McSame", "McLame" or "McBomb"? It's really ***** childish.
- slvrbullet87, on 06/30/2008, -7/+18Did the huffington post just bash on digg? Am i dreaming or something
- kemp34, on 06/30/2008, -4/+14Left/right is pure ignorance. Anyone reading this who is uneducated on the subject, please google "Nolan Chart."
- pintomp3, on 06/30/2008, -9/+19is mccain a better alternative?
- Bilabrin, on 06/30/2008, -2/+11"Funny how they talk about rights, when Paul and Barr both are against the basic rights of Homosexuals due to their fundamentalism."
Wrong, Ron Paul feels that Marriage should not be recognized by government at all, allowing people to do whatever they want regarding marriage without state interference:
Here's a quote.
"Mr. Speaker, while I oppose federal efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman, I do not believe a constitutional amendment is either a necessary or proper way to defend marriage.
While marriage is licensed and otherwise regulated by the states, government did not create the institution of marriage. In fact, the institution of marriage most likely pre-dates the institution of government! Government regulation of marriage is based on state recognition of the practices and customs formulated by private individuals interacting in civil society. Many people associate their wedding day with completing the rituals and other requirements of their faith, thus being joined in the eyes of their church and their creator, not with receiving their marriage license, thus being joined in the eyes of the state. "
Try doing some research you parrot! - WallyAnti, on 06/30/2008, -3/+12So that's a reason to dismiss him or...? What's your point is what I am curious about.
I find it somewhat comforting when a politician doesn't just tell me what to think, but instead goes through his thought process. It's more like we're working together... you know... democracy.
That said I'm pretty disappointed in some of Obama's recent policy changes. - br0ck, on 06/30/2008, -10/+191. Obama didn't vote on S2248 (but supports FISA court supervision of surveillance and opposes telecom immunity and has worked hard to eliminate 'roving wiretaps'): http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_li ...
2. HR2360 passed unanimously. The 30.8 billion cost of the act is equal to 42 days of the Iraq war and covers the cost of the secret service, coast guard, immigration and customs: http://dpc.senate.gov/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=lb-109- ...
3. Regarding roving wiretaps and the Patriot act, actually, Obama acted more than almost anyone in the Senate or the House to combat civil rights issues in the Patriot Act! Obama voted against the original re-authorization: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_li ...
Obama then helped write and co-sponsored the SAFE act which the EFF said would fix the most troublesome of problems with the Patriot Act including ROVING WIRETAPS, limit sneak & peek, and numerous other things that you can read about at the EFF site: http://w2.eff.org/patriot/safe_act_analysis.php
Obama joined a senate group to demand fixes to all Patriot act civil rights violations (listed at the following link), and they did fix as many of the problems as they could in a 50-50 senate: http://salazar.senate.gov/news/releases/060106patr ...
Russ Feingold then proposed a bill to restore more rights. --- "A bill to clarify that individuals who receive FISA orders can challenge nondisclosure requirements, that individuals who receive national security letters are not required to disclose the name of their attorney, that libraries are not wire or electronic communication service providers unless they provide specific services, and for other purposes." --- Obama voted to keep it alive for Senate floor debate while Clinton voted to kill it. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_li ...
Since the House had killed all the fixes, the Republican senators decided to try pushing through a much worse Patriot Act reauthorization which was guaranteed to make it through the House. The Democrats in the Senate decided to try a diluted version of their fixes (which included several of Obama's SAFE provisions) in the form of a hobbled Patriot reauthorization compromise that could make it through the Republican House. Obama then gave an impassioned plea to fix all the problems, but was ultimately forced to go with the hobbled version or the nation would end up with the much worse version with no fixes. http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060216-floor_statem ... - SheilaNoya, on 06/30/2008, -9/+18Attack Obama on the issues, but stop dragging up your lame Sinclair story that has already been debunked as a total fraud. It only shows you lack any credibility.
- ToastedZergling, on 06/30/2008, -2/+11Anarchy is democracy without politicians. I think I'm liking that option much more nowadays.
- ryan850, on 06/30/2008, -0/+9Seems our choice might be to expand the gov't domestically or militarily... I still choose domestically if I have to chose between the two... I'm still writing in Ron Paul though.
- kewidogg, on 06/30/2008, -2/+11It's called "following a negative with a positive" or "ending on a positive note". Not to be confused with the compliment sandwich (compliment / criticism / compliment).
- Nemisys, on 06/30/2008, -5/+13Giant Douche or a Turd Sandwich
who will you choose? - noahhoward, on 06/30/2008, -5/+13You haven't been paying attention have you?
- EnviroChem, on 05/22/2009, -1/+9I dugg you up, not because I agree with you (I don't and I think 2, 3, 4 & 5 would be good things), but because you criticized policy instead of relied on character assassination.
- Hetman, on 06/30/2008, -0/+8All of them. Who determines who is a terrorist or not? Who watches the people determining if you are a terrorist or not? The patriot act gives to much power to the government. They can easily abuse it. They already have by imprisoning innocent people in gitmo. We need limited government, not more government.
- TotalHalibut, on 06/30/2008, -2/+10So? It's not like Digg is influential.
- JettaMan, on 06/30/2008, -5/+13I've never heard him talk about concrete, *specific* issues. I've never heard him say *specifically* what he would do to enact this change that he talks about so much. But from what I heard he is all for expanding government, which is the last thing America needs right now.
- hamobu, on 06/30/2008, -1/+8What is my point? My point is: What is Obama's point!
Point is that obama talks out of both ends. Point is that Obama is vague, evasive and takes stakes claim in both positions in case political winds charge.
DC handgun ban is a good example. Obama was for DC handgun ban, when that got overturned by Supreme court, it turned out that Obama was always for second amendments.
There is always some statement that Obama can point to in the past to imply that he was for this, that or the other issue. - tcpip4lyfe, on 06/30/2008, -2/+8You can if you want and that's fine. I personally don't.
- ConceptJunkie, on 06/30/2008, -11/+17> I think it's alarming that some people are forming a Cult of Personality around Obama
I think it's alarming that some people are apparently only realizing this now. It was obvious about 45 seconds after Obama's name hit the mainstream.
Basically, he's a shallow candidate for shallow people who want "change" but aren't particularly worried about the details. - syncomm, on 06/30/2008, -1/+7tcbishop12,
The FISA legislation was indeed created in 1978 -- however, it has been amended many times over, including at the request of the Bush administration in October 2001. It is by no means archaic. Even after they gave the President everything he asked for -- he still went ahead and refused to follow the law. That's precisely how we got to the 114 page bill in question "H.R. 6304." The retroactive immunity in this bill will prevent us from ever determining the extent and scope of the mass surveillance by quashing all litigation before there can be any discovery. Oh yeah, and it lets the whole thing continue to run with the blessing of Congress.
* It WILL allow bulk monitoring to continue unabated -- H.R. 6304 permits the government to conduct mass, untargeted surveillance of all communications coming into and out of the United States, without any individualized review, and without any finding of wrongdoing. Yes tcbishop12, this violates the fourth amendment -- imagine if the government decided to search everyone's home until they found something illegal.
* Provides blanket civil immunity to those in the telecom industry that decided to play ball (not everyone did)
* It allows “reverse targeting,” a practice by which the government gets around FISA’s court order requirement by wiretapping an individual overseas when it is really interested in a person in the U.S. with whom that supposed foreign target is communicating.
* It contains an “exigent” circumstance loophole that thwarts the prior judicial review requirement. The bill permits the government to start a spying before any approval from the secret FISA court.
* It further trivializes court review by explicitly permitting the government to continue surveillance programs even if the application is denied by the court. The government has the authority to wiretap through the entire appeals process, and then keep and use whatever it gathered in the meantime.
* It permits only minimal court oversight. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) only reviews general procedures for targeting and minimizing the use of information that is collected. The court may not know who, what or where will actually be tapped.
* Members of Congress not on Judiciary or Intelligence Committees are NOT guaranteed access to reports from the Attorney General, Director of National Intelligence, and Inspector General.
Without trials the brave whistle-blowers like Mark Klein of AT&T will never be able to show evidence in court that the scope of this surveillance covered all communications traffic foreign _and_ domestic!
I don't care how you "dress up" Fascism or how happy you can make totalitarianism -- it violates the very core of America's charter. If "change" only means liking my dictator a little more, then count me out. - nickymouse, on 06/30/2008, -6/+12Blah blah CHANGE blah blah HOPE Blah FUTURE blah blah WE CAN DO IT blah blah
- WileEPeyote, on 06/30/2008, -0/+6It's because the politicians distract us with:
1. Abortion
2. Gay Marriage
3. Making Certain Corporations Have Economic Freedom (used to be Anit-Communism)
4. War
5. Prayer in Schools - Hetman, on 06/30/2008, -9/+15Barr is an ***** and didnt is not a liberterian. He voted for the patriot act that means he is not a liberterian. It is funny that you guys are voting and are going to cause america to lose the 1st and 4th amendment. I mean freedom of the press is already gone. It has been bought and sold a long time ago. Obama attacks the 2nd amendment like he has personally been shot in the face by a gun. All it takes is one phone call out of the country and you are stripped of all your right. It pisses me off that your average American Citizen does not care about the constitution. It will be a sad day in America. But no one will complain because there will be no one to complain to.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 283 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is