What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
143 Comments
- strangerzero, on 10/12/2007, -12/+196The Bush administration has the reverse Midas touch. Everything they touch turns to *****.
- Robozilla, on 10/12/2007, -13/+135Would that be the MidASS touch?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+82@omatsei:
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cheneys_stock_options_rose_3281_last_1011.html
"Cheney continues to hold 433,333 Halliburton stock options."
"The Vice President has sought to stem criticism by signing an agreement to donate the after-tax profits from these stock options to charities of his choice" (yeah right)
"However, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) concluded in Sept. 2003 that holding stock options while in elective office does constitute a “financial interest” regardless of whether the holder of the options will donate proceeds to charities."
"Cheney continues to received a deferred salary from the company. According to financial disclosure forms, he was paid $205,298 in 2001; $162,392 in 2002; $178,437 in 2003; and $194,852 in 2004."
This information was a single Google click away. Talk about ignorance. - baxtermaddux, on 10/12/2007, -3/+67"They ought to model themselves after Billy Joe Bob Clinton who readily admitted to schtupping his under-age intern. "
if you could erase one travesty in our countries history, which would it be?
a) a presidential blow job ( followed by lying about said blowjob, much as every man in the history of time has done in such a situation)
or.......
b) a half trillion dollar war, 3000 dead american soldiers, hundreds of thousands of dead iraqis, a civil war in the middle east, fighting that war and trying to babysit the civil war with borrowed money from asia while we continue to give subsidies to oil companies and the richest 1 percent, lying to americans about the reasons for the war, the reasons given being lies in themself, the squandering of our economy and creating the largest increase in national debt in our nations history, alienating the rest of the world and giving america the worst reputation and least likability in the history of our country, alienating all gay americans with discriminating marriage laws, alienating all blacks with a botched rescue effort in New Orleans, alienating the Hispanic community by funding the building a wall on the border of Mexico, ousting the name of a CIA agent because of a personal vendetta, and not vetoing a single bill for 6 years and finally vetoing a Stem Cell Research bill which could potentially lead to the saving of infinite amounts of lives and savings in health care, etcetera ex ***** cetera
which would you rather have?
of course, being a pea brained slug, you would say A. - m3mn0n, on 10/12/2007, -8/+65Everyone knows Faux News is anything but. They even know that but they'll be damned before they admit it.
- quokkapox, on 10/12/2007, -7/+57The large oil corporations and defense contractors seem to be doing quite well. Don't Bush and Cheney have their fingers buried in all those pies?
- iancgi, on 10/12/2007, -5/+51How can they call that news anchor fair and balanced. Listen to his questioning
- taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+36she wasn't underage.
- badken, on 10/12/2007, -2/+34I can't think of a time that Cheney's been right about how to approach Middle East policy...
But look how easily we can assassinate Biden's character to prove him wrong, though! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+34@Wonderkind:
"CNN and Friends only give us unbiased reports with all the facts. They are fair and balanced all the time."
But...but....but...CNN!
Blaming CNN doesn't make Fox any less biased. Stop doing it. It's weak as piss. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28So is there any time Cheney's been correct, or not?
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -9/+34Why would they admit it voluntarily? Why would Bush-Cheney ever admit anything voluntarily?
The only way America is going to get to even one small hint of the truth is if Bush is impeached. Otherwise, Halliburton and the rest of Bush's co-conspirators are going to walk away with all the tax revenue they stole and the Iraq problem will be dumped into the lap of the next president. It will go on and on, until America can't afford to keep the troops there anymore. It is only delaying the inevitable, while the war profiteers (and "the terrorists") are making a fortune.
We're going to lose $1 trillion in Iraq by 2008. What do we or Iraq have to show for it? I know what Halliburton and Exxon have to show for it: Billions. - brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23Two words: Ad Hominem
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+26Tricky Dick (aka nixonrichard), what did "taking Saddam out" accomplish?
- MaelstromVale, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21This is news? Jon Stewart said this basically word for word about Cheney at the Wang Theater in Boston last October. It was a lot more entertaining as well.
- jrbrewin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18but didn't he say he wasn't involved in those... or are you suggesting he's wrong there too? ;-)
- billyh, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23Last week there was a 'tube of this same guy interviewing Cheney. (I'll post of I can find. I saw it from digg). He giggles that he was at Cheney's Christmas party. What a total dope. Why would you want your audience to know what a cheap ***** Cheney buttBoy you are? You would think that he would at least PRETEND it was a serious interview.
And don't forget, this idiot is one of "all my Fox guys" that Rice says she's is in love with. Crype we are in trouble.
Any impeachment proceedings would name not only Cheney but Rice as well. Rumsfeld would have been named if he had stuck around. So forget Obama in '08, I say Pelosi in '07! - Loonacy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16@aceq
Imagine two people stuck in a locked room.
Person A: "Well, we need to think of a way out of here. I'm going to shoot us each in the foot."
Person B: "No, i don't think that's a good idea."
Person A: "Well if you have a better idea I'd like to hear it, but until you do, I'm just going to shoot us in the foot."
Person B: "Please, no, I don't want to be shot in the foot!"
Person A: "You still haven't given me any alternative." - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Why?
- walt100, on 10/12/2007, -11/+22I'm surprised no one has mentioned the fact that this administration is the first to award Halliburton large government contracts. These crooks are setting precedents!
Internal Voice of Common Sense: (( Actually, Halliburton had done much government work before this current administration took office, including work for Clinton and Bush One. ))
Um, well, I can buy Bush One, but Clinton? Why would he use a Republican machine? Doesn't make sense.
Internal voice of common sense: (( Because they're one of few companies who can do what they do. And they do a good job at it. The Clinton Administration even praised Halliburton's performance. ))
Now you're just talking silly.
Internal Voice of Common Sense: (( No, really. There's some stuff here that watchdogs probably need to keep an eye on, but a lot of it is just the same old politics. ))
External Digg User: [[ Dick Cheney sux!!! Shut up neocon!!! ]]
Internal Voice of Common Sense: (( I'm a traditional conservative. But why is neocon an insult? It's not your way of thinking, it's not my way of thinking, but it's a legitimate opinion. ))
Hey, guys. Remember me? The poster?
Internal Voice of Common Sense: (( Sorry. ))
External Digg User: [[ Bite me. Digg down!!! ]]
So, anyway, Internal Voice of Common Sense, your ideas intrigue me. I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Internal Voice of Common Sense: (( I'm afraid a newsletter is not available. The Internal Voice of Common Sense is a gift given to few. Those who lack it will laugh at you when you try to share it. ))
I hear what you're sayi..... ooh! Academy Award nominations!!! - taotehue, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14uhm, lets see here,
no not really. - deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Oh, great now next top digg story is going to be ...
"BREAKING NEWS: Visting White House, Sen. Biden gets shot in the Face by Dick Cheney" - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11@manifestdata:
The right = still in denial about what a terrible administration this has been.
"Guess what, the reason why all of that ruckus started was because of Hilary Clinton, the info was leaked to the media by the Clinton camp."
No proof of that. Pure right wing paranoia. - fogster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Look, I'm a real liberal guy. Pro-choice, a passionate gay marriage supporter... Heck, I voted for Howard Dean because I thought Kerry was too conservative.
Please stop. You're making liberals look like crazy conspiracy theorists. I bet I've seen the same conspiracy theory videos that you have. (I've seen quite a few about 9/11.) There are lots of weird coincidences, lots of places where the Administration clearly screwed up, and lots of unanswered questions. But do you honestly believe that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney planted bombs in the World Trade Center?
If you were calling for a more detailed investigation, on account of all of the questions that still haven't been answered, I'd agree with you. If you were condemning the Administration for so thoroughly messing up preventing, and responding to, 9/11, I'd agree 100%. But you're not. You're joining others in suggesting that the President of the United States deliberately blew up the World Trade Center. And, despite all of the suspicious events around 9/11, I don't see any evidence that that's the case.
Please, stop making us look bad. - billyh, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13Oh *****. This is my very most favorite Stewart skewer of Cheney ever. "Mr. Vice President, I thiink your pants are on fire." Shows Cheney lying through his teeth and very, very funny. Link halfway down the page, http://www.lmno4p.org/index13.htm or direct to Real Player stream, http://www.lmno4p.org/images/6.4/daily_show_cheney_lies.rm
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12The war ain't fixing any of that *****, my friend.
- shmatt, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15Cheney already is the president - de facto, that is. W isn't smart enough to even articulate foreign policy, let alone come up with one.
- cl0r0x70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Your point doesn't make sense.
I think all we're basically saying is that, yes, those countries are really really messed up.
But bombing the ***** out of them makes things much, much worse. Maybe we don't know what to do, but we sure as hell know what NOT to do.
If the people want change, it has to come from the will of the people. You can't go to another country and set up freedom like you set up a tent. - fogster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8You make it sound like they have a sound fiscal policy. But what about tax breaks right as they began record expenditures, resulting in an ever-increasing deficit? Was that part of their economic improvement plan?
- procopius, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Merdes touch?
- baxtermaddux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8if you search for it, and check the " show burried submissions" box it will appear. story was burried. it was a ***** article. no one is lying to anyone.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Hey now. In interviews Cheney has been absolutely correct that Iraq is located in the middle east, he even seems to be aware that it's next door to Iran. You guys act like he's a pompous, dogmatic, self-serving screw-up when he clearly has a firm grasp of geography.
- vhold, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7At the same time, they were there in the first place, allowed to speak, weren't shouted down, cut off or anything like that. My respect for Fox News went up very slightly from that.
- curtvdh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I can:
"I think that the proposition of going to Baghdad is also fallacious. I think if we were going to remove Saddam Hussein we would have had to go all the way to Baghdad, we would have to commit a lot of force because I do not believe he would wait in the Presidential Palace for us to arrive. I think we'd have had to hunt him down. And once we'd done that and we'd gotten rid of Saddam Hussein and his government, then we'd have had to put another government in its place.
What kind of government? Should it be a Sunni government or Shi'i government or a Kurdish government or Ba'athist regime? Or maybe we want to bring in some of the Islamic fundamentalists? How long would we have had to stay in Baghdad to keep that government in place? What would happen to the government once U.S. forces withdrew? How many casualties should the United States accept in that effort to try to create clarity and stability in a situation that is inherently unstable?
I think it is vitally important for a President to know when to use military force. I think it is also very important for him to know when not to commit U.S. military force. And it's my view that the President got it right both times, that it would have been a mistake for us to get bogged down in the quagmire inside Iraq."
(Cheney at the Soref Symposium 29 April 1991)
I wonder what happened to that guy? - BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"""Why?"""
He'll tell you when he's googled exhaustively enough to dig up some dirt on Biden.
Because ( character assassination > relevant facts ), we've all learned that by now, I hope. - BenSerwa, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@ nixonrichard
Stating the obvious doesn't count. - Eleo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It is somewhere. You click the link above ^ and it takes you right to the page.
As previously explained, the article was buried by Digg members. It was buried because it was a *****, tacky article. Well, no, that's just my opinion of it. I can't speak for the other ones that buried it, but presumably they all had reasons for it. So it's not my opinion that was worth more than 83 digs but several other people's combined. I didn't bury it, other people did.
If it were my story I would probably be upset, no lie, but no one owes it to me to appreciate my submission just because I submitted it. Digg isn't obligated to put it on the front page. I've submitted two things I thought were interesting and - although they weren't buried - they didn't even reach ten digs. Wish more people cared but they didn't. Oh well. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Let's take a look at the Vice President's job description, taken straight from the U.S. Constitution.
"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no vote, unless they be equally divided."
Besides taking over if the President is removed, that's pretty much all the Constitution says the VP has to do.
Now then, what about George M. Dallas, William King, Hannibal Hamlin, Schuyler Colfax, Henry Wilson, William, Thomas Hendricks, Levi P. Morton, Garret Hobart, Charles Fairbanks, Thomas R. Marshall, Charles Dawes, Charles Curtis, John Nance Garner, Henry A. Wallace and Alben Barkley among many, many others. Name one thing THEY did right. In fact, name one thing they DID.
How I regret the day that schools stopped teaching civics. - migbike, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6"Is a president ever popular for seeking military action?"
Yes, when there is good reason FOR the military action. Afghanistan would be a prime example of that.
The problem with Iraq, is that none of the "reasons" for us being there are valid. There were no WMD. None of the 9/11 attacks were commited by Iraqi people.
By your logic, we are basically blowing trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives to fix the problems of another country. Doesn't that fundamentally go against everything that "Conservatives" are supposed to stand for? - Palmetto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@Hetman
Socialists are thieves and anti-freedom. - 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@originallucid1:
Let us know if you feel the same way once we actually have to start *paying* for the mess in Iraq. - Miso117, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Dick Cheney is a war profiteer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiteering - States:
"A war profiteer is any person or organization that makes profits from warfare or by selling weapons and other goods to parties at war. The term has strongly negative implications"
"Different types of war profiteers can be distinguished ranging from single persons, to whole companies or trusts, and nations.
During and after World War II enormous profits were made by persons selling rare goods like cigarettes, chocolate, coffee and butter on the black market.
In general, all companies selling weapons increase their profits when war starts.
Furthermore, one can distinguish passive war profiteers from active war profiteers:
Passive war profiteers make profits from a war without influencing the duration and/or outcome of a war.
Active war profiteers, in addition to making profits from a war, have a vital interest in starting and prolonging wars in order to make or increase their profits. Basil Zaharoff's Vickers Company sold weapons to all the parties involved in the Chaco War."
Something smells fishy in DC... Actually it smells like Dick... - BlackAdderIII, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"""This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world, and this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction."""
That comment is in every way credible, as Saddam Hussein attempted to procure WMD, was caught trying to create WMD in the past, and used WMD against people in Iraq. History can bear this out as fact.
This same WMD situation was used as the basis of a series of lies, half-truths and forged or unreliable documents to manufacture consent in the US, UK and UN, and even intimate that allies in Western Europe were under direct threat of attack. History can bear this out as fact, too.
The two things are not inconsistent with each other, if you're able to read. - nixonrichard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes, but Biden is SURE he is not being lied to now . . . so you can trust his judgment completely. Honestly, any senator who gives the president a blank check to go to war should loose his/her job. That is just reckless and stupid.
- ruley, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Ummmm, sorry to be the conservative in the conversation but what about when cheney said ""That looks like a bird"? colbert sarcasm
- junestag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3name one single time joe biden said something extraordinary.
- Charron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Getting back to the question at hand, I think he did admit he shot that guy in the face, so I guess he was right on that one...
- tylercrowley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@skyshock -- funny how you can list that, and clinton still looks like mother teresa next to bush
- eggo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3quick calculation using the numbers from here: http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cheneys_stock_options_rose_3281_last_1011.html and here: http://icasualties.org/oif/
shows the following:
$8,000,000 (current stock value) - $241,498 (previous stock value) = $7,758,502 (Cheney's profit from this year)
Divide that number by the number of US casualties in Iraq (870 in 2006) gives you $8917.81 per US Soldier killed last year. How does this man sleep at night? Oh yeah, on a huge pile of money. -
Show 51 - 100 of 145 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is