What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy’s holiday campaign.
44 Comments
- TruthisTreason, on 09/10/2008, -0/+38I'm sick of having no choices. Neither mainstream candidate has any real issues!
- brettrix, on 09/10/2008, -0/+28imagine if we were able to have a real revolution every 4 years...
It would be on us to be responsible, but if the reps in any particular congress fail us, we elect the next willing servants at the next election.
the current issue today between the dems and the reps is pigs and lipstick - come on, let's talk about fiscal policy and the hole we are leaving the next generation in. - webby65, on 09/10/2008, -0/+27Reject the establishment's non-choices! The time to send a message is now. We want REAL change!
- cmkennedy, on 09/10/2008, -0/+26If after you've read the message you find you agree, JOIN the Campaign for Liberty. Help us elect politicians who promise and will deliver real reform.
And yeah, diggers, it's free. No donations required. Figure I oughta point that out. - 3ugene, on 09/10/2008, -1/+23Third Parties '08!
- inactive, on 09/10/2008, -0/+21 "The silent majority must become the vocal majority "
We are being bullied by arm twisting, war mongering bandits, stealing our freedom and our voice,
those that march beside them are fools. - cmkennedy, on 09/10/2008, -2/+14I respectfully disagree...I know at least McCain has some quite serious issues.
- kemp34, on 09/10/2008, -0/+11Are you going for the record for buries? How do you see yourself as representing the average person, when your average comment has 10-15 negative diggs?
- willers32, on 09/10/2008, -0/+11It does not matter one bit whether McCain or Obama gets elected. The same basic policies will be continued. We will not see the Fed abolished. We will not see a major shift in foreign policy. We will not see a balanced budget. We will not see the 16th &17th Amendments repealed. On the issues that really matter, it makes NO difference.
I will be voting for Bob Barr.
I have some points of disagreement with him, but at least he agrees with me on 70 or 80% of issues as opposed to Obama and McCain who agree with me on about 5% of issues, if that.
If nothing else, a good vote total for Barr will help put the LP on the map. - rolandvvv, on 09/10/2008, -0/+10"An idea whose time has come can not be stopped by any army or any government." - Ron Paul
- 3ugene, on 09/10/2008, -1/+11There is no major party goon that will do any good for our country this time around. Don't vote, or vote third party.
- bratpack8, on 09/10/2008, -0/+9That's because of sheeple like you who think, 'wow, McCain picked a woman, he has my vote,' or 'I just want to vote for who is going to win,' or 'I would like to vote for the first black president.'
- larissa13, on 09/10/2008, -0/+8It does not take a majority to prevail but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. ~Samuel Adams~
Dont vote for the candidate you think will do the least damage. Vote for the candidate who will make the greatest changes for the benefit of "We the People"! Vote against the establishment! - BurningSand, on 09/10/2008, -0/+8I believe the "'tard" gets off on red thumbs...
- danno1982, on 09/10/2008, -0/+8The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.
Carroll Quigley – Author of Tragedy & Hope - larissa13, on 09/10/2008, -0/+8As Winston Churchill so aptly noted, "Those who appease the crocodile will simply be eaten last." Vote to make a real difference; vote non-establishment!
- andy2245, on 09/10/2008, -0/+7Ron Paul is not running for president! The point of the speech at the National Press Club was to encourage people to vote for the Third Party Candidates! See below:
"The strongest message can be sent by rejecting the two-party system, which in reality is a one-party system with no possible chance for the changes to occur which are necessary to solve our economic and foreign policy problems. This can be accomplished by voting for one of the non-establishment principled candidates—Baldwin, Barr, McKinney, Nader, and possibly others. (listed alphabetically)" - Pssdoff, on 09/10/2008, -0/+7I'm not voting to pick the winner... You understand that there is no prize for picking the winner, right? Seriously, do you?
Vote for the candidate you want to see in office. How ***** hard is that? You don't vote for the second worst guy, you vote for who you want to see in the White House. Quit buying into the propaganda. - prattleon, on 09/10/2008, -0/+5next best thing to voting third party: register to vote....then don't vote. registered non-voters are protesters. it will have a similar effect to voting for a third party candidate that won't win this time around.
- bratpack8, on 09/10/2008, -0/+4I found this great book that backs up what Paul talks about. Looks like a great gag gift idea this political season.
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.co ...
Hilarious. I heard they are donating 25% to the Campaign for Liberty. Go Ron Paul. - muckemuck, on 09/10/2008, -1/+5Nope.. it won't..
See, a third party candidate has to collect over 700,000 signatures to be on the ballot in all 50 states. That takes a huge amount of time and money. They can't just collect the signatures either - two parties twist the arm of the state and shift the deadlines and reject a lot of the signatures.. and they do like the Republicans are doing in PA and sue to get the third party removed from the ballot for a technicality.
I said all of that because in many states if a third party gets a certain percentage of the vote then they are automatically on the ballot for the next election. It's a huge jumpstart for them. They'll also be able to collect more in donations if they cans say they got 8% or 10% vs .5%. It is hugely important to vote third party even if they aren't going to win. - bratpack8, on 09/10/2008, -0/+3Roe vs. Wade was an unconstitutional move by the Supreme Court. It shouldn't be a federal issue.
But quite honestly, the two parties are in cahoots on so many things even though they say they disagree on TV. Go read the book, 'The Big Ripoff' for plenty of examples. Both parties rip us off, it's just which of their friends get our dough. - inactive, on 09/10/2008, -0/+3sportsstar67 you have been writing that under three nicknames other than this one and it stilll does not make it true. Congress has single digit approvals and the Senators passed 855 bills without a vote or debate.
How you think a Senator will be the next president is beyond me but then again you predicted Ron Paul would lose his House seat to peden and Paul won the primary by three to one.
Sportsstar67/pajeff2/drmagicone/paultards you have zero credibility and are a legend in your own mind. - Sandiec99, on 09/10/2008, -1/+3Not a possibility in Oklahoma!
- riverrunner, on 09/11/2008, -0/+2uh, my main problem with all that is what if say mccain wins then dies. guess who is your next pres?
- DerangedPenguin, on 09/10/2008, -0/+2"antidisestablishmentarianism" hey it is in my spell check there is hope for us all.
- inactive, on 09/11/2008, -0/+2I am also going to write-in President Ron Paul 2008! No more voting for the lesser of two evils, and only Ron Paul stands for true Constitutional values as evidenced by his consistent voting record in the House of Representatives against anything that goes against our Constitutional liberties. This has even earned him the nickname, Dr. No!
Not only that - he is the only candidate viable in all 50 states; none of the 3rd Party candidates are! However, to make sure my vote is counted, I am going to request an absentee ballot and make a copy of it for proof after filling it out and before mailing it in. Just an idea.
If Ron Paul had endorsed a candidate, I would have voted for that person. But, since he did not endorse another candidate, that means he still could capture the Presidency if all the people who were going to vote for him would write-in his name. As he said to the National Press Club:
"Write-in votes should not be discouraged, but the electoral officials must be held accountable and make sure the votes are counted. But one must not be naïve and believe that under today’s circumstances one has a chance of accomplishing much by a write-in campaign."
Maybe my write-in vote won’t accomplish much if not enough people vote for Ron Paul, but my protest vote voting FOR Ron Paul's Constitutional stance and against the status quo, along with all the others who will vote for a different 3rd-party candidate, will say plenty and my conscience will be clear no matter who gets in. - 4libertyy, on 09/10/2008, -0/+2If you put all those never-ending, trivial "disagreements" (abortion, gay rights) between the 2 major parties aside, it is obvious that there is NO difference between them. They all want to EXPAND government power, fund more wars, steal MORE of OUR MONEY for various failing programs and corporations. They are all the same. Vote 3rd party '08!
- zmedico, on 09/10/2008, -0/+2While I truly prefer the third party candidates' positions on most issues, I see this "two party system offers no real choice" assertion as a "straw man" argument. If you can't see any difference whatsoever between the Republicans and Democrats then I think you've got some blind spots.
Take the Roe v. Wade decision, for example. The Democrats seem to be overwhelmingly pro-choice while the Republicans seem to be overwhelmingly pro-life. Similarly, the Democrats seem to be overwhelmingly in favor of separation between church and state while the Republicans frequently seem to be in favor of blurring or removing this separation in various ways. I can think of quite a few other differences but these are most glaring ones that I think are pretty indisputable.
In order to make more people feel comfortable voting for a third party candidate, I think what we really need is instant-runoff voting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting - Pegasussix, on 09/10/2008, -0/+2Join us at BreakTheMatrix.com and become part of a large and growing number of freedom loving people who are all united and energized by Dr. Paul's message. You'll find cutting-edge commentary in both our web page and our video programming, all created and maintained by a grass-roots consortium consisting of disenfranchised people from across the political spectrum.
- inactive, on 09/10/2008, -0/+2A good reason to shed more light on third parties.
All should be treated equally.
How about a I Vote NO in Oklahoma protest.
Registered voter's in OK. could work together. - BlackMuffin, on 09/10/2008, -0/+1This book is unique, I bought one for my accountant and two for my brainiac In-laws. They read it instantly!
- zmedico, on 09/10/2008, -0/+1You can call them "trivial disagreements" but apparently those are major issues to lots of people. Also, it's arguable that these major faults (excess power & wars), for which you place blame on the major parties, are actually just faults of politicians in general, regardless of their party affiliation. Perhaps third party politicians tend to be better on average, but it may also be arguable that a significant proportion of Democrat or Republican politicians are comparable in quality to their third party counterparts.
- rolandvvv, on 09/10/2008, -1/+2i see what you did there.
- zmedico, on 09/10/2008, -0/+1Well I think it's more like the politicians, regardless of party affiliation, are in cahoots with the corporations. Perhaps it's tied to the major parties is some ways, and third party candidates tend to be more honest. But in any case, we need to put a stop to the corrupt interaction between corporate lobbyists and politicians regardless of their party affiliations.
- inactive, on 09/11/2008, -0/+1Apparently my only choices in Texas are going to be center-right Obama, far-right McCain or *****-insane-far-right Barr. ***** that.
I hate voting write-in. You just know your vote winds up in a garbage can. - sheeplescareme, on 09/11/2008, -0/+1@prattle-if you don't vote, others will and they may not have the same interests or cares that you do. actually, it is more than likely that they will not.
- MizSwann, on 09/11/2008, -0/+1webby65, larissa13, DerangedPenguin....RIGHT ON.
- mettaseva, on 09/14/2008, -0/+1Here's one time when I do not agree with Ron.
I do NOT want to settle for the lesser of 3 evils -- and we DO have a choice: we can all vote 4th party by writing in Ron Paul, even if he is NOT a certified write-in candidate in our state: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/hamilton4.html
Well worth reading and sharing..... - DCRblues, on 09/10/2008, -0/+1There are small differences between the two major parties as Dr Paul says but they are - 'not a dime's worth' counting inflation. Most of the differences lie in domestic issues such as Social Security. Those differences do count for something but as far as the big under-lying issues, the differences are infinitesimal - mostly a matter of tactical shifts rather than strategy or operation.
Vote Nader. Vote Barr. Vote Cookie Monster. But Vote. And Vote your conscience not party line. - Ralphdraw3, on 09/10/2008, -4/+4You have lots of choices -
Green
Libertarian
Tax payers
Constitution
THESE PARTIES NEVER WIN... - ZombiesSuck, on 09/10/2008, -0/+0The silent majority must become the vocal majority...Amen!
- inactive, on 09/10/2008, -3/+0You have something against Minorities and Women ??
- inactive, on 09/10/2008, -21/+1There is no viable 3rd Party candidate this time around
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is