digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

We Are Now Officially Living In A Dictatorship

scienceblogs.com — Its official, fellow Americans. A fantastic article breaking down exactly why things are just that bad here in the States.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • gab00n, on 10/12/2007, -60/+133Bush will drop a nuke somewhere in the US and blame it on some terrorists so he can declare martial law and officially form a police state/dictatorship. His latest bill actually pardons him for the 9/11 attacks and other war crimes, it's absolutely disgusting.
    • truegodofwar, on 10/12/2007, -143/+22What the *****? The terrorist are attacking not bush. Let's go invade Iran! Bomb tehran city from the air, lift up some burkas and get the dirka dirka on.
    • johnnintendofri, on 10/12/2007, -22/+75ah V for Vandetta
      I know I will leave if anything that serious happens. Japan is lookin quite nice...
    • killinger777, on 10/12/2007, -74/+22How can you drink all that Kool-Aide with that enormous tin hat on?
    • FreakTrap, on 10/12/2007, -92/+36Conspiracy theorists make me want to cry.

      Please, kill yourselves.
    • rcflyr, on 10/12/2007, -8/+44Whoah, 24 season right here.
    • Klisk, on 10/12/2007, -19/+52I'm an advocate of Canada.
    • coldphoenix, on 10/12/2007, -29/+12the whole world is heading towards dystopia
    • scott1, on 10/12/2007, -15/+34And then he disbands the senate after the foolishly make him the supreme leader of the U.S. Overthrow the U.N. and it's member states governments with U.S. puppet governments and transforms the U.S. form a federal republic to an Empire with him as the Emperor of the Imperialist States of America.
    • i440, on 10/12/2007, -45/+53Sarcasm aside, the belief of our current government being a dictatorship is absoultely absurd. I don't like Bush either, but lets not lose touch of reality here.
    • Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -14/+58Careful, anyone who dugg or commented on this post will now be officially deemed threats to National Security. You (er we - ooops) will all be rounded up and put in the new US concentration camps, forced into slave labor producing propoganda for the rest of our lives.


      Oh Noooos....
    • bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -30/+24your name is truegodofwar?

      I'm no longer going to engage in debate with people like you. You're WRONG, a moron, and there really truly is something wrong with your current world view.

      I could try and address these problems in this post, but just understand this one point.
      YOU ARE IGNORANT AND WRONG. You can rectify this by spending more time in the library and less time infront of the TV.
      • nicholai, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1I think you are the one that watches to much TV.
    • OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -9/+32"ah V for Vandetta
      I know I will leave if anything that serious happens. Japan is lookin quite nice..."

      In a few years Americans will be trying to get across the border into Mexico, while being hunted by automated gunships and cyborgs that look conspicuously like an ex-governor of California.

      By then, New York City will have been cordoned off and made into a giant penal colony.

      Now look at my avatar.
    • Ray_Justice, on 10/12/2007, -32/+880% of the people above me are idiots
    • Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -11/+16Funny, Bush is the same guy the U.S. RE-elected two years ago ... just like we re-elected Nixon.

      Filed under "rhetoric".
    • aaronnohalo, on 10/12/2007, -13/+9I didn't vote for him
      I couldn't vote for anyone for that matter
      luckily, WI was Gore AND Kerry
      thanks Ohio AND Florida
    • dinobot, on 10/12/2007, -12/+43 Remember, remember, the 11th of September
      The Towers, treason and plot,
      I know of no reason why the Bush treason
      Should ever be forgot.
    • karn, on 10/12/2007, -26/+7Thats the stupidest thing i've ever heard. I'm not conservative by a long shot, but come on, gotta draw the line somewhere. Wow
    • aaronnohalo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+35They crossed the line when they chose to break the constitution.
    • mrfoos, on 10/12/2007, -26/+7Actually, my life is going just swell. In fact, it was during Clinton's reign as well. I guess that's the general difference between those that vote Republican versus those that vote Democrat. Republican voters will generally be OK regardless of who is in office. Democrat voters tend to lie around complaining, waiting for someone else to make their life better.
    • Doofy, on 10/12/2007, -14/+3Now that's what I call FUD!
    • stampy, on 10/12/2007, -6/+16You guys never took Political Science I see. The president can't do jack without Congress. Congress controls the purse strings. Without appropriations bills that provide the necessary spending money for military action, the president can order troops to war, but they won't have any money to get there or to manufacture bullets, etc. The problem isn't that we have a dictatorship. The problem is that the same political party controls every branch of government, and therefore provides no checks and balances. The only government that properly checks itself is one in which different political parties run the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches. Until the Dems take back at least one house of Congress, expect your rights to be trampled in the name of your protection.
      • nicholai, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1We can't count on the democrats. We need to push for more than two options.
    • dopyoman, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23I think Bush needs a blow job.
    • Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -17/+8Methinks some people are unaware of what a dictatorship actually is...

      If you're an American, you digg stories of dissent and anti-government sentiment, and nothing happens to you (or anyone) for it... America isn't a dictatorship.

      Stop with the sensationalist propaganda. Seriously.
    • cliffzdude, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22As an Old Fart Digg'r who is over 30 (Hello? Any body else here???) I have to input one point.

      Each and every new generation of newly politically aware, and thankfully politically active people in the USA experience very similar feelings about politics and politicians.

      As such I, though I disagree fully that our Democratic Republic has been disassembled and is now ruined, I do still revel in the younger generation actually giving a ***** about our Country. You see, such caring about our land is why we are not, and will not become a dictatorship. I'm not trying to prove a point per se, not trying to flame bait or use reverse psychology. Just sharing my thoughts.

      So far as I've lived on this earth since the 60's, since I've been old enough to follow politics I've watched each and every President, save for that of Reagan grow government and grow the government's powers. Be it Democratic or Republican, we need another President with the balls to once again stand his/her ground and point out the government is all too powerful, that government is too big and too wasteful. No, we don't need to cut back on feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, or stop helping those who can't help themselves, don't assume I'm saying that, for I am not. We DO need to stop the bridges to nowhere, stop the overzealous grab of power from the States and localities where it belongs.

      Ironically, in as much we pay most of our attention to the national political scene it isn't what changes our lives the most. What those fat cats are doing down at City Hall, now those ***** can truly but the kabosh on your life. To date the Bush administration has barely touched our daily lives. It may seem like it, as we read about what is happening in the world so much, with 24/7 cable news and the internet. But if those corrupt good old boys down at city hall want to get "theirs", they'll be happy to take your home and pay you under market value so they can put in a new strip mall. They'll be happy to change code to allow a mega low market go where nothing but quiet homes have been in the past. Hell, they'll buy up the land that mega low mart wants to build on before the public knows about its intentions.

      Dictatorship? I don't think so, not while our populace is so fired up to keep the bastards on the left and on the right in line.
      • nicholai, on 02/26/2008, -0/+1You said Reagan didn't grow government, have you heard of something called the "war on drugs"?
    • idonthack, on 10/12/2007, -15/+3bury
    • SirCharge, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5Wow, this new dictatorship feels and seems exactly like the democratic republic to which I had grown accustomed. And strangely, in November, I'm going to vote for democratically elected representatives.

      Am I going insane, or is it the people on Digg who are confused?
    • nunbot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3martial? You mean like the art?
    • NakedSnake, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2So what's the American equivalent of Scutzstaffel, KGB, or Gestapo?
    • aristotle1990, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6If America were a dictatorship, this story would not be on Digg. Digg would not exist.There would be no opposition to Bush. Admittedly, this bill sucks. It gives the president broad power as to what to define as proper interrogation technique, something to be left to the courts. I hate terrorists just as much as the next guy, but having the ability to detain anyone suspected of terrorism, suspend their right to appeal their detainment, and torture them as one man sees fit is insanity.

      However, some of you clearly are not very intelligent. This is not the end of democracy. This bill has not yet been passed into law, the full text is nowhere to be found, the CIA still has to have a good case for marking someone a terrorist, and future presidents can always push this sucker out. Story marked as inaccurate.
    • Smoove, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"So what's the American equivalent of Scutzstaffel, KGB, or Gestapo?"

      You serious? The first thing Bush did after 9/11 was set up the Heimatsicherheitsdienst, and empower it with sweeping, unconstitutional powers reaching as far down as your library records and bookstore purchases. Not to mention phone records, computer files, personal effects, etc.
  • da5idblacksun, on 10/12/2007, -13/+38Please direct to me what section of the the bill pardons him retroactively. I've been looking for that text.
    • sharpfork, on 10/12/2007, -6/+72google is your friend
      SEC. 9. RETROACTIVE APPLICATION.
      This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply retroactively, includingto any aspect of the detention, treatment, or trial of any
      person detained at any time since September 11, 2001,
      and to any claim or cause of action pending on or after
      the date of the enactment of this Act.
      Page 86 section
      http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:Z1aDw3wb2g4J:balkin.blogspot.com/Bush.Military.Commissions.Bill.pdft&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2&lr=lang_en
    • Garda, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32i think that the bush administration needed to change the law after having broken it so severely. They detained people at their base in Cuba illegally, without trial, and most likely tortured them. Not to mention what they have done in other parts of the world, and what they have outsourced to other people to do.

      It's easy to follow the law when you are the one writing it.
    • sharpfork, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16digg chewed up the link- pdf:
      http://balkin.blogspot.com/Bush.Military.Commissions.Bill.pdf
    • ashester, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I like how Bush said the Geneva Convention was vague but he says "the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States..." "...to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 . . . in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”
      So he can take me off the street because I'm "suspected" of being a terrorist? Can he attack countries now that he "suspects" are harboring terrorists or having terrorist activities ("Use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations")? This is really absurd and really does not make me feel any safer at night.
  • earlycj5, on 10/12/2007, -21/+29Political news or opinion? Fits more in the opinion section methinks.
  • zkarcher, on 10/12/2007, -16/+29From the article:

    "...within three years, I predict that Americans will be fighting Americans on American soil. Just a hunch. An eerie feeling of deja vu from someone who has seen the same signs fifteen years ago."

    Interesting... I thought I was the only person suspecting a bloody civil war in the next few years...
    • KMChina, on 10/12/2007, -28/+11You are nuts!
    • batman88, on 10/12/2007, -17/+10A John Titor disciple? Spooky... :o

      http://www.johntitor.com/Pages/CivilWar.html

      Head for the hills!!!
    • mathmanjeffy, on 10/12/2007, -24/+11Wait... we had a civil war 15 years ago?

      Where the hell was I?
    • l0th, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1615 years ago: he's talking about (ex-)Yugoslavia. Read his post.
    • Handcannons, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5****
      Interesting... I thought I was the only person suspecting a bloody civil war in the next few years...
      ****
      You're not that unique. People have been predicting 'civil war within the next X years" for decades. All through the Clinton years some people were saying the same thing. Remember the Michigan Militia?
  • Gaius, on 10/12/2007, -14/+43Personally, I'll become truly concerned if Americans "elect" another president in '08 who will continue and expand upon the policies of the Bush administration.

    I think this decade will become an unfortunate belch in United States history, and in '08 Americans will elect a smarter, wiser and more worthy president. From there, we'll clean up Bush Co's mess and again become a true leader in the world. It might take us another decade to clean up that mess, but we'll do it.

    We're Americans. In the end, we won't allow our country to slide into a dictatorship or anything else that cuts into our founding principles. We have resisted that in the past, and will again resist that. Why should now be any different?
    • da5idblacksun, on 10/12/2007, -4/+35One can only hope ...
    • JesseJericho, on 10/12/2007, -8/+29If the "powers that be" have let this farce go on for this long, and have spent hundreds of billions of dollars doing it, do you honestly think they are just going to give up in 2008? This is a plan that extends far into the coming decades, if we actually make it there alive...
    • Four20, on 10/12/2007, -8/+24We already did this, with Bush Sr/Clinton. Clinton. Except this time it's piled up twice as high.

      And what happened after Clinton, we elected another Bush, TWICE. The States will go Democrate for 1, maybe 2 more elections, and then go back to the Republicans, and we will continue more of this BS.

      I just hate it that we have 2 more years this with ***** nut.
    • Naxr, on 10/12/2007, -17/+3we sure defended those principles during the civil war...
    • cell00, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16"One can only hope ..."

      Well actually, you can vote too! Hopefully...
    • Catchpen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9"and in '08 Americans will elect a smarter, wiser and more worthy president." I hope the choices are better than dumb and dumber like we had last time. That's the only reason Bush stayed for another 4 years. I want wise and worthy myself - not one that is just a good speaker and a liar. I hope to vote Democrat in '08 but the line up is already looking less than stellar.
    • matts0344, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Yeah, except the problem is that we only get two ***** choices because not enough people will vote for a third canidate. So we're pretty much scewed because 99% of both democrats and republicans don't really care about anyone but themselves.
    • glock22ownr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I hope you are right... but all I see is apathetic teenagers that can only think about MySpace and rap music... personally I am worried that you and I are a dying breed my friend... there aren't many that can think for themselves anymore :-/

      And yes... we did have 2 crappy choices last time...
    • thespace, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5Actually I'm still rooting for Jerry Springer (hoot! hoot! hoot! hoot!)
    • tehgooch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12I would not be surprised at all if Bush somehow became the emperor of the United States. Anything we do now makes little difference. Essentially the state is having a massive heart attack and you suggest "tweaking its diet"? Lunacy.

      People will either wake up to the immorality of the state and become dirty anarchists or we'll get another USA experiment which will implode in a few hundred years again. It amuses me to see minarchists say that if we just had a small government it would all work out. We already tried that--it hasn't worked.
  • oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/12/2007, -38/+25the beauty of the blog, everyone's a political pundit.

    just because you've got a library card, it doesn't mean you're yoda.
    • poohneat, on 10/12/2007, -10/+33did you RTFA ...
      Try and connect what all he recommended..
      i tried the first three and i was hoping to see a more informed discussion instead of people putting down blogging or blogger...

      juvenile tactic #2 during arguement
      Cast an aspersion on the character/nature of the person you are arguing with instead of breaking down the merits/content of his arguement
      blah
    • VTmruhlin, on 10/12/2007, -15/+9Yeah, I don't think some wacko's blog post makes it "official."

      This guy needs to learn how to summarize things to make his point, instead of just spouting radical ideas and putting two unrelated hyperlinks beneath them.
    • Rikkochet, on 10/12/2007, -14/+18"just because you've got a library card, it doesn't mean you're yoda."
      Up The Shut *****?
    • l0th, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15"This guy needs to learn how to summarize things to make his point"

      Yeah, my head hurts, his stuff's too difficult. What is he again? With us or against us? Good or evil?

      Man, not all ideas have to be simple, especially when you face a situation as complex as today. Looks like this post will go well beyond the head of those who need to understand it most, those who can't get an idea if it's not summarized. And they are unfortunately the majority... How do you think a guy like W. can get elected twice?
    • oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2@poo

      i read enough and realized the blog title pretty much summed up what he had to say. do i think this country has issues? absolutely. i just don't read sensationalism.

      i could go on but VT has already expressed the sentiments i would try to convey.
    • VTmruhlin, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3"Man, not all ideas have to be simple, especially when you face a situation as complex as today."

      But expression of those ideas SHOULD be simple. This guy links to other opinion pieces that eventually trickle down to actual facts. Other facts that we already know about.

      This guy's not bringing anything new to the party, so it must be assumed that he's just trying to recap what's already out there. And he did a horrible job of that.
  • killinger777, on 10/12/2007, -34/+13In other news: The Sky is Falling!!
    • PhantomBantam, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4Nothing worse than sensationalism, and both sides of the political spectrum are guilty of it. Not to mention, this guys whole argument can be destroyed by asking why abortion is still legal. If this was a dictatorship, wouldn't Bush outlaw it? No, because he is not a supreme ruler. While it is true the executive branch of government has been granted more powers (which I personally am against), the president cannot just do whatever he wants.

      The point which annoyed me most, however was: "Many of my friends and neighbors are beautifully naive about the 'innate goodness of the American people'." What evidence is presented to support her assertion? Two links about president Bush's torturing. Although He won the presidency fair and square, he is not "the American People" If there were polls on how many americans support drowning kittens for gambling purposes, she might convince me. The list goes on.
    • PhantomBantam, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4I forgot to ask why Gay marriages aren't banned, and why he is leaving in 2008.
    • JesseJericho, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Abortion and gay marriage are clearly not in the same realm as national security and the "war on terrorism". The former is an issue contained within the USA, and only concerned with the American people, whereas the latter can be construed as a matter of global concern, and as such certain liberties can be taken to address it. Or so they say. Abortion is something that can win Bush the Christian vote, and simply because they KNOW he supports pro-life, he's got it anyways. Taking control of the middle east is a whole other matter, one that is worth much more than votes.
  • twitchr, on 10/12/2007, -25/+8bury
  • Spikito, on 10/12/2007, -20/+13I dont get it, its not like he re-wrote the consitution, ever heard of checks and balances?, separation of powers? In a dictatiorship, whatever he wants, goes, but in our situation, the president is a republican, so is the cabinet, obviously since he appointed them. the sect of state, and maj of both the house and senate, it only seems liek a dictatorship because one party has a majority everywhere, same thing happened with JFK with the democrats. read your ***** goverment book sometime
    • PitifulLoser, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4I don't believe this writer knows the correct usage of "officially."

      Or really "dictatorship" for that matter.

      See you in the election booths in a couple weeks... IF THERE ARE ANY!!!! Run for your lives!

      EDIT: Whoops, didn't mean to reply to this post.
  • Smoov, on 10/12/2007, -29/+12@rjonesx

    You people are ***** lunatics. I mean you are seriously starting to sound like we need to invest more in mental hygiene in this country.

    Listen, you brainless left-wing *****: if we were living in a real DICTATORSHIP then YOU would be DEAD by now. In real dictatorships anyone who called the "great leader" a chimp and posted stuff against his regime in the web would have the lifespan of an asthmatic gnat. Just ask anyone who ever criticized Saddam Hussein.

    You leftist jackasses DO NOT DESERVE TO LIVE HERE. Go to France or Cuba. Just get the hell out of America.
    • unicornbeauty67, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3@Smoov..."You people are ***** lunatics. I mean you are seriously starting to sound like we need to invest more in mental hygiene in this country.

      Listen, you brainless left-wing *****: if we were living in a real DICTATORSHIP then YOU would be DEAD by now. In real dictatorships anyone who called the "great leader" a chimp and posted stuff against his regime in the web would have the lifespan of an asthmatic gnat. Just ask anyone who ever criticized Saddam Hussein.

      You leftist jackasses DO NOT DESERVE TO LIVE HERE. Go to France or Cuba. Just get the hell out of America."
      *****
      Smoov, "brainless left-wing *****?" Wow! If that and your advice for Americans who disagree with you and the Bush Regime to go to France or Cuba is the best you have to offer then I would venture to guess that you are one of Bush's success stories in his "no child left behind" project. In "no child left behind" they allow children who to be promoted every year whether they are academically ready or not. Your crude name calling being your only ability to make your argument shows that you absolutely should have been left behind in about the 7th grade...3 or 4 times! But congratulations! You passed on because Bush wanted more C- adults such as himself, let loose on society!

      PS... Bush is not only a dictator but he's retarded as well!
    • Smoove, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Just a note: @Smoov is not me. His asinine opinions are not mine. Thank you all.
  • cannibaljp, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23(starts countdown until thread get labeled as inaccurate...)

    and... GO!
    • heavensblade23, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Any article that leans even slightly to the left or right is buried by the other side as innaccurate within hours. I don't even know why people bother posting political stories anymore.
    • l0th, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7unfortunately, this very fact seems to support his point about a pending civil war. The polarization on digg (but not only) is getting nasty and stinky.
    • VTmruhlin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I only buried it because it doesn't belong in the "Political News" section. If he had correctly labeled it as political opinion, I would've let it slide. If we actually had officially become a dictatorship, then it would have made sense to call it news.
  • BadassCheese, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12If you look back at the Romans,as well as many other ancient civilizations, they went through a reublic> ditatorship> republic> dictatorship pattern, this is just the next step in an inevitable pattern. In like 75 years there will be some huge rebellion then we will be free for about 150 years then another dictatorship. I phrased that really bad, but you get my point.
    • neozeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well that & a collapse, and attempted refragmented reunions, but religion always seemed to get the sidetracked. As long as they dont ban books we should be ok......
    • NakedSnake, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2But you forget that the American Revolution was the only successful revolution to date. The same documents that were drafted from the beginning still govern us today, and the political organization is a little more evolved but basically still the same.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Bleah, it needs restoration. We own a fine Mercedes, but we have let the floorboards rust through. We need to sandblast the crap off our Constitution. And that may mean replacing or deleting large parts of our government.
    • Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Err...NakedSnake, "the documents that were drafted from the beginning" were overthrown in 1789! Ever heard of the Articles of Confederation?
  • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -22/+16This article is a joke
  • flashboy131, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6Democrats can't muster a filibuster, you think they can win in 08 against these republicans? Dem's have no backbone left in them. Sad... how did we get here?
  • halosniper7, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5i, for one, will welcome our new president.

    bury me, i hate that stupid comment

    give me -437 plz (or whatever it is now)
  • comedianX, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12The problems with articles like this is even if they make valid points (which I think it does) most people will just tune it out because of extreme hyperbole in the headlines and article that most people know aren't true.
  • DrunkenPirate34, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Since when is anything in a blog "Official"?
  • scott1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Maybe we should try digging the Constitution! Bush is obvisouly a digg user:
    http://www.digg.com/politics/The_Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_America
    (Just read that quote)
  • thexder, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7Christopher Walken for President!!!

    Could you just imagine him? It would be awesome. Think of him discussing dimploamcy with Iran. I crack me up.
    • Catchpen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Can you play Hail to the Chief on a cowbell?
    • tehnico, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Sometime in the future... you will pick up a cow bell... you're gonna try to play "Hail to the Chief"... it's gonna sound real bad... everyone's gonna hear... Don't you understand!? You're gonna be mildly embarrassed!
  • greymaxcat, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22I'll say it again...
    Bush is Taking away rights... Bush causes the world to hate us... Bush caused 9/11... Bush causes Global Warming... Bush is in the pocket of Big Oil... Bush is stupid... Bush blew up the levies in Louisiana... Bush is insane... Bush is a dictator... Bush hates Black People... Bush wants to torture people... Bush will bring back the draft... Bush kills innocent people... Bush deserted the National Guard... Bush is Hitler...

    After the first 100 or so accusations it just becomes background noise...
    • postaboy, on 10/12/2007, -20/+3stfu u fuccing *****, its republicans like u taht make the world turn to ***** :X
      lol
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -16/+2its the crying lefitst democrats pointing fingers going
      oh by golly he hit me REMOVE HIM FROM PRESIDENCY
    • polyfrolic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17The same attitude the good people in Germany had in 1935.

      I really wish Americans started reading up on what really happened in Germany during that period. It is like a script of what has been happening in USA for the past five years.
    • tehnico, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10"At least the trains ran on time".
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@technico

      Mussolini made the trains run on time. Bush gave us the TSA.

      Pretty clear which one is more evil.
  • CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -13/+16"I am a Red-State Serbian Jewish atheist liberal PhD student with Thesis-writing block and severe blogorrhea trying to understand the world by making strange connections between science, religion, brain, language and sex. My specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and sleep). I teach introductory biology to adults at a community college. You can contact me at: Coturnix1 AT aol DOT com"

    Yeah, un-biased and credible.

    Lame
  • PopcornDave, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27Does anybody on Digg actually realize that the US is a Republic *NOT* a Democracy? Never has been.

    Does anybody stay awake in civics classes anymore? Do they even teach civics anymore?
    • sfacets, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Totally - the US is run by an elite and the populace is invited to make minor decisions... that's about it.
    • Breakdown05, on 10/12/2007, -13/+3lol it WAS a republic and it is NOW a democracy aka MOB RULE
    • l0th, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I think the word we're all looking for is plutocracy:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy

      or better, christiano-fascist-plutocracy (this one is not on wikipedia yet, but you just wait).
    • tehnico, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Plutocracy Or Polyarchy...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyarchy

      Whatever your level of faith in the system will determine which you feel is more accurate.
    • OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I prefer the more generic term Oligarchy, it's more debatable.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
    • nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5The US isn't a republic, because people in a republic have rights that supercede the state (like the right to a trial by jury, the right to know the charges against them, the right not to be tortured).

      We are neither a democracy, nor a republic.
  • sfacets, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9Conspiracy theorists arwe ok if they end up being right. Live outside the box a little.
    • bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19The trouble with the label "Conspiracy theorist" is that conspiracies *really* do happen ALL THE TIME.

      Here in Australia we've got the AWB who funded Saddam, you lot had Enron, Karl Rove, you've had all the fallout from bribery scandals, AT&T conspiring with the US Govt to spy on you, torture coverups at abu ghraid, and subsequent admittions that this DID INDEED come from the top. (that is to say, those at the top did conspire to order torture, and they did conspire to have the little guys at the bottom take the fall)

      Frankly, in the political world, most of the conpiracies aren't any longer theoretical.
    • JesseJericho, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18I think the conspiracy theorist "haters" are the crazy ones... They get so riled up about people asking questions, logical or not. It speaks volumes about the type of person they are. I would love to see the moment when one of them realizes the theory they were bashing was actually true, because I guarantee you 99% of the time, they "forget" they were opposed to it in the first place.
  • ko16736, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5Wow, politics suck, yet they determine most of how I am required to live my life.

    I love Chapstick. It's so simple.
  • erkokite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Me and my friend noticed something similar the other day. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me (not a history expert by any means) that The United States is behaving like the former Soviet Union in some respects, particularly in the amount of money spent, by both the consumer and the government(although in the Soviet Union, it was obviously the government that did most spending). Our country seems to be hemorrhaging money. Now granted, the Soviet Union had other problems as well, such as severe public dissatisfaction and dissent that was allowed to amplify with the Glasnost policy, but when it all comes down to it, it probably was mostly a money issue.
    • neozeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+97 trillion+ national debt. Our housing market is about to pop now that interest rates have increased (the last few years 0% principal mortgages are en Vogue, not to mention Arm's) which means peoples monthly payments will go up quite a bit.

      So its time to spend spend spend consumer comrade! Tomorrow doesn't look so hot.
    • NakedSnake, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2You guys don't realize that the nat'l debt has been that way for a long time. Huey Long, back in the 1930s, ran his campaign based on the nat'l debt. He was assassinated.

      A big bunch of the nat'l debt goes to things like rebuilding Japan and Europe after World War II. Here on digg, not too long ago there was a nice article about how Great Britain was just now paying off it's last payments to the US from the World War II era.

      Also, anytime small countries request foreign aid, and we give it to them, indirectly thru the UN and what not, that contributes. Anytime the US gives a lump of cash to Africa to end hunger and AIDS and etc. that's you and me and all of us paying for it.

      After close to 100 years of doing that *****, borrowing money and jsut paying interest on the ***** borrowed, you have a massive national debt.

      It'd be easy to get rid of, in theory. All you have to do is raise taxes, and eliminate a bunch of services. But I don't see many people going along with that, do you?
  • Benad, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Amazing set of links about the issue. Also found Hilary Clinton's response:
    http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_09_24_atrios_archive.html#115947389727117828
    • stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Interesting bit about George Washington renouncing torturing the British soldiers. A lot of people today don’t realize that the British army brutalized soldiers and civilians alike. As a means of making an example, no punishment was too extreme for rebels. It was British policy that neither the rules of war, nor the protection of civil law applied to them. Any Americans who would not actively join the king’s cause were considered rebels, and were treated as such, though it usually meant losing their lives to the rebels if they did.

      When Britain Invaded the US, 60% of Americans still considered themselves Englishmen, and expected to remain so. Like the British king, they were fully anticipating the British army would quickly set things back to normal, and colonial life would go on as usual after the brief hick-up in the natural order of things.

      Were they ever surprised. The British behaved exactly like the US has in Iraq, quickly losing that 60% to sheer, unrestrained arrogance. As they murdered, tortured, looted, and destroyed their way to defeat, the British army proved to everyone that the rebels were right about resisting British tyranny. It was not long before the British found themselves in the midst of a permanent, and very expensive, guerrilla war in which their overwhelming might was ultimately useless. So hot did righteous hatred burn in the heart of ordinary Americans, the British could win battles, but never the war.

      And to see the British army in the service of yet another would be emperor named George, in exactly the same kind debacle, over 200 years later is astonishing. It’s true what they say about those who don’t learn from history.
    • joybran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What do you know? An issue that puts Hillary's political interests on the side of the angels. She is as hypocritical as anyone about putting partisan politics aside, but she is right in what she says about how horrible the bill is. I don't trust her one little bit, and I doubt this is the stand she takes in private, but maybe her public stand will do some good.
  • halosniper7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20hey, sorry if im wrong but didnt people start america because of these types of things?
    • Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2King George was practically libertarian by comparison!
  • ohgr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20Let me just say this and leave.

    We're not fighting for our freedoms in Iraq, like Toby Keith sings all the time in that "American Solider" song. The truth is, we should be fighting for our Freedoms here. Not in Iraq. The only ones taken our freedoms and liberties away is right here in the Good Ol' US of F-N A!".

    I do agree with this guy. I do believe we've been lead straight into a Police State, with a Religious Overtone, that easily sells to those Christ Loving Nutcakes. I'm sorry, they're no different than the supposed terrorists we're suppose to be fighting.

    I do believe that a civil war will come out of this here on American soil. And it will make the Crusades look like kids playing with plastic army men.




    • bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5As long as you say that and then leave to storm upon congress to repeat it i'll be happy.
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3except the terrorist were supposed to be fighting are more ruthless
      you Dis Allah
      then you get a big mob and a target on your head
      at least in our country groups vote to get were they want
      the terrorist say jihad and kill you and your family
  • DeadLikeMe, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I think this article is over the top but in a few years if we elect another wannabe king this article will have merit.

    But I really cannot believe the other Americans (I'm excluded from that category since I voted for the other guys) are so ***** dumb they will elect another guy that wants to treat the country like his private fiefdom. Or allow the election to be stolen again
    • Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"(I'm excluded from that category since I voted for the other guys)"

      You're not, since you voted.
  • losxn, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5honestly, this is really exagerated. of course i think bush did thing wrong and everything is messed up. but you wanna see lack of liberties? look at europe. although they act like they have more freedom its not without its problems. yeah i think we are being lied to by our government about stuff, but so do other governments and although its not right, lets not bash our country. the US was founded on the principle of freedom. we have to fight to get it back and not physicly. how many of us are actually informed and help in our comminuties and in local politics? if our lives our so boring that we have time to sit and blog *****, then why not time to help our fellow man? or help reform politics?
  • DeadLikeMe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I want a timer next to the "inaccurate" label afixed to this story.

    That way we can run a pool on how long it takes before the sticker appears. The winner will get the password to the paypal account the money was deposted in.

  • dinobot, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Where is Johnny Smith/Christopher Walken when you need him?
  • Catchpen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6When the right to bear arms gets amended that's when I'll worry.
    • l0th, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7Because?

      As long as you have your weapons you think you can defend yourself against your government anyway?

      If so, sorry to say, but you're an idiot.
    • Catchpen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Well Iraq is doing a pretty good job at it.
    • Yinepuhotep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's already BEEN amended, by court decisions and "interpretations" from our Glorious Leaders. Remember when John Ashcroft made the NRA so happy with his "Americans have the right to bear arms" letter? How many people read the REST of what he said? That part about the "right" being subject to "reasonable regulation"?

      If it's a RIGHT, there IS NO SUCH THING as "reasonable regulation".
  • Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2The sky isn't fallng.
  • kyledavis, on 10/12/2007, -15/+5Oh, for cryin' out loud....you people have no *clue* what it's like to live in a real dictatorship. Move to North Korea or shut the ***** up.
    • aaronnohalo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Your right it is not a Dictatorship...yet
    • Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7in china they censor the internet because of politics
      in the us anything bad gets marked with a rated 18
      now which is worse i ask
      defending children because of morals
      or a compleate disregard for any freespeach and i mean any
    • neozeed, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Isn't Iraq a nice place to visit this time of year? No civil war, and it'll be cooling off for winter! And everyone knows that its super peaceful during the sky fairy months!
  • BigBrother87, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5Okay, it's been said before, but it bears repeating: If you don't like it...MOVE! The US is the greatest nation of all time. I've thought about moving before, but then I think of the rights I would have to give up. I may not agree with all the decisions being made, but I like the final outcome of them. Look at the big picture, not each one you don't like.
    • aaronnohalo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I won't move. I will continue to try and support the U.S., and I will attempt politician before I move. If I failm I will move, hoever.
    • nixr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14I'd move to another country if I wasn't so terrified of our foreign policy.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I have my second passport already. I won't be staying.
    • Yinepuhotep, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The big picture is, that this country is kept from being the world's largest Banana Republic only by the Bill of Rights, and the Bill of Rights is effective ONLY if people fight for their rights.

      Telling people who demand their rights to shut up or move is nothing more than saying that you LIKE the idea of living in a Banana Republic.
  • dchaosdx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4it seems to me that ambiguity is a very large problem here. if any law whatsoever is intentionally ambiguous, then it should not be passed without significant revision, as it would seem that the only purpose of said ambiguity is for deceitful and mischievous purposes.
  • lightningrod220, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6The ironic thing about this posting is that the submitter believes he lives in a dictatorship, but yet he has the freedom to write this very submission, without fear of someone coming knocking on his door to arrest him for posting it.

    ... well, as long as you don't count Tom Cruise and the scientologists.
    • fiveoaks, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I doubt that is completely true, especially since American citizens can be declared enemy combatants and be spirited away to some black site. But then I guess that was always possible, really.
    • Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Unlike most others I ignore article titles, knowing they are generally technically inaccurate and sensationalist.
    • Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Why do you think there's a relationship between dictatorship and having GeStaPo agents carting people away in the dead of night? Once that starts happening, you can bet the dictator is not long for this world. Any really successful dictator will let people say whatever they like (talk doesn't hurt, and the more people are allowed to rant online, the less likely they are to actually DO anything - besides, there'll be a lot of people saying "hey, as long as you're free to say that, it's not really a dictatorship, so shut the ***** up or leave!")
  • rooster1056, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1Kyledavis just hit the nail on the head.

    Calling some of these guys dumb asses would be an insult to the dumb asses of the world.

    They should have been around during the Gorram Cold War. Then they might have a clue, about how crappy things can really be around the world and here in the USA. Here's a history lesson for you crying bunch of losers -- look up Joseph McCarthy and then come back crying about how bad we got it around here now.

    And if ya wanna go bitching about our government, why don't you take a long hard look at how the special interest groups are twisting the Constitution around to suit their own agendas.

    If ya don't like our country GET THE F*CK OUT
    • neozeed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Gorram Cold War? Who the hell are the Gorram's?

      As for deporting SIG's Im all for that. The government has gotten way to cozy to SIG's. K street project anyone?

      I say Rove should be the 1st to go... Then Cheny/Shrub.
  • GruntboyX, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Damm hippies and neocons promoting blog trash. The fact that people digg this stuff and promote it to the front page is scary. I mean we complain about Fox news being biased, but damm in the last 10 days the majority of the crap to hit the front page has been bush bashing and sensationalist journalism.

    Digg was cool when it was strictly tech news. Lately its just been political garbage pushing the attention away from the cool tech articles.

    So digg has succumbed to the level of slashdot.....now what options are there. ne suggestions for the next big thing, with tech articles only. ?
    • tokyopimp, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Absolutley, I had the politics section blocked off, and I decided to unblock it on my account today. And wow, just wow.

      I don't like the President, I don't like his policies. But these stories getting bumped to the front page shows exactly how biased most stories and people on digg are. Sensationlist garbage... if you can read this and agree, and then make a comment about Fox News being biased you are a ***** hypocrite.

      The sections I visit on digg, all have a huge bias. Gaming news is like this, the Wii is the greatest thing since sliced bread, the PS3 sucks, and the XBOX360 is right in the middle.
      On the overall tech section, apple is the *****, linux and ubuntu rock, and anything and everything MS does is crap.

      Want to be a popular poster on digg... find stories bashing MS, bashing Bush, praising Wii, bashing the PS3, etc.

      Want to be digged down to hell, have a different opinion then 90 percent of the drones on digg.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Anyone is a position of authority will soon find themselves in "Indian territory" every day. I predict people will start building IEDs and killing government agents because our government is ust as much an occupier here as it is in Iraq.
    • williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Digg the fear, government *****.
  • Mu99ins, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3The majority of those folks claiming, "this is such
    a dictatorship" are disgruntled Leftists who don't vote.
    That hurts the Democrats, who would normally enjoy
    a majority, but instead have to compete in evenly
    split elections in this new century. The Democrats
    are victimized by the disgruntled defeatists (which I suspect
    is a cover for being too lazy to interrupt their daily routine
    to vote...), from their same side of the political spectrum.
    I say, forget the lame dictatorship conclusion, and get out
    to vote, and vote out the incumbents while you're at it.
  • Mikesfedup, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9
    You really think Democrats or Republicans are the party to change this government? Better think again, because the corruption is in both. Many in office now are not arguing the Constitution and its principals for government. The Bush administration has been pushing for re-interpretations of this great document to further their agenda and the Congress has allowed him to do so. Apparently, they have forgotten who is the more significant Branch in this government, but ultimately, they have forgotten who was granted the REAL power by the Constitution; The People.
    The People that wrote the Constitution said that the text must be interpreted by Historical Background. This is the only true Constitution, unless there is a Constitutional Amendment to change "this" to "the", for the builders were extremely precise in each and every word they finalized for ratification. What? What's the difference? This sets a reference point in time. At that time, the Constitution was only to be used with the Historical Background. It is that interpretation to which they are forced by their oath of office to support.
    As James Madison has been qouted:"Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government."
    Isn't that what We have now?
    • Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Whenever I see a top list of corrupt politicians (with accompanying explanations), Republicans win hands down.
  • halosniper7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4we should takeover some other place and call it america 2, then well have about 250 years until a bush figure comes along.

    history will repeat
    • stonebear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"There is no more new frontier
      We will have make it here."
      ~ The Eagles (The Last Resort)
  • zorpedo, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1***** like this doesn't belong on Digg. Can't there be one cool place left to go to without hearing everyone else's retarded political theories? I if wanted to hear political fantasies and fairy-tales, I'd turn on the TV.
  • zenguy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+0Oh, figures, Digg has become another echo chamber. Better end this thread while you can.
  • DigiRaven, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1what the hell is wrong with people on digg? it has become very disappointing with these fascist conspiracy theorists.
    • Osjpr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7If you think powerful governments don't have any desire to shape law and control people, then you are just being naive.
    • Mikesfedup, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11 The dictatorship arguement is real because the interpretations of the Constitution are being skewered to fit whatever Bush's AG, Albert Gonzales, can misinterpret to Congress and the Congress has been rubber stamping everything, giving Bush more power as a consequence.
      The false war on terror has been the pretext for all of this since the rationale argued by Gonzales has been the War Powers Act that gives the president the right to declare war on whomever He wants. Congress has to approve, and they have, frequently.
      Only Congress has been granted this power by the Constitution, not the President, but that has been changed. Since going to war in Iraq was a HUGE lie, that would make it illegal, same with Afghanistan, and perhaps Iran or Syria, if it happens.
      So where is the opposition party? And where are the watchdog media? Where is the true fighters to keep an eye on the government at all times?
      We now have a torture bill just passed, that qaulifies us as a terrorist state/nation.
      A war on terror? The Bush administration is a terrorist government.
      Remember what He said? "You are with us or you are with the terrorists."
      In that context if you don't agree with him, then that makes dissenters."Terrorists"
      Passage of the Patriot Act allowed this government to spy on its own people "legally", what other reason could there have been for the Patriot Act? It does nothing to stop terrorism, but yet it was the first thing the government did right after 9/11.
      Does anybody think that those who push for War don't make any money? Do those who go into battle make any money? Our guys are now in Iraq and Afghanistan fighting who now? Who is now or has benefited from these wars? Is Iraq in better shape now than it was 4 years ago? Are We in better shape than We were 5 years ago? You want to surrender your rights for security? Do you think once you leave your security in the hands of the government, then the government can enslave you in the name of security? You certainly will have to give up your rights to ensure that power into the hands of government.
      In fact, once you trade your liberty, you'll never see that security. You're going to receive tyranny, in spades!. . .You're being searched at airports. You'll soon be
      searched on buses, trains, and subways. Eventually, you'll be searched on the streets."
      The Constitution already provids to protect us against these abuses of power for the people against enemies FOREIGN and..DOMESTIC. The Patriot Act waters it down.
      Our biggest enemy right now is the government.
  • Eleo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6It's sad how this happened like this. What ever was democracy if it only takes such little effort to install fascism?
    • Mikesfedup, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8
      Well Eleo the watchdog mainstream press that was given a place in the first Amendment has become corporatized. The corporations are who the politicians listen to, We are given lip service. This is Fascism. When corporations are the most prevelant as far as influence,i.e. Lobbies, large political donations, expensive dinners, exclusivity to only elites, then this is what you have; corruption.
      When people look to the government to take care of them, that means the government ends up running the economy. That means, ultimately, ten percent of the people are gonna up end two-thirds of the wealth, and the other 90% will share the remaining one-third. That's just human nature, and those who think otherwise have their hands glued over their eyeballs.
      When people allow the government to take away their liberty to order to "take care" of them, the people invariably end up with no liberty, no security, and no wealth. Instead they end up poor, stupid, and oppressed. They voluntarily turn themselves into slaves. This will always happen, just as surely as night follows day.
  • sonicdevo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Is there any way I can invert my rated-comment viewing preferences? Most of the comments worth reading are massively negged, and visa versa.
  • perrygeo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16"When the Nazis came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.

    When they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    When they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out."

    Martin Niemöller
  • elpayo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15George Bush: "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long I'm the dictator." December 18, 2000
    • unicornbeauty67, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7elpayo...George Bush: "If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier - just so long I'm the dictator." December 18, 2000
      ******
      Wow! Straight from the horse's ass..er.. I mean mouth!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.