What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
63 Comments
- dextrousm, on 10/11/2007, -4/+52I'll say this one more time: Just cause Clinton did it doesn't make it OK. If the conservative response to people being critical of Bush is "Clinton did it too," that's simply pathetic. Pardoning people for purely political reasons is wrong no matter who did it. There have been wrongful pardons in the past, and there is a wrongful pardon now. Just cause something has happened before doesn't make it right or acceptable or even excusable. This is a blatantly politically move that places personal loyalty to Bush above the letter of the law. Have other presidents done the same thing? Sure. Does that mean we should let anyone get away with it again without in-depth analysis? Of course not.
- IrishJoe, on 10/11/2007, -9/+44Hey, seraph82, guess who Rich's lawyer was the one who petitioned Clinton for and received Rich's pardon. Still guessing? Let me help you out...it was none other than Scooter Libby himself. I love when Repubs use the Rich pardon and conveniently forget that it was Libby who got him the pardon. Dork!
- ddxChrist, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21This "but [insertperson] did it" nonsense needs to stop. Are we going to sit back and not handle current problems in the future by saying, "But Bush did it!" If we allow this kind of reasoning to persist we're going to start a dangerous precedent.
- roflcawpter, on 10/11/2007, -7/+24This, my fellow diggers, is an example of the dumbass 20% who still support the president.
- reed311, on 10/11/2007, -4/+18(Tears streaming down face) But Clinton!!!!!!111lolz2wrongs=right
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Finds the bill of rights.....
- Arbus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13.... and edits the page to their liking.
- LordVance, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12This is one of the largest problems facing our nation right now. Once one administration, or politician in general, does something wrong and gets away with it that instantly sets the precedent that it is okay to do.
- strOphe, on 10/11/2007, -6/+17Justice is blind... which is a problem when your administration is deaf and dumb.
- BlackAle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Saying he has to pay $250000 is meaningless, what matters is how much money he has? ...I'm guessing considering his stature, it's not going to bankrupt him.
- omaryak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6This reminds me of the time former FCC chairman Michael Powell said he didn't know what "public interest" meant – "The night after I was sworn in, I waited for a visit from the angel of the public interest. I waited all night, but she did not come." (Full speech: http://www.fcc.gov/Speeches/Powell/spmkp806.html ) At least we know Mr. Powell gave serious thought to the concept.
- roflcawpter, on 10/11/2007, -6/+12I'm burying this article as inaccurate.
I doubt the White House knows what justice OR law is. - ZephyrNinety, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11White House Discovers Wikipedia
- drakethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Where was Iraq mentioned and wtf is wintermd talking about? Its as if he just cut and pasted the response he had preplanned for any political article on digg...
- wordwarp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Why hasn't Richard Armitage been prosecuted?
- nevesis, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9It was actually the Project for a New American Century who was advocating the removal of Saddam.
This is the (first?) neoconservative think tank responsible for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al. - greywolfexcel, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Even if Clinton did the same, thing, that still doesn't make what Bush did right. It just means that there were *two* presidents that had contempt for the constitution.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Because Richard Armitage is a stooge. That's the same reason Rove wasn't prosecuted, and Libby wouldn't have been prosecuted either, were it not for his obstruction-- even though they both also leaked Plame's identity. The investigation led to Cheney as the driver behind the leaks. Libby lied to protect Cheney.
- kurttrail, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Why are you just concerned about Armitage? Libby & Rove both outed Plame too.
- mtjohnson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Equal Justice? No.
Equal Just-ISH? Yes! - palehorse864, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I'm not sure he's right about regime change being coined in the Iraq Liberatin act of 1998, but Clinton did sign the law calling for the US to work towards a change in Iraq. It's not the same thing as Bush's plan exactly but it does share a few elements. I just checked wintermd's comment and simply googled for the Iraq Liberation Act and got the text of the bill and a bit more.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c105:H.R.4655.ENR:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
The first link is the text of the bill, the second is a wikipedia article on it, so take that for what you will. - kurttrail, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Don't you mean "You retards that aren't rightist extremists?"
Remember, Bush bashing has spread to the center too. You isolated kooks at the extreme right are all alone in your insane adoration of the Idiot-In-Chief. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Interesting that that's been the exact opposite of this administration's policy since day one.
- unloud, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Joke taken too far by AngryBacon.
- otep, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9..
Clearly, Justice hates America.
... - kurttrail, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3What "IS" the relationship between you and the preschool you went to?
- conceptkid, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4^dude, the election is over a year away, november 08 right? We cant ignore whats happening now. You do the crime, you pay the time. Ain't no more to it.
- pontiac, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4This is just a copy-paste comment. If you go to Wintermd's profile and look at all of his comments on other articles the majority of them are just this same paragraph over and over again. I guess he really feels the need to get this message out that because a popular ex-president said that regime change was needed in Iraq then it was A-OK for Bush to send out troops there and do whatever else he wanted in the meantime.
- AngryBacon, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Wikipedia admins notice White House IP, reverts and locks page.
- nater86, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Context is everything, folks. Here is Stanzel's complete answer from the whitehouse.gov transcript, although it doesn't make him look much better:
MR. STANZEL: Well, I guess I don't know what you mean by "equal justice under the law." But this is a unique case, there's no doubt about that. And we have said that there are a lot of people on all sides of this issue who've made good points. The President took a very measured approach to it. He believed that the jury verdict should be respected and -- but he did feel that the sentence was excessive, in terms of jail time. But this is a unique case, and there's no doubt about that. - Me1000, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4i would say politics is a very important part of life, i mean these are the people that ...rule... I mean serve you!
- yanked, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Why not impeach him now? Or at least pull the troops home, and maybe save 1000 American lives, at the current rate of loss.
Plenty of reasons not to drop it. - insticate, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6The White House Press person/secretary (whomever it might be on that day) speaks for the President of the United States.
The United States is in BIG, BIG trouble when the President doesn't know what "equal justice under the law" means. - uptown, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7I don't know why the press even wastes their time at the White House daily press breifings. It's such a packaged collection of ***** and marketing spin, that it seems the public would be better served by having those reporters chasing down leads on their own.
- nevesis, on 10/11/2007, -5/+7celeb cases? dork?
um.... what? - simplejoe79, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2What does the White House know?
- yanked, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Wow, this is the most Clinton-free discussion of Libby I've seen yet on Digg. We may be actually making some headway.
Now if we can just get these nincompoops to start explicitly defending their President's decision to pardon his own employee. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2you forgot about tricky dick! he was a GOP president right?
or should we talk about Iran contra? - alpine75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I could keep spamming "don't confuse them with the facts" in a lot of Digg postings today. As it is, I already have. It's astonishing how ignorant some posters on Digg are!
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2hey how about tricky dick?
- fahimi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Dugg up for using The Word.
- texaspeaks, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10Buried as inaccurate because no context is provided. You pick out one quote without any explanation and tear the guy to pieces.
"Digerals aren't interested in intelligent debate. They'd rather insult those they disagree with and compare them with the most evil and ignorant people in history, thus exposing their own evil and ignorance." - KevinDupuy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+7I love when anybody, Republican, Democrat, Black, White, American, Canadian, Martian decides to use a CUT of someone saying something, and then get a conclusion off of that.
Burying as innacurate. - iChuckles, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Oh Canuck you make me laugh so. Are you smart enough to understand the irony and hypocrisy of your post. You should run for office.
- cherwilco, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Its funny how you people get all upset about anyone discussing the atrocities of our current presidential administration! In case ya didn't notice YOUR IN THE POLITICAL NEWS CATEGORY! and this is just the news so if you don't like it ya shouldn't have voted for him!
- origclubsoda, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3If you think this is bad, then Clinton was a bumbling idiot. He doesnt know what sex is or what the definition of "be" is.
- Speckles, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Don't call seraph82 that name; it's insulting to women.
- Catachresis, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I thought we already had a dangerous President?
Oh wait, "precedent," sorry. - texaspeaks, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3A great question that screams for an answer. If Libby covered up a crime, then Armitage is guilty of that crime. Equal justice? If Libby has to pay a $250,000 fine, then what would a fair punishment be for Armitage?
"Digerals aren't interested in intelligent debate. They'd rather insult those they disagree with and compare them with the most evil and ignorant people in history, thus exposing their own evil and ignorance." - brooklynboy, on 10/11/2007, -8/+7"Scott Stanzel was asked, “Scott, is Scooter Libby getting more than equal justice under the law? Is he getting special treatment?” And Stanzel responded, “Well, I guess I don’t know what you mean by ‘equal justice under the law.’” That explains a lot."
Wow, you anti-conservatives are just going crazy, aren't you? SCOTT was not saying he did not understand "equal justice". He was saying that he does not understand THE QUESTIONERS UNDERSTANDING of equal justice under the law. Do YOU UNDERSTAND?
Jesus people, just drop it. In less than a year you'll have a new president. Stop whining and looking for ways to attack the administration and start voting. -
Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is