What is Digg?203 Comments
- jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -34/+134If Clinton can get impeached for a bj, i think Bush can get impeached for violating the constitution, starting wars illegally, and approving CIA leaks.
- Sofa_King_Jank, on 10/12/2007, -19/+82I saw a minivan with this bumper sticker, "When Clinton lied, nobody died."
- xavier42, on 10/12/2007, -15/+67Bush needs to go. I used to be a republican, but he turned me into a democrat with his out of control spending and his countless lies. Props to Vermont for getting the ball rolling.
- cheez, on 10/12/2007, -17/+65and so much more
- wnathans, on 10/12/2007, -21/+55Clinton wasn't impeached for a BJ, he was impeached for lying under oath.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -15/+46So you went from one dumb party to another? You do realize they're essentially the same party, right? As long as you keep bouncing from party to party and attacking the opposite party and playing "rah rah, my team is best" politics, nothing will ever change. Being truly independant is the way to go (not just "Ross Pero" independant) or at least libertarian.
While I have some issues with goofy libertarians, it's less about what they stand for and more about the lame way they present it (they'll take twelve pages to explain something that should take a paragraph). But at least they stand for the basics. The other parties are constantly in flux however it best suits their own personal agendas.
So yeah. Whenever I hear a republican talk ***** about dems or a democrat talk ***** about republicans, I just laugh. It's like two kids in the special olympics arguing over who is more retardeder. - tdkyo, on 10/12/2007, -12/+42With a Republican majority in both houses of Congress? Dunno about that.
- jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+37If your an american, this affects your life much more directly then a linux cluster.
- thebusdriver, on 10/12/2007, -18/+43Couldnt have said it better myself.
- jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22Bush's reign has affected the entire WORLD much more then you might realize. The US is a superpower, the world (like it or not) looks to us as somewhat of a role model. We affect trade, we affect peace. We are setting a VERY bad example.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22It doesn't matter what your political affiliation is. To become a viable presidental candidate, you must be vouched for by certain very powerful organizations, parties and individuals. This is not going to happen to some radical libertarian out to shake things up and return us to a free, open, independant society because that person does not serve the needs of those who have the most power.
So, by nature, you must compromise and be compromise to be presidential material. I don't care what party you are from. That is why it gets on my nerves when people act like getting a democrat in the white house is going to solve our problems or getting a republican in the white house will do it. It won't. Just like most presidents have the same color of skin, same general religion, come from the same general part of the country and are generally business men or lawyers, most presidents must adhere to the same asskissing promises and compromises. You need it if you want the money and political support needed for election.
When I hear people talk like that (about left versus right, for example), it just makes me wish someone would take the blinders off their eyes so they could think more abstractly and see the rest of the spectrum. So that they could see that they're not positively contributing to society by going from one evil to another evil -- all the while being lulled into believing that the side they rally behind is inherently better than the other.
When you get right down to it, it's all a ruse on the American public. They keep you fighting over left/right conservative/liberal as if there was a significant difference (they both want to invade your privacy, in different ways -- they both want to take your money, in different ways -- they both want to push agendas, in different ways -- they're both after their own personal power). It's like sports. Sports exist to placate the public. To make you forget about the ***** of life and wallow in shaking a giant foam finger to support a bunch of over paid athletes that aren't even from your city and feeling victorious when they win, as if it means something or has changed the world. Likewise, when you shake that big foam donkey or elephant, you're just particpating in the same sort of placating party-bashing that they *want* you to participate in. As long as you think there is enough of a different to fight each other over, they can keep the balance that works out to their favor in pushing the agendas behind the agendas.
Like I always say, debating republican versus democrat is like deciding if you want a piss soda or a ***** sandwich.
They both have their philosophically good points and their bad points. And neither has enough good points to be worth my time. And when I see a bunch of spoiled little college and highschool brats who are going around spouting off things like "impeach bush!" (as much as I hate the guy), it just strikes me as a little disingenuous. They often strike me as not very politically educated and like their radical and enthusiastic viewpoints are not based on introspecial and thought and logic, but because people around them (school, parents, televison, etc) tells them that it's what they're supposed to feel. I'm sure it is different in general here on digg, but elsewhere in society, you would be hardpressed for such people to offer you (on eithe side of the aisle) good reasons of why they hate the other party or the other party's candidate, other than the rhetorical talking-points they've heard over and over from their favorite source.
So I say, unless you're going to be different about it, shut the ***** up. Stop promoting the status quo by acting like republicans or better -- or democrats are better. They're all full of ***** and ***** things up. - theweapon, on 10/12/2007, -13/+27They should impeach him for not being able to speak an English sentence properly.
- Fascist, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22About time.
- omn3s, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Congressional elections are coming up. Maybe the Democrats will get their heads out of their collective asses and win some elections. Then there will be a chance at impeachment, and Bush will finally be forced to answer for his actions.
- jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachement
- Rufunki, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17I hope other politicians follow through. I am getting tired of paying taxes, that I see going to Iraq. When school don't even have funding for paper and pencils, but yet billions of dollars are being sent overseas for a fruitless war, there is defiantly something wrong.
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -17/+29It's funny how the Republicans jumped all over Bill Clinton about his scandal, but it seems like whatever George does is a-OK. No-one (Senetors ect) seems to complain, even with the Presidents falling poll numbers- it makes me wonder who they are working for, us or them. The only Senetor that has been pushing for an impeachment is Russ Feingold, and he has basically been made fun of by both sides.
- Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Some American people here actually believe Bush's actions only affect American people! Ahem, what about the all the innocent and dead Iraqis. What about war planes refueling in Ireland!!
- ani-pockdotnet, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12But this my friend, is important! There are times when the "Is this Technology related" rule must be broken for a greater good. Even if you aren't living in the States, this does concern you, as the United States is a world power. Bush is the leader, so his outcome should be important to you.
Nicely put jmechy! - pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -8/+18Basically they want to fire him.
- ConceptJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I'm sorry, geminitojanus, but I think you should learn to spell before criticizing others.
- RobotCitizen, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17I sympathize. I bet you probably thought you were voting for an actual conservative. I don't think they exist anymore. They've all been replaced by theocrats and megacapitalists bent on economic global supremacy.
- eadnams, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15Does it matter if Bush is a Democrat or Republican at this point? Regardless of party, he's got a lot of blood on his hands, and a lot of decisions to answer for. Any president who has acted as he has, needs ot answer for it.
As an aside, apparently the last time a president had an apporval rating this low, it was Nixon the day before he resigned. - Kujila, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10I'm only ready for a Nintendo Revolution
- mike_p, on 10/12/2007, -9/+16This is what happens when the opposite party is in the executive position of the presidency... It doesn't surprise me that Vermont is calling for action as they are pretty much the most liberal state in the entire US with 1 democratic senator and 1 independent whom usually sides with democrats....
But... Bush still is ***** up this country's public image and shows a lack of concern for our brother nations. Anyone outside of our "circle of trust" looks at us as the heavy-handed republic of imperialism... Deal with it for 2 more years and then vote the Republicans out of office. It won't do you any good to have a Democrat prez and republican majority congress... AND conservative majority supreme court...
@dukeofspades: you bring up what a lot of democrats don't want to hear... both parties did vote in favor of the act of war all knowing the circumstances and consequences... John Kerry was standing out amongst the supporters of the war in the beginning. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Whatever side you're on, consider how sad it is that 2 presidents in a row have been in this position. This says something about the sad state of politics and politicians in this country.
- hollywoodone, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14Good for them.
digg.com/politics - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12I don't think it's a partisan issue myself, and I feel its very tech-related in the sense that the President may have authorized domestic spying (which is very technical).
I don't care if the president is black, white, Democrat, Republican, male or female. Their job first and foremost is to Follow The Constitution. And the instant they've failed us, it's time for people to consider getting someone else to do the job. The President is not above the laws set forward by this country because he is President, if anything the President should be held as the example of a model citizen and follow the law to its dotted I's and crossed Ts. - Ireland, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13He's a war monkey!!!
- MoeB, on 10/12/2007, -9/+16i agree. i cant stand bush anymore when he says that he is a man of god and he is doing the work of Jesus. he isn't a Christian by my definition. the only thing he and his stupid party worships is power. "if you believe Jesus ever had a good word for war or torture or tax cuts for the rich or raping the earth the you might as well believe bunnies lay painted eggs." - bill Maher
- bobbob1016, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11@seumas: Yes they were democrat's who called for his impeachment, but that does not mean they are the only ones wanting it. I am a democrat, but even if bush was a democrat I'd want this. This is not meant against republicans, this is against a corrupt government, and I've seen more corrupt things in the republican party, but that is just what I've seen. Democrats however, have been womanizers.
- speel, on 10/12/2007, -10/+16http://www.impeachbush.org
- dracula7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7howard dean was an idiot... calling the democratic party liberal is like calling the republicans conservative (but with more negative condonation). i would like to see people take a blind-taste test of american politics. no red or blue, just the facts - and see which they pick... the invasion of iraq had been planned long before september 11 by the neocons (some private company funded by cheney had it outlined in a press release 2 years before, etc.)... the notion that we were invading iraq for domestic security is so obviously FALSE and a lie, i simply cant stand politics any longer.
bush's current approval rating is very telling of whats to come you ***** republicans - hashkaran, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11i seriously doubt if it happens..
- EricAnderton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8@Seumas
I actually modded you up since you seem to understand how things actually work. Political parties are, in the end, entities that hire and employ people so they have some motive behind collecting money in any way they can. They advertise an agenda that appeals to a certain crop of people, so that they can further their own ends. The end result is a rather dubious blend of civic and party-oriented responsibility; Kind of like toothpaste companies.
I myself don't cling to *any* party line as I like to think for myself. :)
IMNSHO, folks should do themselves a favor and burn their $POLITCAL_PARTY membership cards and start voting for *individuals* that actually represent their views and needs. The branding and image that a given party puts up, and uses to float a given candidate, is just that: branding and image. Rather than watching commercials and listening to how the press pans things left and right, you have to do things the old-fashioned way and do your homework before entering that voting booth.
Yes, I understand that this is quite a "pie in the sky" kind of idea as it requires an *informed public*. Fix the education problem, raise the average IQ around here and things will change. Otherwise, our fellow citizens (as a whole) are more likely to vote the kind of guy that they'd like to hang with at the local VFW, than someone that actually knows something about economics or foreign culture.
PS. The USA has had a long history of putting lawyers and veterans into the White House. While these, arguably, are not the only source of leadership and brains in this country, the current state of affairs may very well stand to demonstrate what happens when we brake from that forumla. It certainly makes me wonder.
// gets off of soapbox. - Kujila, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I totally agree. It doesn't matter whether it's a Republican or Democratic controlled nation, the Government is still corrupted beyond repair.
- 12340987, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9bush's policies drastically affect science and healthcare. Job markets are destroyed that may employ many thousands of tech workers.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+17Finally someone takes a stand against Bush. About time too. Impeach Bush before our beloved nation is no more!
- jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12exactly. "No child left behind" my butt.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9You do realize that impeachment proceedings take a LONG time and even if everything worked, it wouldn't be completed and effective until his term is almost over anyway, right?
- Kujila, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's off the front page now everyone, so y'all can calm down :P
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@ericanderton
Exactly. For example, do you think that the United Auto Workers Union is going to put their support behind a candidate based on whether or not he leaked a CIA cover? No. They're going to base their support and votes and money on whether or not the president is going to bring them more power, money and benefits.
Is the National Teacher's Uniont / NEA going to base their support of a candidate on whether or not they support a woman's right to choose and smaller government? No, they're going to base it on how much power, money and benefits the president will bring to them.
Are the religious organizations (Falwell, etc - who command far too much power and votes) going to base their endorsement and money and votes on whether the president supports free speech or being anti-pollution or lower taxes? No - they are going to endorse and promote the president who will offer them the most power, money and benefits they can get as well as the president who will bolster their moral beliefs and infuse them into the fabric of society.
Is big business going to support a president because he supports worker's rights, better healthcare and free speech? No, Big business is going to support the president (with large sums of money, votes, etc) based on the president's ability and willingness to offer them power, money and benefits such as skirting anti-pollution laws, worker's rights laws and tax laws.
The political parties we have can ONLY produce very generic, homogonized presidential candidates who will find the greatest leverage among all of these special interest groups and unions -- all of which are interested in their own bottom dollar own clout rather than freedom, security, liberty and justice. But people are too blind to see that their devil is not much better than the other guy's devil. And both devils are bought and paid for. - jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9what makes you think Cheney would have been elected? There is a reason he wasn't in the running for president, the republican party knew he was a bad canidate.
- gk128, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10"What I Like About Bush is no Matter how the Facts Change his Opinion doesn't." - Steven Colbert
Bush is the one not using facts to back up anything. Only old outdated notions.
As for tax hikes... they will be needed. How else are we going to fix our HUGE deficit? At this rate there will be a deflation in the value of the USD in the near future. - Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I am a registered Republican. I support the war. How many more mass graves do we have to dig up before people stop pretending that Saddam and his supporters aren't worthy of a good ass kicking?
Still, I do not agree with bush's spending policies (aside from the war). On those grounds alone, I would see him go. He takes a lot of *****, and he deserves most of it.
The problem isn't Liberal vs Conservative or Rep. vs Dem.
The problem is the size of our nation. There are too many people, we'll never agree on anything. We have very different political and moral views. The purpose of the Federal government was to serve 2 essential needs:
A) Defense of the nation from foreign forces.
B) Secure interstate commerce.
Now it's grown out of control. They take care of health care, retirement, unemployment, can supersede state laws and policies etc.......The list keeps going.
I propose breaking up the Federal government all together. When it was formed, military strength was based solely on the population. Those countries who had more soldiers won more wars. Now weapons have advanced enough where technology is more important than population. The state could defend it's self. The states could independently pick and choose which battles they wanted to fight, and against who. With a smaller voting public, your vote would count for much more. As laws between states diverge from a common origin overtime, differing policies would severely decrease the power of lobbyists and large corporate contributions. Again this would result in your vote having more power.
When the United States was founded, when our constitution was drafted, the country was a much smaller place. even as it grew, crossing the country could take up to a year and may well cost you your life. We were geographically isolated, and politically isolated from each other. There was a stronger sense of community, and individuals had more influence. Now we must organize every effort with millions of people all over the country, find financial contributors who will support our goal (usually because it incidentally benefits their business / personal profits) and rally for attention that we ultimately wont get. Yes our peers who know where to find us will hear us, but they're not the people we need to get the message to.
Of course, state government isn't perfect either (I live in NY, home of George Pitaki and Hillary Clinton... Why is there never a good lynch mob when you need one?). My taxes in this state are higher than most of you could conceive (except some of you homeowners in southern California maybe) When we take away the Federal government, the state would have to fill in all the holes. That means no more Federal taxes, but a lot more state taxes. Now states that outrageously overcharge the taxpayer will have more to lose. It forces a more competitive nature in local government. They have to better balance cost and service without receiving multi-billion dollar subsidies from the Federal government who gets it from other states. (yes if you live in Wyoming, your paying in part for my state's expenses as well as your won, and your not getting anything back for it.) Try that ***** without a bigger organization to bail you out. People would simply move away, or better, revolt and kill dirty politicians... that used to happen all the time.
But the fact is, among a smaller voting public, real change can be effected. Sure it's all just a crazy dream of mine, but hey someone needs to propose a solution instead of just bitching. Maybe it's not the best solution, but lets at least get a good dialog going that doesn't involve more mindless political bashing. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=facist&btnG=Google+Search
- andwest, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12Man. It's about time.
- MoeB, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9hah, the bush administration has failed to warn the citizens of USA of the mass weapon of destruction that is global warming. why do you think that is? well the answer is simple... in order to protect oil company profits. that fits well as the definition of treason.
your saying he didnt break any laws? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8The Instant that he gave the theoretical middle finger to the Bill of Rights was when we should have pushed through impeachment motions.
- gk128, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12This is a good move. Chances are it will never go through. The Bush administration is way too powerful and far reaching.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 202 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is