digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at observer.com

WOW! Robert De Niro on Obama's 'Inexperience'

observer.com — It's clear Barack Obama does not have the experience to let the special interests run the government. He wasn't experienced enough to authorize the invasion of Iraq. That's the kind of inexperience I can get used to.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • MurphyWatson, on 02/05/2008, -69/+16Soo.. Robert De Niro endorses Obama as president?
    • bcclist, on 06/11/2008, -4/+16per the link. but, it required that you click through it.
    • michaelb1, on 02/05/2008, -4/+35You talking to me? You talkin to me?
      • scarletsneakers, on 02/05/2008, -24/+1LOL ~ looks like it! :)
        (Check out my shop for YES, WE CAN & SI SE PUEDE gear!)
        • chaosium, on 02/05/2008, -0/+8Reporting for spamming cafepress *****.
    • CrazedLeper, on 02/05/2008, -29/+4Obama is in the process of getting all the experience he'll need bowing to his dark overlords.
    • calon9, on 02/05/2008, -1/+7Elementary my dear MurphyWatson, but in this case what could've gone wrong (you not reading the article), apparently happened.
      • alimighty1, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1this is one of the most clever comments I have ever seen on Digg or any other social site for that matter. Bravo. It would have been icing if your username was something like "Sherrylock"
  • cashman57, on 02/05/2008, -243/+41He has never held a leadership position. He has had all the opportunity to do so but has failed to take them. He has absolutely NO economic experience or expertise.He has NO record of working with both parties in Congress unless you count the time he voted to fund the Iraq use of force in the now famous 100-0 Senate vote.
    Now, if he was as dead set against the Iraq debacle, why did he vote to FUND IT?
    He's an anti-gunner who thinks the second amnedment gives him the right to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. He fought against allowing law abiding people in Chicago to protect themselves with a handgun and now we saw that in the mall in suburban Chicago the only one with a gun was a bad guy. How many more people have to die before Barack understand what a BIG MISTAKE he made? He should go make an apology to the families of those women who were killed because HE disarmed them.
    • bcclist, on 06/11/2008, -13/+78cashman - good to see you back at it. i haven't seen you around in awhile but maybe it's because i haven't paid attention. or, you've always been dugg down by the time I get to an obama story. it must be pretty tough bashing obama now that he's the popular candidate that will win the nomination.
      • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 02/05/2008, -60/+14Yea, he should really know better than to be critical of someone who is popular!!
        • bcclist, on 06/11/2008, -11/+46good to see cashman's only ally chiming in. keep up the good work guys.
          • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 02/05/2008, -54/+6Good to see high school is not over for some. I have no idea who cashman is.
      • cashman57, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1I sometimes have difficulty in gettin to 'puter. Have spent some time bedridden but am better now. Telling the truth about Obama isn't bashing and even if he wins we all lose because of his backward thinking. His CFR speech convinced me he's no different than Bush. Want more undeclared wars and abuse of executive power?
        Vote Obama or some other lawyer
    • nblsavage, on 02/05/2008, -7/+97Cash, I don't know how to make this any more clear. Smearing the other candidates doesn't make yours more viable.
      • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 02/05/2008, -52/+8Well, we could talk about what he will actually do in office - execpt we can't because no one knows just what that is. Maybe is planning on running feel-good ads where throws out meaningless phrases like "Its time for change" for his entire term.
        • nblsavage, on 02/05/2008, -6/+46Or you could quit posting pointless messages on Digg and go to his official site which has all the information you want.
        • 1159, on 02/05/2008, -4/+25Yes, because Bush's experience as governor was really indicative of what his presidency has turned out to be. At least Obama has an inkling of character and doesn't just follow whatever the polls tell him to advocate or dispose. For example, it's interesting and politically risky to come out and say the war on drugs isn't working and it may just be a good idea to decriminalize marijuana. I don't see any other mainstream candidates (with the exception of Paul) willing to make such common sense statements.
          • capiCrimm, on 02/05/2008, -1/+6Obama does not support complete decriminalization of marijuana which would be the smart common sense approach. From his website...

            "Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior. "

            ... which is a very small step.
        • TecHeavy, on 02/05/2008, -3/+16@DRINKxREDxBULL
          Past presidential candidates may have told you what they would do when they are in office, but how many of them have actually done it? At least Obama isn't a liar, and for the first time in history maybe we can have a real genuine person in the White House.
          Now, the fact that you don't know what Obama is planning to do in office confuses me a bit. If you would just take the time to real a little you'll see and learn about a lot of the ideas that he has presented. If you don't like to read, well there is the presidential debates that have been on for almost a year now.

          Barack's Zero to Five Plan:
          Barack's Plan to Protect the Openness of the Internet: "Which this administration is killing as I type"
          Barack's Plan to Open Up Government to its Citizens: "So that we know what the ***** is going on with our country"
          Barack's Plan to Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: "Which Hillary Clinton's husband put into place"
          Anyway you get the idea if you just do some research instead of just typing what you think you'll never be able to make informed choices in your life, OK buddy?
      • Tenbatsu404, on 02/05/2008, -8/+4Tell that to the Obamabots that plague every Ron Paul story on digg.
        • krebcycle, on 02/05/2008, -3/+2Curses, if it wasn't for Obama and you crazy kids, Ron Paul would be the next president!
        • jjsixty6, on 02/06/2008, -3/+4And the Paulbots that plague (almost) every Obama story.
      • r3574r7, on 02/06/2008, -3/+1Exactly!!
        Please post this on the next antianyothercandidatebesidesobama submission.
      • cashman57, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1I don't know how I can make this more clear, it doesn't matter who is running Obama is wrong on our right to keep and bear arms.
    • digindrivefast, on 02/05/2008, -37/+10He came to Idaho & claimed he supports the 2nd amendment... Did he flip/flop?
      Go Ron Paul.
      • Luminoth, on 02/05/2008, -6/+5Saying much against the 2nd amendment here is almost grounds for a lynching.
        • SkinnerBox, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5Hello West Virgina, thanks for stopping by.
        • livejamie, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1ahahahaha
        • Luminoth, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1So I came back and read this and realized I should've said "here in Idaho".
      • slearwig, on 02/05/2008, -7/+13Ron Paul can't win.
      • krebcycle, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3Ron Paul and Obama aren't running against each other unless they both get the nominations of their party.
        Arguing Ron Paul over Obama makes no sense in the current context. We're talking about the democratic primaries here.
    • pell, on 02/05/2008, -16/+33"the only one with a gun was a bad guy."

      I am from Canada and this is such an odd statement to me. As if everyone in a mall should be bearing arms. Good ole fashioned mall shootout. Ridiculous. I think the gun topic is best left for another thread.
      • Pixelante, on 02/05/2008, -28/+9"I am from Canada"
        I'm from ***** and think your scrotum should be pierced. Everybody here has his scrotum pierced, so it stands to reason that everyone in the world should have his scrotum pierced.
        Pierce your scrotum.
        • klco, on 02/05/2008, -7/+10what??? I mean seriously.... what???
        • midbc, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3can your dick reach your ass
          if so you know what to do
        • krebcycle, on 02/05/2008, -1/+2wow, that's the most *ingenius* rebuttal since singing the abc's with your fingers in your ears or maybe.. i know you are but what am i...
        • Damien79, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1Good comeback Pixelante, Now I don't have to guess where you are from.
          Don't you have some crosses to burn or cut eye holes in pillow cases or something.
          • Pixelante, on 02/06/2008, -0/+0Why should I? I don't hate black people, you know. Keep guessing, you don't have the wits to figure where I'm from.
      • Brownds, on 02/05/2008, -15/+7I have a license to carry a concealed weapon. If I were at a mall and some punk started shooting up the place, should I run away like a girl so as not to offend anyone? No I would put one in his nads then in his head. If you want to die then fine that is your right but don't take people with you. Damn Emo kids... If you dig me down I’ll shoot you! lol I jest I jest.
        • TopherT, on 02/05/2008, -4/+3I bet that punk kid wouldn't have gotten a gun in the UK
          • Brownds, on 02/05/2008, -3/+0No he would have left a bag full of explosives on a busy subway train and ran away like a puss.
        • ubitendo, on 02/05/2008, -4/+7Don't mess with big, bad Brownds or he'll shoot you in the nads.
      • capiCrimm, on 02/05/2008, -5/+7so you prefer a pile of innocent dead people and the police arriving ten minutes after the shoot-out?
      • Phatt138, on 02/05/2008, -1/+4Good call from Canada. Save the flag-swinging ass-kicking machismo rhetoric for another thread - or, better yet, another forum.
    • bahamutxd, on 02/05/2008, -3/+28Using the tragedy in that Chicago suburb as a way to prove a point is pretty classless. Good job coming across as a d-bag.
      • absentmindedjwc, on 02/05/2008, -0/+4its pretty ***** up... they still have not caught the guy...... (i live in tinley park, illinois).... :looks around:

        I work right down the street from the strip mall where it happened... and I go to college right across the highway...
    • mGARANDEUR1, on 02/05/2008, -11/+8Interest though that nobody has proved you wrong. All diggers love Ron Paul because he supports gun rights yet everyone is willing to vote for Obama. I don't think anyone understands that democrats really do enjoy taking stabs at the second amendment. They'll stand up for people's right to privacy, but not to actually do anything to the government...great.
      • TopherT, on 02/05/2008, -6/+9Once Bush is out of power I'll feel less need to be armed.
        • Akronos, on 02/05/2008, -3/+5Touche.

          I didn't think about it like that.
      • Tanishh, on 02/05/2008, -3/+7 Because obviously gun laws are the only thing that matters in this election. Give me a break.

        Some people love RP because he is pro gun, but most don't have that as their main reason, especially once you consider that most of the Republicans are pro gun anyway...

        And really, if his opposition to guns is the worst thing you can bring up about Obama, he's pretty goddamn good.
        • Tenbatsu404, on 02/05/2008, -4/+2Voted for the Patriot Act and War funding.
          • krebcycle, on 02/05/2008, -1/+5wasn't in office when the patriot act was up for vote, and wasn't in office when the war was launched
      • EtherGnat, on 02/05/2008, -1/+6"I don't think anyone understands that democrats really do enjoy taking stabs at the second amendment."

        Yeah, but in Democrat's defense it's the only part of the Constitution still intact after 8 years of Bush.
    • EricAnderton, on 02/05/2008, -2/+7[Citation Needed]
      • capiCrimm, on 02/05/2008, -1/+2his website didn't have anything, but here's some stuff on the gun issue
        http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Gun_C ...

        # Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
        # Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
        # Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition, and sets a minimum prison term of 15 years for violations
        # Keep guns out of inner cities
        # 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 [handgun] per month
        • alkajazz, on 02/05/2008, -3/+6I don't think i agree with the ban on all semi-auto weapons. But some of the views on other issues are great. Is there really a need to be buying more than 1 handgun every month? I do agree with the his views on guns in the inner city, there is only so much much the fed can do to stop it. Do we really need armor piercing rounds? I could see how hobbyists would get upset, but i think we can live with most of those changes.
          • capiCrimm, on 02/05/2008, -2/+6If you support guns for self-defense(from criminals and government) any bum can legally buy bullet resistant armor, so why shouldn't I be able to buy armor-piercing rounds? If you don't support that I'll remind you as in my above comment there is *no* obligation for a state to provide you a police department, and furthermore most states have laws preventing lawsuit if they fail to provide you police service(say 9/11 is down or the cops just don't care). There are also plenty of state supreme courts upholding that idea.

            As for no guns in a city working. Guns are just a symptom of other problems that need to be dealt with.
    • digindrivefast, on 02/05/2008, -0/+4"..Running through a list of smears that are circulating about him, Obama also threw in that people are claiming that he's against the 2nd Amendment. "And then there are people who say I don't believe in the 2nd Amendment, though I come from a state... We got lot of hunters in the state of Illinois, and I have no intention of taking away folks' guns."

      That comment reflects the bright red hue that Idaho is usually associated with, and the surprise that nearly 15,000 cheering people could show up for a Democratic candidate on an early Saturday morning at the Taco Bell Arena at Boise State University...."

      As posted on firstread...
      google it he said it

    • alkajazz, on 02/05/2008, -2/+6Who the ***** brings a gun to a mall?

      "Oh wait honey, we're going to the mall right? Lemme grab the .357.
      • Ballchinian, on 02/05/2008, -1/+0Mall Security.
      • xlop, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3A person who actually cares to protect himself and those he loves who are with him.
      • Lewie, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Xlop:
        Why would I want random people taking the law into their own hands? Police go through training for a reason. They are the only people who have the authority to shoot or kill someone. Maybe you're responsible. But maybe you can agree with me that most people are stupid, irrational, impatient, and a horrible aim. I don't want some idiot thinking he can be a hero, start shooting the aggressor as he's running away, and ends up killing families in the background.
        • MrWhite7, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2I assure you that police are not the only ones with the authority to shoot or kill someone. I understand a fear of guns from thouse who are inexperienced, but an ignorance of gun law when one proposes to change it is unacceptable.
        • xlop, on 02/07/2008, -0/+1Lewie: Random people don't get concealed carry permits. People with bad aim don't get concealed carry permits. We have to take courses, we have to have our fingerprints taken. The type of person who gets a concealed carry permit is a law abiding citizen who practices with his handgun frequently on the range. No one goes through all that without an understanding of the preciousness of human life and what it would take to have to use force to end it. People who legally carry concealed weapons are responsible and i guarentee you, no one wants to "be a hero" when it means killing someone and litigation that could deplete your life savings.

          The people who don't listen to these "no guns here" rule are always the typical criminal element. If you prefer to be unarmed against an armed attacker, that is your choice. I however, would prefer to place my odds on my training with my handgun.
    • Donwangugi, on 02/05/2008, -3/+3Dude your getting the bear arms all confused, its the right to huge bear arms, as in the animal. Gosh. Its so easy to see.
    • IpecacNeat, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1What don't you understand about his vote to fund the war? The troops were already there. They aren't coming home anytime soon. Why take away funding from them? That is just plain idiotic! He didn't vote for the war, but since he can't get the troops home by himself, he needs to make sure they have enough to stay alive, until they can come home. Stop being short sighted and get your head out of your ass.
      • MrWhite7, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2Wow... it's called the legislative power of the purse... I'll keep it simple.
        If Congress doesn't like how the President is executing its Legislation... they cut his funding... That's all they've got.... get it?
    • analogyxz, on 02/05/2008, -1/+4You said: "Now, if he was as dead set against the Iraq debacle, why did he vote to FUND IT?"

      Wow, the shallowness of your thought process is amazing (no offense). Just because he was against the invasion does not mean he should be against doing what needs to be done to support the troops (i.e., funding). That would be the same as saying "Well, your kid jumped in the water after you told him not to, so now he is at risk of drowning but, because you told him not to, you shouldn't throw him a rope or a life jacket.. because, errrrr... that can be considered flip-flopping".

      "How many more people have to die before Barack understand what a BIG MISTAKE he made?" That is a really, really good question. However, it really should involve someone else's name in it (I doubt you need a hint...).

      It amazes me that people continuously forget that an elected President is not the sole "decider" ever. It is the cabinet and advisors and other people involved in policy making that contribute to the direction of a nation (unless, of course, you live in a dictatorship). That said, I'm pretty happy with the types of people Sen. Obama has got behind him because they will be doing much of decision proposal work. Let's not forget this when we cast our votes, please!

      Good day to y'all.
      • MrWhite7, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2Fill me in on Obama's advisors. Think tanks and a delegation of responsibility are what got us into this Bush mess in the first place.
    • ironpirate, on 02/05/2008, -5/+4hes inexperience and ***** will come out soon enough.
    • Fubeman, on 02/06/2008, -1/+3As someone who has was born and raised in Chicago, I say "Good for Obama." Jeez dude, how delusional can you be? If some idiot had a handgun every time some bad ***** went down in any situation in Chicago, half the people would be dead there. I met some bad ***** in some bad situations in my day back there, but I also met some stupid as wood people as well. Put some guns in these idiots along with the "Bad Guys" and you have a whole lotta blood and big ass mess on your hands. No thank you! The less guns in that city the better. And as far as the Iraq funding goes, you know what the REAL deal was about don't you? They forced everyone's hands on that one so they HAD to fund the troops or else, guess what, the troops would end up having no armor, no ammunition, no food . . . nothing unless the Democrats supported it. It was a no-win situation and you know it.
      Get off his ass and get some perspective would ya?
      • MrWhite7, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Power of the purse. Cut the funding... the troops come home... it's that simple.
    • cashman57, on 02/06/2008, -6/+1Oh my, I guess I did touch a nerve with the obamaland fans, but the facts remain the facts and if you don't want someone without training having a gun that's OK but there are enough of us who actually are proficient and government trained in the care, use, and storage of a firearm. If one of those women had a firearm the robbery would have ended with either the punk running as fast as he can or one of my fellow Americans would have shot the punk and given him something to think about if he lived. To me it is the fact that Obama just doesn't understand the second amendment and to me it is so simple. In order for there to be security in a free state the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. He has repeatedly voted to infringe on that right that I and all of my fellow Americans have. Now if you are completely comfortable with only the bad guys having guns go to Canada where they have that silliness. If you lack the courage to be an American, I don't need you. AND it would not matter if Ron Paul were out of the race by now anyone who can't understand what the second amendment says is too stupid to be president of this country. Maybe he should run for the top job at the united Nations.
      • jmann, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Obama taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. I'm pretty sure you're the one that doesn't understand the constitution.
        • cashman57, on 02/06/2008, -2/+1What is hard to understand? Did he have someone else take his test?
          I know what it says and apparently he's as clueless as a candidate can get.
          I don't care what he says he knows, the fact remains he is unable to understand that in order for there to be security in a free state the right of the PEOPLE ( that's all of us) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
          It isn't hard to understand
  • bcclist, on 06/11/2008, -9/+51outside of the crummy new jersey weather, it sounds like this was a good rally. i love obama's inexperience!
    • Forcough, on 02/05/2008, -2/+20Sorry to hijack but the site was down

      EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J.—Robert De Niro has shown up to pitch for Barack Obama, just as the rumor had it, here at the Izod Center at the Meadowlands. He's looking sporty in a blue blazer. "Barack Obama does not have the experience to be president of the United States" is his opening line. For one thing: "He wasn't experienced enough to authorize the invasion of Iraq."

      "And that's not all,” he went on. “It's clear Barack Obama does not have the experience to let the special interests run the government."

      The crowd (which takes up 5/28ths of just the lower tier of seating in the 30,000 seat arena, so you know, a big crowd, but not a big, big crowd) is jazzed. This rhetorical device goes on for a bit. "That's the kind of inexperience I can get used to," said DeNiro.

      "I've never made a speech like this at a political event before," he said. "Sooo, what am I doing here?"

      "Finally, one person has inspired me," he said. Guess who!

      "Lemme just speak to you young people here," he continued. "The rest of you can listen --it's okay. I've been concerned that so many of you aren't voting.... No one inspired you. You wanted to vote, you just didn't have anyone you wanted to vote for. You know what? I felt the same. Until now."

      He then introduced Senator Ted Kennedy, Caroline Kennedy and Barack Obama.
    • arcticsoft, on 02/05/2008, -8/+3Yeah I like his too. I just wish obama supporters looked up his history. At the time of the beginning of the iraq war, Obama was not in a position to even vote on the war. And since then he has repeatedly voted to fund it. So how can he claim he was not authorizing the war? Why cant elected officials be honest people. Can wait for Obama to get in and the people will see the US keep going down. He says he is going to change America, but where are the specifics? I can not see why people are so blind. Vote for paul, we dont need to be in other countries forcing democracy on them at gunpoint, meanwhile leaving behind at home a falling dollar, and a socialist welfare state. Go ahead sell your vote to the media and who they want. If a few years I'll be back on hear saying I told ya so. See ya, im going to go see how bad the stock market is today, then Im going to go vote for someone that has me in mind and not the celebrity status the rest go for.
      • bcclist, on 06/11/2008, -0/+2arcticsoft - Ron Paul 2008, right? bla
        • arcticsoft, on 02/05/2008, -3/+2So tell me what specifically is Obama going to do for this economy. Im open minded in supporting others, but when they say they are going to change things without specifics, its a little discouraging. Tell me some specifics. Pauls site has published solutions to problems, Obama says hes going to change things, how? I wanna know. Is this change going to be good? bad? does this change take away my rights? guns? jobs? money? Give me some answers not just some pretty boy running for office.
        • phunlee, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.
          # Fight for Fair Trade: Obama will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs. He will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks. Obama will also pressure the World Trade Organization to enforce trade agreements and stop countries from continuing unfair government subsidies to foreign exporters and nontariff barriers on U.S. exports.
          # Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: Obama believes that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers.
          Create Secure Borders

          Obama wants to preserve the integrity of our borders. He supports additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry.
          Improve Our Immigration System

          Obama believes we must fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy and increase the number of legal immigrants to keep families together and meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill.
          Remove Incentives to Enter Illegally

          Obama will remove incentives to enter the country illegally by cracking down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants.
          Bring People Out of the Shadows

          Obama supports a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens.
          Work with Mexico

          Obama believes we need to do more to promote economic development in Mexico to decrease illegal immigration.

          You obviously had the time to read Paul's site. Couldn't find www.barackobama.com? There's more to read there.I love RP's ideas, I hope his voice doesn't go away. Hell I donated!... But he would try too much too fast and nothing would get done w/a Dem Congress or a Rep Congress.
        • arcticsoft, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Yeah I saw his site. I see a lot of "i believe" and "supports". As i read i see the problems, but no real solutions. And the ideas behind what solutions he has cost more money and created more programs to fund. We can not afford to create more programs to solve our problems, that is what is wrong with the system now.

          "Obama will remove incentives to enter the country illegally by cracking down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants." How?

          "Obama supports a system that allows undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens." Pretty vague, this opens up a lot of stances on this important issue. Will we deport them while waiting to become citizens? This can be twisted to just giving them amnesty.

          "Obama believes we must fix the dysfunctional immigration bureaucracy and increase the number of legal immigrants to keep families together and meet the demand for jobs that employers cannot fill." Thanks for the belief, but how are you going to do this?

          "Obama wants to preserve the integrity of our borders. He supports additional personnel, infrastructure and technology on the border and at our ports of entry." Isnt that what we all want? But is he going to build a wall? build more checkpoints? even bush says he wants to secure our borders, but how?

          Its vague "plans like this that make me wonder what the change is. There are no specifics. Compare that to Pauls 4 prong economic plan: http://www.ronpaul2008.com/Prosperity
      • poxonyou, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2He's been extremely open about his opposition to the war. Many senators keep voting for funding because they may feel it's a poor solution to withdraw funding without an exit strategy and may cause more problems. If an exit strategy hasn't been undertaken, and they run out of money, what are they supposed to do? If Bush is determined to stay, he'll find the money from somehwere else, most likely putting the US in further debt. If he withdrew immediately, highly doubtful, it could be disastrous, and he'll rightly be able to blame those who voted against funding. I want troops out NOW, but it has to be done from the top, with a plan.
    • tgunner, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Crummy?!? It was in the 60's here today. I was loving it.
    • doronster195, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1"It's clear Barack Obama does not have the experience to let the special interests run the government. He wasn't experienced enough to authorize the invasion of Iraq. That's the kind of inexperience I can get used to."
      He has the experience to accept millions from special interests. He has the experience to authorize funding of the Iraq war. He has the experience to leave Iraq just to go into Pakistan and kill more people. Voted for Patriot Act twice. Increase spending hundreds of billions of dollars more than even Hillary! Awesome.
      • shakbhaji, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Everyone that keeps pointing to the fact that he continues to fund the war needs to shut up for a minute and use their ***** heads. Stopping funding isn't how you end occupation. It's a disaster waiting to happen. Without funding soldiers there won't get proper equipment and services, probably leading to a higher death count. That's not something we want. Without funding Bush wouldn't be expected to withdraw immediately because a withdrawal plan has to be in place or the soldiers are put in more danger. And if he refuses to withdraw even without funding he could blame the congress for the death of soldiers, maybe even rightly so (I wouldn't agree), and the funding would have to come from somewhere. I want this war over with as soon as anyone, but withholding funding isn't the way to do it. What would you have Obama do instead?

        A response to the post two posts above:
        He's been extremely open about his opposition to the war. Many senators keep voting for funding because they may feel it's a poor solution to withdraw funding without an exit strategy and may cause more problems. If an exit strategy hasn't been undertaken, and they run out of money, what are they supposed to do? If Bush is determined to stay, he'll find the money from somehwere else, most likely putting the US in further debt. If he withdrew immediately, highly doubtful, it could be disastrous, and he'll rightly be able to blame those who voted against funding. I want troops out NOW, but it has to be done from the top, with a plan.
  • whitezombie420, on 02/05/2008, -8/+206it would have been cool if deniro showed up in an army jacket and a mohawk.
    • thedr96run, on 02/05/2008, -14/+6 "What if I hacked in and created a night elf mohawk class, Mr. condescending director?"
    • exomni, on 02/05/2008, -1/+5You're waiting for the senator?
      That's a very good answer.
      *****, man! I'm waiting for the sun to shine.
    • MRintheKeys, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3I guess we know whom he's talking to....
    • Ramenamen, on 02/05/2008, -1/+5Are you talking to me?
    • dreamfamous, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1so he is still going to lose...hillary will win
    • onemanriot, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Taxi Driver starring Robert De Niro is a fantastic movie. Rent it if you haven't seen it!
  • THEROC, on 02/05/2008, -64/+28He was also "inexperienced" enough to vote for the funding of the war, the reauthorisation of the patriot act and the thought crime bill. That's the kind of inexperience we don't need.
    • wild, on 02/05/2008, -11/+38I would rather deal with his inexperience than your incompetence. Issues aren't black and white. He voted to support the troops, not the war. DO some reading and research, comprehend the reasoning for a vote, and then maybe you'll find an argument.

      Life isn't yes or no.
      • blackmage439, on 02/05/2008, -4/+13Indeed. In addition, Obama was and is not in favor of the Patriot Act. In fact, he voted for clauses that LIMITED the powers of so-called roving wiretaps.

        There is nothing wrong with the idea of the Patriot Act itself, just the implementation, enforcement, and broad, sweeping powers it grants this government. Obama is seeking to limit those powers.

        THEROC, you have failed. Epically.
        • mGARANDEUR1, on 02/05/2008, -0/+6Clearly there is something wrong with the patriot act. The fact that the government wants more power is what is wrong.
        • Akronos, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3Did you just say there is nothing wrong with the idea of the Patriot Act itself? Seriously? Are you kidding me?

          That's the thing with Obama that I don't like. He doesn't have much principles. He votes based on his conscience.
        • IpecacNeat, on 02/05/2008, -1/+0Akronos, yeah, did you talk with Obama? When did he tell you he votes based on his conscience? Oh, he never did? Your just spouting off *****, based on YOUR conscience? Good to know.
      • kcap122, on 02/05/2008, -4/+1wild, that's exactly what political inexperience means. Even if he has the right intentions, he doesn't have the political experience to know that when he votes for new federal powersl that could potentially have a great use in protecting the country, it is necessary to assume that those powers will be misused.
        Obama is too much of an idealist to be politically viable. I know that he wants change, and I love everything that he stands for, but the fact is that he's not going to be able to do it riding on hopes and dreams. His policies support putting new programs in place instead of fixing old ones, and with his very significant political inexperience, those new programs are likely to be neutered by divisiveness in Congress.
        Political inexperience may be what has kept Obama from becomnig cynical enough to reject radical change, but it is also what is keeping him from understanding how things ever get done in D.C. One needs to understand the mindset of legislators, and what things (lobby groups, interest groups, or what have you) change those mindsets.
        I'm sorry, but if Obama is elected, he runs the risk of a political stalemate. He will vote this his heart, but he'll be the only person doing it.
        • EtherGnat, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1Obama had two choices. Tell me which is more telling of experience:

          1. Vote against the bill, resulting in the bill passing 99-1, and alienating himself from fellow Senators.

          2. Work to change the bill. The bill passes 100-0, but with several important safeguards added to the legislation. Obama builds a reputation as somebody who can work across party lines to get things done.

          Yes, we all know Ron Paul voted against the Patriot Act. But tell me in what practical way are we any better off today for his actions?
      • wild, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3Kcap, if Obama gets the people to buy in, Congress will buy in.

        You aren't going to have a man so passionately involved in change get stonewalled. ANd the other side of the aisle likes working with him, because he makes smart decisions. Informed decisions. His rep is that he knows both sides and thinks about them before responding. He doesn't check the polls. He checks his brains. I think he will be good if he makes it in there.

        And really, what would you rather have? A candidate with hope and attempting to make change, or a candidate already neck deep in the machine?
    • CrackyJSquirrel, on 02/05/2008, -3/+8So, then you are saying we want the experience that created the war? I am confused..
      • absentmindedjwc, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2no, he was not in senate when they voted for the war, so he did not "create the war"
        he DID, however, vote to fund the war... for the benefit of the troops, not the war...
    • mGARANDEUR1, on 02/05/2008, -4/+3Ha Ha. You are posting in a very liberal thread....watch where you step.
    • markperia, on 02/05/2008, -3/+3He voted to fund the war, because the solidiers are already in the war and they need support.
      He voted for the Patriot Act, to limit its power, not extend it.

      He initially did not vote for either.

      Reading and research makes a lot of difference.
      • Tenbatsu404, on 02/05/2008, -2/+2Spin it how you want. It would have been a bigger statement for him to vote against both. Anyone can make excuses in hindsight.
        • markperia, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1If he did not vote to fund the soldiers, they'd be all dead.
          If he didn't vote to limit the Patriot Act, well most of us will be in jail right now.
    • bluezinc, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3THEROC, get a hobby already. Spending all your time on digg spamming anti-Obama ***** isn't doing much. Nobody is reading your posts and going, "OMFG! My eyes are opened!!" because everyone knows you're feeding them horse *****, because it tastes like horse *****.
  • katie212, on 02/05/2008, -72/+22Obama only knows how to vote..."Present" and noncommitted then he doesn't have to be held accountable and can state, "I didn't vote for this bill or that bill." what a sham!
    • Manhigh, on 02/05/2008, -2/+52You are aware that he only voted "present" in Illinois, not the US Senate, right?
      And you're also aware that voting "present" in Illinois has an actual legislative purpose, right?
      • DuffyDirect, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Probably because its an accomplishment to be present (and conscious) after the 5 hour train ride to Springfield on a 2 hour late Amtrak from chitown
    • CraigJ, on 02/05/2008, -4/+11Hillary? Is that you?
      • masterm1nd, on 02/05/2008, -1/+2Yeah, because Hillary is the only person in this country that should find this "discomforting".
    • drakethegreat, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1epic fail
  • jeyaone, on 02/05/2008, -25/+401The whole experience thing really annoys me....

    Experience: Obama has 11 years as elected official, Clinton only 7.
    • citizenchan, on 02/05/2008, -2/+26I'd rather have a president inexperienced enough to try something unorthodox, than a president too experienced to do anything at all.
    • danlowlite, on 02/05/2008, -0/+58Shh! She's saying "experience" like she was elected the first time around.
    • CrackyJSquirrel, on 02/05/2008, -2/+41It was put to me like this. If by her just being a first lady, gives her experience. Then can we (Chicago) draft Brett Favre's wife as the new Bears QB? I mean, just simply being his wife makes her an experienced NFL QB, right?
      • tdog138, on 02/05/2008, -8/+7Well, if Brett Favre's wife constantly watched game films, participated in practice, went to each game, I would say she may have a leg up on most women.

        With Hillary, she participated in political discussion with Bill and his advisers, she spearheaded the attempt at reorganizing Healthcare, she participated in legislative meetings, she met heads of state. So, I would say being a First Lady does give you some kind of experience. Whether that experience is really relevant to being a good President, I am not so sure.
        • mustafya, on 02/05/2008, -2/+8no she didn't this is a fallacy she has supported. everyone with actual knowledge says Hillary had very little to do with anything outside of her failed Healthcare reform project. After that failure she was kept away from anything of actual substance.
      • absentmindedjwc, on 02/05/2008, -0/+8no, but it would make for some brutal sacks...
      • bigsteve, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Hey! You can just take McNabb... he'll work great if you just draft some 7ft tall receivers.

        /I kid I kid
        • hoovcluck, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1So your saying he would fit well in Detroit?
    • larsone86, on 02/05/2008, -0/+9Working at the state level also gives him a great understanding of how federal laws affect the states.
    • mrASSMAN, on 02/05/2008, -1/+24She has vast experience defending the interests of Walmart.
    • uncertainty, on 02/05/2008, -3/+6To be fair the experience that one can gain from being a first lady probably trumps most elected positions. She was the President's wife. Who do you think Bill went home to after a hard day's work?

      That said, this should be about the ISSUES. I really do believe Obama is less experienced. But if he was totally inexperienced, he wouldn't have made it this far. I'm supporting Obama not because Clinton is a woman or because Obama is black, but because Obama is the candidate is the better of the two.
      • zumpiez, on 02/05/2008, -0/+22"Who do you think Bill went home to after a hard day's work?"
        Too... easy. Must... resist.
      • insllvn, on 02/05/2008, -0/+13"Who do you think Bill went home to after a hard day's work?"

        Uhm..? Ah...? Wasn't that sorta Bill's problem?
    • babar77, on 02/05/2008, -1/+26NASA put man in space with a bunch of 24 year olds who weren't smart enough to realize they couldn't do it.
      • CrackWilding, on 02/06/2008, -0/+0Uh, the guy in charge was 42 with plenty of administrative experience.
      • DuffyDirect, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1yeah im pretty the astronauts were mostly Ph D's and military pilots too
    • crowbar77, on 02/05/2008, -0/+4Who voted against the war AND is a 10 term congressman? The way I see it you get the best of both worlds.
    • moush, on 02/05/2008, -1/+4Both are inexperienced compared to Gravel and the like.
    • Cowboy1015, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1She got experience as the wife of Bill... imagine that...
    • doronster195, on 02/05/2008, -8/+7Ron Paul: 20 years...
      • jer2eydevil88, on 02/05/2008, -5/+4Sorry that phase is over... THANKFULLY!
    • Icebath, on 02/06/2008, -0/+3He taught constitutional law! I would really think that a comprehensive understanding of the supreme law of the land constitutes (no pun intended) good job experience. Especially because the POTUS is SUPPOSED to protect and defend the constitution.
    • slythfox, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1One's experience measured in years is not the point. It is what they learned and how well that counts.

      Besides, I hate fallacies.
  • theNazz, on 02/05/2008, -29/+68Well Bob, here's the problem. I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton if she is the only name on the ballot. If she is the DNC candidate of choice, I will be wasting my vote on an independent. That is all.
    • moin1097, on 02/05/2008, -11/+4The way things are shaping up, I'm writing in "NONE OF THE ABOVE" no matter who gets the nod from either party.
      It's better than doing nothing. And not voting is as good as a vote for whoever got the most votes anyway.
    • mrsteveman1, on 02/05/2008, -0/+25I'm not sure you understand the subject. If you read the article you would know he wasn't supporting clinton, it was a joke you moron.
    • foolonthehill, on 02/05/2008, -0/+6I realise you're being at least partly ironic, but you can't "waste your vote" on an independent. I've posted this once before, but I think it bears repeating:

      It always annoys the hell out of me when candidates outside of the frontrunners are considered not worth voting for. I don't know whether many people here are part of the primary/caucus process but it applies to all elections anyway. It's impossible to 'waste' your vote on any candidate/party, since *your one vote has no impact on the outcome of the election*.

      Your vote is your voice: You should always vote for whoever best represents your views because even if they don't win, politicians see where votes are going and act accordingly to try and win more votes next time. That's how democracy is supposed to work, not by voting for someone who the media has already told you is likely to win. Of course, democracy doesn't always work how it's supposed to, but a lot of the reason for that is people failing to exercise their right to vote for what they actually want.

      "It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it."
      - Eugene Debs

      "We try to get people to vote for us and in the process we hope the people force us to do good things."
      - fictional President Josiah Bartlet on The West Wing

      • ubuwalker31, on 02/05/2008, -1/+2If you prefer a Democrat to a Republican in office, you need to hold your nose and vote for the Democrat, unless that Democrat is so cringe-worthily unacceptable to you, that you would rather a Republican end up in office. That is the real calculus here. I don't want another Republican in office more than I dislike Hillary, so I would vote for Hillary. This is not a situation where we are choosing among Hitler, Tito, Franco and Mussolini.
        • Akronos, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Too many people think like you, and that's the real problem with this society. There are other options. It isn't only Republican vs. Democrat. But with your attitude, the two party dominance will remain for a long, long time.
      • deinspanjer, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3Bah. That would be great if the candidates likely to come to power actually did care for those small minority numbers.
        It is a fact that independent voting in our broken two party electoral college based system can swing the results in a direction that is contrary to what the independent voter would like.
        The system would better support "how democracy is supposed to work" if people could actually voice the full extent of their preferences without having to worry about the meta-voting directly or having to worry about other people complaining about the meta-voting.
        If we implemented an approval voting system where people could actually check all the candidates they are willing to have represent them, we would see a noticeable increase in independent voting.
        If we followed that up with an IRV or Condorcet voting that allowed the newly-enlightened public indicate their ranked preference, it would probably be followed soon by the fall of the two party system and the rise of informed voters and elected officials who were elected because of their stances, not because of their party lines.
      • mlirblur, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Bravo!!!! High five, Foot!!! Thank you for understanding how the democratic process works. All those who disagree with you on this matter are not voting in elections, they are taking part in a scheme to strip the American people of their ability to keep their government in check. If you vote for the lesser of two evils, you are not a person, you are a pawn.
    • mupaully, on 02/05/2008, -0/+5If that's the case, I'm writing in Obama on my ticket.
    • zeiben, on 02/05/2008, -1/+5Well Bob, here's the problem: about 1 in 4 people are impervious to irony, and thought you were putting Obama down.
      • RikF, on 02/05/2008, -2/+0The people at the Obama rally thought they had brought DeNiro on stage to put Obama down? Really? Did you read the article at all? Even just a little bit?!
  • Gabberwok, on 02/05/2008, -8/+199I want to see DeNiro beat the crap out of Chuck Norris...
    • bjs3171, on 02/05/2008, -3/+13HAHA. That would be the best thing ever.
    • Snappysnap, on 02/05/2008, -18/+2Chuck Norris MADE Robert De Niro out of his own crap.
      • EarlOfLade, on 02/05/2008, -3/+3I always knew Chuck Norris liked to put his dick in the crapper, wrong hole, bro!
    • NinjaJoey, on 02/05/2008, -2/+2You're mad!
    • kubedawg, on 02/05/2008, -3/+11OMG KICK HIS CHRISTIAN EVANGELICAL ASS!
      • hoovcluck, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2That's a hate-crime *****, and I bet you are too stupid to know which party passed federal hate-crime legislation. DeNiro should kick Norris' ass because Norris is an idiot not because he is a christian evangelical. People like you are worse than the bible thumpers that come to my door every day because you are filled with hate and have nothing of value to contribute to society. Please do us all a favor and SHUT THE ***** UP
    • jmkiii, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1The universe would cease to exist! NO!
    • cochondinde, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Another tired Chuck Norris reference to get Diggs.... sad.
      • hamGrenade, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1but it's an anti-chuck norris reference. its funny
      • Gabberwok, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1It's actually a Huckabee comment.
  • imgstacke, on 02/05/2008, -8/+254Judgement > Experience
    • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 02/05/2008, -29/+5Or you can vote for Mitt Romney and have both.
      • Oktoeatfish, on 02/05/2008, -4/+10But, I don't agree with Republican ideals...so..no
        • bahamutxd, on 02/05/2008, -3/+8You mean Neo-Conservative ideals, right?
        • ploop, on 02/05/2008, -1/+7I agree with much of what the GOP claims to cherish. (It's all hypocrisy, but that's a different story...) My issue is that I don't agree with much of what ROMNEY claims to cherish.
      • jezsik, on 02/05/2008, -1/+14I'm pretty sure imgstacke was implying GOOD judgment.
    • Oktoeatfish, on 02/05/2008, -2/+16Ever since the Democratic National Convention 2004 I've supported Obama, much before he even annouced his canadacy
      • yutt, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3Same here. I thought, my goodness, there is a potential candidate I could vote for who would have half a chance.
      • blackjack75, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Canadacy? That sounds cool! If he doesn't get elected I a moving there (from Switzerland.. err forget it).
    • ePuck, on 02/05/2008, -0/+5I agree. I would prefer someone with no experience who is honest and smart rather than someone who has a ton of experience taking bribes and voting accordingly.
    • ganlet, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1But here is the problem, its like jeyaone said up a few posts, Obama has 11 yrs as an elected official and Hilary has 7.
      He has experience and judgment
      • moush, on 02/05/2008, -1/+111 years is not good experience. There are many politicians that have been doing it for 20+ years.
    • MrBigWords, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3Yes, but typically, more experience leads to better judgment.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2Actually, it's tragically rare that that is the case. It's a nice ideal though.

        With age often comes a close minded nature. Lack of an open mind is highly detrimental on the political stage.
        • MrBigWords, on 02/22/2008, -0/+1I've been developing software for about 3 years now, and I think I can better judge now which direction to take to fix a particular bug because I have run into similar a problem before. However, there are some problems which I don't enjoy solving, and I tend to avoid them until absolutely necessary, even though they may not be as difficult as I would expect.

          My point is, that I agree that we develop more biases as we experience more, but I don't think that learning from our failures or the failures of others is rare.
    • Ireland, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3Judgement + Experience > pretending to be experienced
    • sonnybobiche, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2If only people knew how to spell "judgment"...
      • sathias, on 02/06/2008, -0/+3Judgement is correct spelling in England... you know, where English comes from.
    • CrackWilding, on 02/06/2008, -0/+0Examples of Obama's vaunted judgement, please.
    • Icebath, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Clinton nomination = fail
  • digindrivefast, on 02/05/2008, -29/+13Bummer. Another great actor goes politics...
    • zacktastic, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3It's nothing new. He supported Gore in 2000.
      • mrASSMAN, on 02/05/2008, -3/+3If only people listened to him then.. now he's supporting another good candidate, clearly he has good judgment.
    • nblsavage, on 02/05/2008, -4/+10Wow...even actors have opinions - film at 11.
      • digindrivefast, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1It just makes it tough at times for me. I like to think that if I ran into a "famous person" I would not bother him/her. I do not care who B. Spears or Paris support, or what they wear. That's all..
        • OralCavity, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1it's a good thing that B. Spears and Paris didn't give their opinions, instead a smart celebrity did.
    • gyronic, on 02/05/2008, -4/+7Bummer. Another great actor goes with politics I'm against.

      -fixt
    • jbella, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Of course he is going to have an opinion. Everyone has an opinion about who should be the next president (at least they should!). The only reason we are talking about it is because we (and by 'we' I mean the general public) seem to give a ***** about what actors think. In fact we've got an unhealthy fascination about what they wear, and who they date, and what crap they buy or don't buy. There are entire magazines dedicated to showing us pictures of our favorite actors in flip-flops shopping for toothpaste. How many nationally televised award shows for actors are there nowadays? If it weren't so sad, it would be hilarious.
    • ByteGuerilla, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Man is a political animal.
    • mrASSMAN, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3You realize that there actually are some very intelligent actors and actresses out there? Many of these people had fantastic education and managed to succeed in life, so clearly most of these people aren't clueless.

      That doesn't mean you should let yourself be affected by their words, you're free to be an individual and make your own decisions.
    • EarlOfLade, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1You must have hated Ronald Reagan then?
  • ericdano, on 02/05/2008, -6/+53And Hillary is more experienced? She is a carpetbagger with what, 7 years of Senate experience?
    • codyman, on 02/05/2008, -4/+10and about 40 years of carpetbagging experience though...
      • ploop, on 02/05/2008, -0/+4Or is that saddlebagging?
      • SteaminTmann, on 02/05/2008, -0/+8Or is it carpet munching?
      • mrASSMAN, on 02/05/2008, -0/+5slut-bag?

        urban dictionary:

        A bag of slut
        -or-
        A bag, possibly a burlap sack, filled with sluts
    • Mistaxe, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Dugg for use of the term "Carpetbagger". Haven't heard that one since High School!
    • elliotys, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1I am a O'bama supporter, but I think people are missing the obvious. When people talk about Hillary's experience, they are referring to her 8 years in the whitehouse with her husband.
      • MrWhite7, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1O'bama? is he the Irish one with the red hair?
  • ametory, on 02/05/2008, -5/+38Is he talking to me!!
  • hoffey, on 02/05/2008, -25/+11Gotta love all that experience voting FOR the Patriot Act, and FOR the Real ID Act. This guy is not the real deal, wake up people.

    knowbeforeyouvote(dot)com
    • nblsavage, on 02/05/2008, -7/+5"wake up" meaning - "hey I think I'm smarter than you"
      • Dyssolve, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5Even if he does think he's smarter than you, you ARE ok with the Patriot Act and the Real ID act?
        • hoffey, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Yeah apparently they love it. They love it so much they probably haven't even read into it. Because once someone does find out the national id card and what the Patriot Act entails, they might just have to find someone else to vote for.

          Research, oh noes!! Deal or No deal is coming on right now, I can't take the time to find out WTF is going on! I'd rather vote for the cool guy or girl and let everyone else worry about it. Besides, the terrorists are coming, the terrorists are coming!
      • hoffey, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3I don't think I'm smarter than you -- I think Ron Paul is smarter than Obama. A lot smarter.
        • babar77, on 02/05/2008, -4/+4Except he seemed to sleep through class when economics, history, and basic sociology were taught. Newsflash, people need leaders. Pick up any book on leadership and RP has none. "Let the people do what they want" is not leadership.
          • hoffey, on 02/05/2008, -2/+4It's called FREEDOM.

            I can lead my own life thank you very much. That is the difference between you and I.
          • PeppermintPig, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2So you actually want to choose a master and let them make all 'important' decisions for you?

            Knowing a bit about economcs, history and sociology myself, I'd say Paul is well versed.
    • ePuck, on 02/05/2008, -4/+5When you are in a war you don't keep voting against it out of spite. You do what is best for the nation. Trying to save lives and end it asap.
      • erasedgod, on 02/05/2008, -3/+4Oh, the Patriot Act and the Real ID are going to end the war? Damn, why didn't anyone say so sooner?
        • hoffey, on 02/05/2008, -3/+5No, they will just erode all your personal liberties. But you are so into voting for the 'cool' candidate that you don't even realize it.
        • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5Nice to see a few individuals in the sheep herd.
        • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -1/+5No surprise all the Obama ***** suckers voted us down. Convincing them that Obama is a neocon is about as likely as convincing a Scientologist that Scientology is a cult.
    • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5Was he thinking about saving lives and ending the war asap when he voted against the timetable withdrawal from Iraq?
  • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -29/+11Obama is going to ***** us the first chance he gets.
    • toolbox, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3proof?
    • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -2/+1Opinion based on history. Obama has not voted on a number partisan issues. Voted Yes on Iraq funding, voted No on a timetable withdrawal and voted Yes for the reauthorization of the Patriot Act. And his stage presence seems focused on telling the audience what they want to hear, not what he believes.
      • erasedgod, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3Let's not even mention his March, 2007, speech to AIPAC, which is (shockingly enough) a lobbying group.

        Luckily with Obama, our tax dollars will continue to fund Israel's military. Fortunately, he'll expand our military too. (http://www.cfr.org/publication/13172/)

        "Obama has also called for sweeping amnesty for illegal immigrants. However, he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006."

        Oh yeah, the more I read about this guy, the more he seems like a neo-con. http://www.cfr.org/bios/11603/barack_obama.html

        Why do you Democrats like him again? Sounds like Bush to me.

        Can some of us see through his *****? Yes we can!

    • Oktoeatfish, on 02/05/2008, -1/+5In 2003 and 2004, he spoke out against the war on the campaign trail;
      In 2005, he called for a phased withdrawal of our troops;
      In 2006, he called for a timetable to remove our troops, a political solution within Iraq, and aggressive diplomacy with all of Iraq’s neighbors;
      In January 2007, he introduced legislation in the Senate to remove all of our combat troops from Iraq by March 2008.
      In September 2007, he laid out a detailed plan for how he will end the war as president.
    • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -2/+2So he says one thing, but votes the opposite? How exactly does this help his image?
    • EarlOfLade, on 02/05/2008, -4/+1Wouldn't it be nice to at least have ***** ONCE in your life? Not like you are getting anything elsewhere...

    • GeorgeWKush, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1You forgot to take your Ritalin.
  • uselessexpert, on 02/05/2008, -12/+1So... Obama for DeNiro?.... I guess!
  • OpaqueMurdock, on 02/05/2008, -6/+10If Harry Tuttle is on board then so am I! "were all in this together!" : )
    • d03boy, on 02/05/2008, -10/+1Yes because having more ill advised famous people really means you should jump on board. ***** idiots, all of you.
    • senatorpjt, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3Harry Tuttle was a terrorist!
    • joshuabowers, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Do you think he filled out his 27B/6 correctly?
    • naij0k, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1You, sir, have made my day with that comment. My hat is off.

      Let's just hope Central Services doesn't drop by today.
  • Nocturnalis, on 02/05/2008, -5/+48All the "experienced" people got this nation into a F'ed up war. John McCain has over 20 years and I don't trust him worth a damn. The people who have "experience" are the one who will keep this country on the same track that is set for derailment and can't think outside of the box.
    • babar77, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2The ones with real experience were fired by this administration. Remember all the generals that told Bush et al. that it would take 300,000 troops to win the war in Iraq. They said that winning the battle is the easy part, securing such a large geographical area was the hard part? Hillary should've listened to them and didn't. They had the experience to predict what would happen.
    • rorykinnear, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2yea but look at Carter, great guy, none of that DC taint, which was basically his only platform, but for all his untouchable moral virtue, he couldn't run the country. Thats why i have a hard time buying the negative view of experience. I just don't want another Carter.
      • DuffyDirect, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1I feel like a lot of went down in the Carter years was out of his control, though. The oil, the railroad collapse because of years and years of federal highways subsidies, labor unrest in the airlines, etc.
  • cornswalled, on 02/05/2008, -31/+7To all the folks comparing Obama to JFK I say this:

    Bay
    Of
    Pigs

    If you're unfamiliar with the term, look it up. A lot of people died because of JFK's inexperience and rank stupidity.
    • Sle3per, on 02/05/2008, -3/+18I R A Q
      • PeppermintPig, on 02/06/2008, -2/+1So in other words, you agree with cornswalled's point?
    • atomatos, on 02/05/2008, -0/+6It should be noted that history records the failure not being Kennedy's fault, but due to a failure of our intelligence service.
    • badqat, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3There is more to that than simply Kennedy's inexperience...his administration was plagued with groupthink and decisions that came about via committee rather than him simply making a decision.

      And when you add his drug-addled mind into the equation, you get a whole other perspective to the situation.
      • cornswalled, on 02/05/2008, -3/+2"his administration was plagued with groupthink "

        Which was a symptom of his inexperience.
        • badqat, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Partially true...but in this day and age, too many utilize polls and opinions and pundits to decide their position. And that is on both sides of the aisle - because we have no true "leaders" anymore...just folks who govern at the whim of whatever the latest poll says.

          Myself, I'm convinced that we're screwed no matter what...
    • CraigJ, on 02/05/2008, -0/+4Robert McNamera
    • tybris, on 02/05/2008, -0/+7A lot of people died because of Bush and Cheney's experience. I don't see a relation between death count and experience.
    • babar77, on 02/05/2008, -0/+5Cuban
      Missile
      Crisis

      Civil
      Rights
      Legislation
  • Remixrio, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3mirror plz
  • saturnx8, on 02/05/2008, -20/+12yeah yeah yeah ... I get the point the entire world is for Obama, except for the ones who aren't. What happened to all the Ron Paul fanatics out there? I guess Digg has been taken over by Obama shriners, er I mean campaigners.
    To bad no one is posting anything about the other candidates. Who am I trying to kid there is pretty much only one view on digg, and lots of yes men. Or at least thats how it seams since the same people get things on the main page.
    • d03boy, on 02/05/2008, -7/+4Funny when people whine about Ron Paul but when it's obama its ok. Hypocrisy is abundant in the USA.
    • ePuck, on 02/05/2008, -2/+4Obama won the first primary. He wins.
    • Locnar, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Majority rules...
    • JewelD, on 02/05/2008, -2/+4NoBama for me...

      I voted for Sen Mike Gravel, after realizing he was sill in the race. And regarding taxes: Gravel's also for eliminating income taxes, and shifting funds from the military-industrial complex to investing in domestic programs.

      How active has everyone really been anyway, besides anonymously venting on places like this? I'm only sorry I didn't help out my chosen candidate earlier ... individuals count more today than they ever have before (see: Ron Paul's money bombs, etc.) it's become a bottom-up effect on politics these days... check: techpresident.com
      • Tenbatsu404, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2And you're getting dugg down by your fellow democrats. Pathetic. Gravel is the only democrat left that I would vote for.
      • PeppermintPig, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1It takes an exceptional person to stick to their guns. Good to hear you didn't find yourself voting lesser evil.
  • The2ndAct, on 02/05/2008, -2/+22Damn, I thought this was going to be DeNiro's World of Warcraft Commercial.
  • ghostie, on 02/05/2008, -9/+2mmmmm yummy obama
  • tarawoo, on 02/05/2008, -23/+10Become a Delegate for Ron Paul: http://delegate.notlong.com
    • halik, on 02/05/2008, -10/+9because there isn't enough Paul spam as is *eyeroll*
      • d03boy, on 02/05/2008, -6/+4..and obama spam doesn't exist? Been on digg.com lately?
        • halik, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3Actually no i haven't, I stopped reading while back when the RP bots took over. When i started seeing "Ron Paul = jebus" and "Guiliani clubs seals" headlines, I decided to spend my time elsewhere
        • shabutie325, on 02/05/2008, -2/+2Yet, here you are?
  • charlietuna, on 02/05/2008, -5/+12http://www.walken2008.com/
    • insllvn, on 02/05/2008, -1/+4He will bring us all more cowbell, and ring America into a bright new future!
      • hoovcluck, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1MORE DEAD HORSE!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED MORE DEAD HORSE!!!!!!!!!!!!! BEAT THAT SUMBITCH TILL SHES GLUE!!!!!!!!!!!! BEAT THAT DAMN HORSE!!!!!!!!!!!! BEAT THAT BASTARD UNTIL ITS NO LONGER FUNNY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED MORE DEAD HORSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED ENOUGH DEAD HORSE TO ENSURE THAT EVERYONE WILL BE SO SICK OF IT THAT PEOPLE WILL START TO GET MAD WHENEVER IT IS MENTIONED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED MORE ***** DEAD HORSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        • insllvn, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Deep soothing breaths. In and out, in and out. Relax.
          • hoovcluck, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2Sorry about that, i just get so bitter when i watch SNL these days and see how pathetic it is. Whenever i am reminded of the good old days i get frustrated.
    • blackbeardtron, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3Walken is going to take America back!
      "I feel like a little boy who's lost his first tooth, put it under his pillow, waiting for the tooth-fairy to come. Only two evil burglars have crept in my window, and snatched it, before she could get here... Wait a second, do you understand the CONCEPT of the tooth-fairy? Explain it to them... Wait. She takes the god damned thing, and gives you a quarter. They've got my tooth. I want it back." - Christopher Walken, Presidential Candidate 2008
    • Dwebtron, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1has that not been updated since '06?

      "in preparation for a full campaign in early 2007."
  • hmmmok, on 02/05/2008, -11/+11I was inspired ... until I saw Senator Ted Kennedy.
    • shakbhaji, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Maybe it was here on digg, but I remember someone making a good point about Obama getting all these endorsements from career politicians. If he's running on a platform of change he should be distancing himself from these kinds of people because they're exactly what's wrong with Washington. Them and Hill-dog. I hope these endorsements don't end up biting Obama in the proverbial ass.
      • l0k0, on 02/06/2008, -0/+0I seriously doubt these endorsements will hurt Obama. They can sway some voters and spark interest in Barack's campaign, but I can't see someone refusing to vote for him because they don't like/agree with someone who endorses Obama.
  • gyronic, on 02/05/2008, -21/+14Americans are funny.
    You people scream RED vs BLUE, Liberal VS CONSERVATIVE.
    The reality is they are ALL CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATES.
    Sheesh you people need to travel more, you guys wouldn't know a liberal if they took your money as well.
    • sgtpppr, on 02/05/2008, -4/+7And why is your country concerned about our election then? Unlike the British, we don't enjoy paying 40% of our income to taxes and having the gov't snoop into every orifice. The US has it's share of problems, but there is nothing worse than a cocky european who watches American TV, American movies, follows American politics, and lives in a world heavily influenced by America, then talks down to Americans like they are irrelevant.
      • Qtip42, on 02/05/2008, -6/+2I tried arguing with a woman the other day who said she didn't mind paying the high taxes as long as insurance was covered........This is what you're dealing with...stupid...people.
        • hoovcluck, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1are you an idiot? when the goverment says that health insurance is free that means we don't have pay for it dumbass! washington is going to buy it for us! it is not going to cost us a dime and we can get heart transplants whenever we want!
          • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1can we both get heart transplants at the same time? that's awesome.
      • gyronic, on 02/05/2008, -4/+4haha You people pay income tax 30%-35%, Social Security tax, sales tax and pay for your health care from your income.
        On top of all that tax... you can still loose your life savings from a poor "healthcare plan" or insurance companies that deny coverage at will.
        At least European countries tell their citizens they are spying, yes its not perfect but they don't try to hide it.
        Irrelevant? NO. Do Americans have the best chance(at the current time) of all nations to set the right course for human kind? Yes.
        Thats why we watch so patiently and enthusiastically for Americans to make informed, intelligent decisions.
        I was just laughing at your candidates, and of course... your two party/binary system.
      • peteophile44, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1Says the guy with the Beatles handle? I ain't hatin', I'm just sayin'.
        • sgtpppr, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1I never said Britain sucked and tried to downplay them. That's the Brits job. And yes, Lennon hated the US so much he spent all his time here and lived in NYC. Unfortunately, we also have crazies like mark david chapman.
      • mlopes, on 02/05/2008, -0/+5I'll tell you why his country and all the other countries in the world are concerned about USA's upcoming President elections: because for the last half century you've been invading and promoting imperialism at will. You've overthrown democratically elected Presidents from Chile, Uruguay, Argentina or Brazil. You've invaded a country for oil. You promoted and endorsed the Iraq vs Iran war. You've invaded Vietnam.

        Do you get this? You think you rule the world. You freakin' DON'T. You've elected Bush, a warmonger, twice.

        Now, you can keep your laws at your own expenses. We prefer to give health insurance to everyone over here regardless of whether they're rich or poor because we believe one should not have to be rich to be healthy. To each its own.

        But we're sick and tired of seeing a country back to the imperialist era. So, definitely, we're anxiously waiting for a President that will keep the world a little bit calmer and will stop this imperialist America-owns-the-world crusade.

        Thanks,

        One tired European that has lived in the USA and has a lot of American friends.
    • dvdrtrgn, on 02/05/2008, -4/+2Agreed.
    • kewidogg, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3Like sgtpppr I think it's comical how you are reading about our country and what's going on, and commenting on our president. Do you see too many Americans commenting on whatever country your from? Nope :) So keep following the US and all of its curvaceous glory
      • jakobahman, on 02/05/2008, -2/+2Its hard not to be interested when the US is ***** up the whole world in the name of "democracy".
    • xsquirrel378x, on 02/05/2008, -1/+3in b4 ameri/britfag *****

      edit: oh
    • skippyatuw, on 02/05/2008, -2/+4You're probably confusing socialism and liberalism.
    • iucraigmc, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Interesting observations. Liberalism stems much deeper than many of the values held by the candidates that will probably make it into office. It's interesting to see someone who has been exposed to the long standing effects of socialism and deep seeded liberalism. I suppose this should hold promise for me. You are right about us making decisions that will effect the direction of policies, I hope we make the right ones, for all of our sake. Typically though, we fly as a pendulum in America, about the time it swings far to the right we bat it back too far to the left.
      "If there is one thing we have learned from history it is that we have not learned from history."
    • gyronic, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Actually your neighbors to the North, pay less income taxes.
    • rorykinnear, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1thanks for the perspective, not one of our democratic candidates would survive an election in sweden or denmark.
  • blacklilyninja, on 02/05/2008, -11/+1I still think it should be Hilary and barac together. "Special interests groups" make thier own rules. With both of these idealists in place there might be a way to cut through the garbage.
    • petejones32, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3Hillary accepts more money from lobbyists than any other candidate, almost twice as much. Look it up. You want to cut down on the special interest groups, keep her the f- out.
    • ganlet, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Id rather Obama/Edwards, I think Obama could do a lot of good on foreign affairs and Edwards would be a blessing to domestic affairs.
  • AidenHuntley, on 02/05/2008, -4/+4http://duggmirror.com/
  • dkern, on 02/05/2008, -14/+8Well if a great big movie star says Obama is the man for the job- then it must be true (give me a ***** break). We went through this ***** with Hollywood stars when Bill Clinton was running. And look how he turned out! I feel like suing Barbara Streisand!

    Just remember people- actors are just ***** artists who get paid- not unlike politicians- which is why politics is such an obvious jump for them when Hollywood puts them out to pasture. De Niro is getting ripe!
    • entity447, on 02/05/2008, -1/+2someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed today
      • dkern, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I have been doing that a lot lately. I wish I had a pair of rose colored glasses- I really do. Did you catch the comment from Ultraelite stating that Bill Clinton was a great president! I will take being in a pessimistic mood over being delusional any day of the week. I do not understand why an actor feels because they are a celebrity- that somehow their opinion is more relevant than mine or yours.
    • ultraelite, on 02/05/2008, -1/+7yeah look how that did turn out, a great ***** president, *****.
    • adversive, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2Bill Clinton averaged a 66% approval rating while in office, despite the impeachment. What's Bush's again?
    • insllvn, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Homer: At least we know there'll never be a President worse than Bill Clinton! Imagine, lying in a deposition in a civil lawsuit. That's the worst sin a President could commit!

      Marge: There'll never be a worse President. Never.

      Homer: Never.
  • elfingo, on 02/05/2008, -4/+1Mirror: http://www.observer.com/2008/robert-de-niro-obamas ...
  • appleacolyte, on 02/05/2008, -14/+8Yeah, De Niro has the kind of experience to talk politics...
    • david76, on 02/05/2008, -0/+6He's a citizen. Does he need another qualification?
      • bruinhenryd, on 02/05/2008, -1/+2appleacolyte prefers to leave politics up to the politicians. don't hurt your widdle brain! everyone is qualified to talk about politics you elitist twit.
  • coffee200am, on 02/05/2008, -8/+2RACISM!!!
  • nova9, on 02/05/2008, -11/+4This guy is going to f-up the country because he's too used to talking and not enough doing. He'd be really good at covering his ass when he fuk's up a decision.
    • bantam, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2or we will be hearing yet again another "I did not...." speech.
    • bjs3171, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1the country's already ***** to hell. time for a new approach.
      • dkern, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Believe it or not- there are still lower depths to which this country can sink. Sadly we may live to see them. I hope not. I truly hope that America is really waking up this time. But if celebrity influence can still sway a vote then nothings changed. Actors should stick to acting.
  • Metalsonik, on 02/05/2008, -1/+6It is good to see this time around people all over the place seem to be more concerned with the election! Thank god more people are paying attention, than turning a blind eye! God help everyone of us on this planet if nobody cared and posted!
  • roberto_deneero, on 02/05/2008, -6/+13Who cares how much experience the President has anyway when his cabinet and advisors are the ones who are really running the country. The President is just a figurehead.
    • Locnar, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5great comment! glad to see someone knows how this whole thing works..
      But with him not owing any favors to lobbiest it makes his cabinet a bit more squeaky clean.
    • bjs3171, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5George W. Bush is just a figurehead. Presidents with brains listen to their advisers, and then make decisions.

      that being said, someone with a present with less experience can certainly utilize those advisers and be a good president.
    • triskele, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1A.K.A. scapegoat. George W. Bush was the perfect candidate in that respect. It's that damn Commander in Chief and Veto stuff that screwed everything up.
    • Gabberwok, on 02/05/2008, -0/+3The thing that distinguished George W. Bush as a bad president was not his lack of experience entering office.... it was his lack of intelligence and compassion. He chose very "experienced" people for his administration - most had spent a significant amount of time in previous administrations - but he did not have the intelligence to distinguish good advice from bad and had the wrong set of priorities. He has been awful, but let's not start claiming his problems were due to a lack of experience... the only thing he would probably change if he got to start it again today would be his failed immigration reform policy.
  • coffee200am, on 02/05/2008, -12/+2Obama has done more this country than any other Senator.
    • dan222555, on 02/05/2008, -2/+4Like what? Besides seduce people with his eloquent speaking abilities, I can't think of a single thing he's done. He's only been in the Senate for 2 years and he's followed the party line the entire time.
    • boxybrzown, on 02/05/2008, -0/+5Senators do stuff?
    • Iconoclast25, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5"Obama has done more this country than any other Senator."
      -------------------------
      Oh, absolutely. /* sarcasm

      Without doubt he's given gold medal performances keeping the empty suit inflated while delivering great oratory from prepared material. So he can talk from a script.

      But he's still *DONE* nothing of note in his time in office *EXCEPT* talk from a script . . . so it's an open question if he can even crawl like a liberal, much less walk like a man.
      • coffee200am, on 02/05/2008, -2/+1That's racist!
        • Iconoclast25, on 02/05/2008, -1/+1Oh, absolutely. /* sarcasm

          It's his (lack of) performance and leftist agenda, not his ethnicity. Put Condi Rice in the Primary mix and I will be working for her campaign.
    • insllvn, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2What is the opposite of Progress? Congress.

      /twainIthink
      • Iconoclast25, on 02/05/2008, -0/+4"Pro is to con as progress is to Congress."
        ---------------------------------
        However the original source is, AFAIK, "unattributed."
  • stevensj2, on 02/05/2008, -12/+7http://www.knowbeforeyouvote.com

    Don't cast your vote due to an actor's words about a politician. Make an informed vote.
    • Shaft0rz, on 02/05/2008, -2/+5Oh, look, the issues are framed in such a way that Ron Paul gets a big green YES for everything, while everyone else gets a scary red NO.

      That website will not lead to an informed vote.
      • xsquirrel378x, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3RP spam. get over it, its not gonna happen

        EDIT: meant to reply to OP, sorry bro
    • stevensj2, on 02/05/2008, -2/+3You're right, I was wrong.

      People really DO care about DeNiro's opinion. Well, in any case, you guys will get the president you deserve.
    • ultraelite, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1I like ron paul but some of his supporters put out as much trash as a "mainstream" canidate
    • dkern, on 02/05/2008, -0/+1Even though the information on the link provided is accurate- the neocon contingency will use it as RP spam- and it does appear that way- even though the information is true. I checked it all out. You got dugg down as an RP spammer. Its sad when people frame the truth to become irrelevant facts in order to keep on believing rather than look at something from an alternative perspective.
  • bbColonie, on 02/05/2008, -1/+10Dugg for basically saying exactly how I feel:
    "Lemme just speak to you young people here," he continued. "The rest of you can listen --it's okay. I've been concerned that so many of you aren't voting.... No one inspired you. You wanted to vote, you just didn't have anyone you wanted to vote for. You know what? I felt the same. Until now."
  • mCanada, on 02/05/2008, -3/+6I'll never abandon Mike Gravel! except for the fact that I legally can't vote
    • JewelD, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2You CAN legally post about him - go for it! Make videos! Whatever you can :)
    • icexe, on 02/05/2008, -0/+7it's too bad Mike Gravel is pretty much out of it. He reminds me of my crazy grandpa who was always rambling on about old war stories after a few swigs of brandy while ignoring the rolling of eyes from the entire family. Then one day you realize that if it wasn't for that old codger going over there to fight them Nazis, to have the balls to stand up and do what's right, we wouldn't be here today.
    • FredFredrickson, on 02/05/2008, -2/+1Are you a felon?
    • hoovcluck, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1THANK GOD
  • melonhedd, on 02/05/2008, -12/+7I get ALL of my political advice from bad actors.
    • insllvn, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2So you won't be listening to De Niro?
    • TheKarmaPolice, on 02/05/2008, -0/+2so......this story is irrelevant to you?
  • ePuck, on 02/05/2008, -12/+21I get the feeling that Obama actually wants to help the country whereas the rest of the candidates just want to be president.

    Obama is the least corrupt of all of them. Yes, they all take mone