digg

Join DiggAbout

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

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.
See the original image at thinkprogress.org

Anti-War Candidates Get Most Money From U.S. Troops

thinkprogress.org — Yesterday, the Center for Responsive Politics reported that members of the military donated the most not to Sen. John McCain, but to two anti-war candidates,Sen. Barack Obama and Rep. Ron Paul.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • XanderDee, on 02/06/2008, -11/+24Also the only man that can stop what is coming...
    http://www.digg.com/business_finance/Federal_Reser ...
    • MindStalker, on 02/06/2008, -1/+13Whats REALLY classic is the military obviously knows who's Anti-War, while McCain is STILL winning even today among anti-war republicans, and among republicans who think Bush has done a terrible job.

      WTF.. Is it a requirement that you have to leave this country in order to know WTF is going on in it?
    • LukasSmith, on 02/06/2008, -8/+2This information doesn't look legit. This digg article on thinkprogress.org (a biased liberal @#$%hole) looks like a few unsubstantiated unproven comments made by a digg user. Some guy named Ben apparently. Wow yes lets believe Ben whoever the hell he is. This is just anti-war propaganda. nothing more.
      • mOdQuArK, on 02/06/2008, -2/+4Your commentary looks SO much more "legit".
      • LukasSmith, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2actually it does. Thanks for noticing.
  • DeadElephantORG, on 02/06/2008, -11/+73 Support our troops?

    * Lie about Iraq's "role" in 9/11.
    * Lie about Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction.
    * Lie about how cheap and easy the war is going to be.
    * Send the soldiers on endless tours of duty.
    * Treat them like sh#t at Walter Reed.
    * Question the manhood any soldier suffering with PTSD.
    * And never even allow their coffins to be photographed.
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 02/06/2008, -6/+8Obama wants to continue that tradition in Pakistan.
    • theelectricafro, on 02/06/2008, -3/+7Obama vs Paul : let the voting record speak for itself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVKSfwfy0h8
    • Benjaphil, on 02/06/2008, -2/+6 they have them(bumper stickers) all over the police cars as well as the busses/ambulances in canada now, Or at least where i live.

      Does anyone even bother to put serious consideration what exactly constitutes supporting our troops?

      it just seems ridiculous to have such a vague statement plastered all over the place. I don't know what it makes you think but it immidiately makes me assume that we should support the war, and not the troops.
      • Benjaphil, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2for the record, i tried to edit this to better communicate what i was trying to say, but for somereason my session expired before i was able to.

        anyways

        to paraphrase what i was trying to add(and unfortunately leave my botched first sentence still intact), even if the person who sports one of those stickers has a well thought out grasp on what it really means to support our troops, who is to say that the reader will even put reasonable consideration into the topic? It seems self-defeating.
  • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -13/+41***** mccain is only talking to generals and higher ups who have power. Those idiots are feeding him *****. The real troops in harms way are voting for Paul because he is honorable and takes his oath seriously, not just paying it lip service. I'm assuming the troops respect that kind of thing because they too take an oath.

    Mccain, romney, and huck wipe their ass with the constitution and only give it lip service.
  • intotheforest, on 02/06/2008, -18/+8Oh my Xenu, i really hope Obama wins tonight and ends this war!
    • fonguleverybody, on 02/08/2008, -2/+1Obama wants to send troops to Pakistan. That ought to stabilize the region, finally! All you anti-war Paultards need to relax. Only war can bring us peace. Only ignorance can make one thirst for knowledge.
  • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -15/+75I also gotta say this even though the obama supporters hate to hear it........There is apparently a few levels of "anti-war" ......Starting from the top:

    Ron Paul: never funded, was against it before, after, now, and always.
    Obama: funded it, says he was against dumb wars (generally speaking), and now opposes it.
    Hillary: funded it, in favor of it, now says she isn't for it

    Now tell me, where else on the earth can being "anti-war" mean so many different things? You guys need to get your heads on straight, this issue is black and white...you either say and back it up with actions or you don't.
    • XNihil0Zer0, on 02/06/2008, -20/+7I agree with your points, but its too late for paul, lets go with the lesser of 2 evils.
      • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -6/+19Why would anyone change who they are voting for because a 'majority' feel he has no chance. This is why a full democracy is retarded. People think "majority rule" is how it should be... It is hardly that and anyone who does change was never a supporter in the first place (probably a bandwagon groupie) .....Paul even said it himself.....he's a conduit for the message of freedom. It won't die with him. The message will continue and I will follow that message wherever it may go. And for the remainder of this election, I'll write in Paul's name if I have to......because I'm not going to jump ship to support some lesser of evils... That is ALWAYS what it comes down to.

        I'll let you throw your vote to the downfall of our nation. Personally I'd like to see hillary try to run this country because the only place she's taking it to is into the ground. If that's what the American people need to wake them up to the constitution and Ron Paul, then so be it.
        • XNihil0Zer0, on 02/06/2008, -2/+12All very good points again, But Paul is running as a republican, and most republicans are blinded by the need to confront terrorism, so that they can sleep at night, which is why the other candidates are getting more votes. I wish Paul would win, but to be honest, the country is too stupid for that.
          • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -2/+10Well then we agree with each other, this country is too stupid :-)
          • mmmmmbiscuits, on 02/06/2008, -15/+2.......Well then we agree with each other, this country is too stupid :-)..........
            Said Idiot#1 to Idiot#2.
        • elliotys, on 02/06/2008, -14/+6I can honestly say I will sleep better tonight knowing Ron Paul will never be president, ever. . .
        • random19, on 02/06/2008, -5/+2How will writing Ron Paul in on election day help anything? You said "anyone who does change [their vote] was never a supporter in the first place (probably a bandwagon groupie)". Look, I voted for Ron Paul in my primary, but writing his name in on the ballot in the general election is really meaningless. At this point just suck it up, and vote for the guy that next best represents you (in my case Obama).
          • cmackattack, on 02/07/2008, -0/+1which one is that; the douche or the turd sandwich?
        • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -1/+5Like I said random19, how you can support Ron Paul and Obama? Two entirely different outlooks on the issues. I mean if you look at obama in comparison to hillary, yes he looks a bit less of a disaster but that disaster is going to happen one way or another. Writing in Paul's name in the general election is similar to not even turning out to vote. Once enough people are so turned off by the election (likely hillary vs mccain EEEK), it'll show the population that nobody cares anymore because the deck is stacked.
    • Kohaxx, on 02/06/2008, -11/+9The only thing I disagree with is that you're saying Obama funded it somehow indicates he was slightly for it.
      Obama funded it because cutting funding would have prevented any armor or equipment for our soldiers over there, once the war was started cutting the funding would have just caused more casualities on our side. It's been discussed a lot in the debates. Hillary's stance on the other hand is indefensable and she's been nailed on it many times.
      • cathpah, on 02/06/2008, -5/+5exactly...this ***** war is a fact. The least we can do is support the troops with proper gear. I don't blame obama at all for funding it after it was started.

        it's the voting that counts.
        • dualboy24, on 02/06/2008, -0/+5Funding it is what has kept it running. And a great deal of the money spent doesn't help the troops stationed. Then again I suppose its got to increase health care costs for them after with 20% troops suffering head injuries.
      • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -3/+3I say he funded because obama's excuse about the troops is a cop out argument. Hear me out why.....Everyone knows that all available funds go to the people in harms way so if they do not get funded, they do not get put in harms way. Simple as that. Obama can make the excuse but is far from valid. You and I both know that he can't say "but but but troops" when funding actually extends the war (where most of the money is going). It's not like the troops were walking around barechested in a sea of snipers.
      • lasenorita, on 02/06/2008, -1/+8Forty cents of every dollar spent in Iraq goes to private military contractors. We're not spending that money on proper safety gear for troops. We're giving it to corporations like KBR so that they can provide lousy laundry service and charge $99 a bag. They're holding lavish parties at our expense while our troops are languishing in battle zones. If you think that the money is being used to take better care of soldiers whose tours of duty has been extended yet again, please re-evaluate. I highly recommend the eye-opening documentary "Iraq For Sale: The War Profiteers".

        There's a reason why the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war and the power to control the purse strings. While the President oversees the actual war, Congress has the authority to put an end to it by withholding all funds for the mission. If sitting Congress members will not stand up for the long-term well-being of our men and women, then they're not fit to be Commander-In-Chief of the U.S. military.
      • fonguleverybody, on 02/08/2008, -0/+2cutting funding would have forced Dubya to bring them home where they belong.
    • thebellmaster1x, on 02/06/2008, -6/+8Kohaxx is right; Obama has explained his funding the war the whole way. He has ALWAYS said that he did not support the Iraq invasion, but he feels it necessary to send them supplies since he doesn't have the authority to bring them back.
      And God knows, Bush wouldn't stop the war just for lack of funding. He'd write some stupid forced war budget.
      • Qtip42, on 02/06/2008, -3/+8Obama's explanation, once again, is a cop out for voting for the war man. You show support by sending further supplies. The troops wont be put in harms way if they dont have supplies so it's a moot point. He knows he made the mistake in funding it now but he has nothing else to say to recoup the bad decision he made. I wish you guys could see past his excuse and lay into him about it. He's not a perfect candidate.
        • r00fus, on 02/06/2008, -3/+4>> The troops wont be put in harms way if they dont have supplies so it's a moot point.

          I don't think you quite understand how anti-troop the Bush administration is. They will find a way, troops would die, and the media + BushCo would collude to blame the Dems who voted against.

          Of course, it's OK if you're a republican, which gives Paul the cover he needs to vote against.
        • reaganite, on 02/10/2008, -0/+1Qtip42 is right. Cut the funding and the troops come home. It is that simple. Let's think back to the beginning of this war. Rummy said you don't go to war with the army you want, you go with the army you have. I would agree with that statement if our country were invaded because it would take some time to ramp up operations. But we sent our men and women to Iraq w/o the equipment they needed. Remember, our troops had to be creative and find ways to fortify their humvees. If you think this administration supports the troops, you need to stop sipping the kool aid, because they could care less.
      • fonguleverybody, on 02/08/2008, -0/+2Obama wants troops in Pakistan. How can people forget so quickly that its the Dems that always start sensless wars? Clinton anyone? LBJ anyone? Bush was the exception to the rule, not the standard.
  • mooseontheloose, on 02/06/2008, -11/+29Being against the war is a lunatic fringe position. At least that's what the voters claim, since all the anti-war candidates are being run off (Paul, Kucinich, Gravel). The rest are for the Iraq war and for more wars against Pakistan or Iran.

    Ah well. You morons are the ones that are going to be drafted, I have dual citizenship. :)
    • hoffey, on 02/06/2008, -1/+16Yeah maybe the draft will open their eyes, only after it is too late though. Damn this country, why can't everyone be a free thinking individual and look at the facts?
      • Kohaxx, on 02/06/2008, -1/+3The ones screwing up the system aren't going to be the ones drafted though. I've been tracking the campaigns since summer last year and the idiots who still vote strictly party line piss me off to no end.
        • d03boy, on 02/06/2008, -1/+3The voters are the same people that will be drafted.. they are stupid
      • bosssmiley, on 02/06/2008, -2/+1In America you're free /not/ to think...if that's how you want to live.
        • hoffey, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2The problem with that is, those people vote as well.
    • GetALifeRIAA, on 02/06/2008, -8/+4I don't believe that all of the Anti-War candidates are being run off.
      http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/
      considering he has won 12 of the 26 primary/caucuses so far and has a chance to win a couple more pending ballot results
  • brokenspatula, on 02/06/2008, -25/+8THINK PROGRESS GOT BURIED AGAIN FOR DISTRIBUTING GARBAGE
  • XNihil0Zer0, on 02/06/2008, -18/+3CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL.
  • toddcat, on 02/06/2008, -3/+31Those of you troops active or vets: thanks.
    • fonguleverybody, on 02/08/2008, -0/+2Want to thank me? Do what we did. Send money to Ron Paul and vote for him so we can come home!
  • moskaudancer, on 02/06/2008, -1/+9This really is a "well, duh" kind of statement. Soldiers know better than the folks back home how horrible war can be. I guess McCain is must be the exception that proves the rule.
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+3No, McCain is not the exception. He knew how bad war was when he had to deal with it directly.

      But now he knows how great war can be when you are in a position of power and can benefit from it.
  • ussoldier, on 02/06/2008, -2/+15...along with hand written notes that reads "get us the ***** out of here...!"
    • toddcat, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Hey soldier-thanks for your service. We know you might have had to do some bad things but certainly the commanders and civilian "leaders" are much more culpable.
  • TDDM, on 02/06/2008, -7/+13Extra extra, read all about it, people don't enjoy dying!
  • etjrowe, on 02/06/2008, -1/+21I can't believe anyone would be surprised by this. Only the ignorant support the war. It's depressing that so many people believe that simply because someone like me is on active duty, that I must be a complete moron that blindly believes everything we do is right. I took an oath to support and defend the constitution, this administration doesn't believe in the constitution. But I also swore to obey the orders of those appointed over me. So I will continue to do my job, and hope that enough people vote to end what I consider to be one of the biggest missteps in American history.
  • hoffey, on 02/06/2008, -10/+28I would hardly call Obama 'anti-war'

    He continually says he will go into Pakistan when he feels like it, and Iran of course is always on the table. He doesn't want to really bring the troops home, he just wants to move them around the region. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure thats how it plays out.

    Dr. Paul on the other hand... now thats a man with a head on his shoulders. We don't have to be policemen of the world, and we can't afford it even if we wanted to. Unless you enjoy being taxed to all hell and losing all your personal liberties, then you might have found your candidate.
  • GoKings, on 02/06/2008, -3/+12So wait... The message wasn't "Let us win"? ***** McCain...
  • tcardone05, on 02/06/2008, -4/+7God bless our troops. Regardless of your opinion.
  • daxsymbiont, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2nobody is against hapiness. nobody is in war with happiness.
    • r00fus, on 02/06/2008, -1/+3Have you heard of puritanism
      "the fear that someone, somewhere is having a good time"

      Part of what started this country :-)
      • daxsymbiont, on 02/06/2008, -2/+1it's propaganda to try to make others think *anyone* really wants to be sad. terrorists don't want to be sad they think (in the case of islamists against the US) that they take "rightful" revenge (like revenge is ever rightful in itself). and they'd be happy later in "heaven" etc.
  • mrzack, on 02/06/2008, -16/+5Most Troops know that 9/11 = INSIDE JOB
    • cathpah, on 02/06/2008, -2/+6you read too many internet conspiracy pages and not enough scientific facts/realities.
      • mrzack, on 02/06/2008, -7/+3do some research, the proof is in your face. you are just afraid, too chicken to do some research because you're afraid to find what you may find....
        • cathpah, on 02/09/2008, -0/+2random conspiracy theory websites don't count as "research"

          anyone can post any old crackpot theory they may believe in and claim its true. it's the idiots who believe them and cite it as fact that support that cycle of ignorance.

          don't get me wrong, i think that the US gov't may have known more than it admitted, and it was politically beneficial to that ***** bush....but that still doesn't mean 9/11 was created by fbi gnomes with magical terror-inducing pixie dust that also happens to melt steel.

          and no, i'm neither chicken nor afraid by the truth....just not falling for some internet rumor/halfass theory because some ***** posted it on the internet.
    • TheDHC, on 02/06/2008, -2/+49/11 troofers, lol
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2Even troofers poll lower than Paulies.
  • daxsymbiont, on 02/06/2008, -9/+1apparently usa is too racist to vote obama, reminds of 2004, how could they be so idiots.
  • jmpeagle, on 02/06/2008, -3/+9too bad the troops hate America and don't support the troops. Also, the troops are government shills...guess who pays them...the government.
    • cheesehead, on 02/06/2008, -3/+1I'd digg you up many times for that irony.
  • phenry50BMG, on 02/06/2008, -9/+2This is my rifle. There is none other like it. It takes care of me as well as I take care of it. Should someone wish to part me from my rifle, may God have mercy on their soul...since I will not.

    Live in your dream world but beware of those who refuse to do so. Those of us who are smart enough to do things properly won't even make a sound. Pink mist and question marks will be all you read, see and hear about us.

    Phase II begins now.
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -1/+1Go down in a blaze of glory dude! Have fun being a loser who gets shot to hell by the people you fear!
  • harlowsmonkeys, on 02/06/2008, -6/+2In the comments on another post on this on Digg (or was it on Reddit), someone pointed out that these donations are probably not from U.S. troops, as military law and regulations prohibit troops on active duty from participating in partisan politics.
    • Niirs, on 02/06/2008, -1/+7Actually the Law just prohibits troops from actively assisting a party (can't work at their HQ), can not wear a military uniform to a rally or parade, can not solicit votes (and obviously we can not tell subordinates who to vote for, some places even will not let you have a bumper sticker if you are high rank) but we are free to donate money to a candidate.
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+2You mean they can't vote?

      Holy *****. You are ill-informed. They cannot put banners up in their offices or barracks, they cannot wear buttons showing support for any candidate on their uniforms. But there is no way they can be prevented from making contributions to a candidate that they agree with. They can send their money to whoever they like.

  • saady87, on 02/06/2008, -2/+4sadly, no one will know this, because the major news networks (especially fox) will not talk about it
  • LinuxGalore, on 02/06/2008, -2/+12The reality is this war in iraq is destroying the USA bit by bit both economically and morally. If you were a terrorist you couldn't plan this mess any better and do as much damage to a proud nation like the USA. The days of imperialism are long gone and if you want to make a difference you have to go out and build schools and offer assistance for nations to grow. With the equivalent money that the USA spends in Iraq every day one could build a training hospital or a University in a poor nation. You know for every dollar the USA spends to help countries develop they get six back in trade. It doesnt take an idiot (although you can vote for one) to realise being a good global citizen has very high dividends but the USA has forgotten this fact over the years. I truly hope the USA gets back on its feet because it would be a shame to see them fall due to such simple minded stupidity.
  • cathpah, on 02/06/2008, -5/+4I wish every idiot who says anyone who doesn't support the war doesn't support our troops and is therefore anti-american/non-patriotic would read this. straight from the horses mouth.
  • TomJoad, on 02/06/2008, -5/+9Its good to know that the military doesn't have a complete stranglehold on its rank and file. Though i would like to point out that Obama is more an anti-war candidate in speech then actual action (and definitely when compared with Kucinich or Paul).
    • AustinMandi, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4Yeah, and Paul is more anti-war in action. Which is better, talking the talk or walking the walk?
  • piktograf, on 02/06/2008, -1/+5What do you think these troops joined the armed forces because they are patriotic ? These poor people were looking for free tuition and jobs at the expense of the government. GI bills and other hand outs. Now they are in the thick of war they realize what they got themselves into. It is always the poor who is the pawn in the game. No wonder why they are contributing money to the anti-war candidates. I haven't heard of any member of the armed forces who come wealthy educated families. Have you ? They are either rural or inner city as always. Have you ever seen any advertisements (bill boards and such) displayed in very upper middle class neighborhoods in this country ? I dare you to put one up near a wealthy exclusive neighborhood !
    • toddcat, on 02/06/2008, -1/+4Damn straight. The war pimps love to claim that kids choose to serve.......but given the cost of college these days, the ***** education, the mediocre job opportunities....yeah, it's a poor choice. Again, this war is being fought by lower middle-class and poor kids, largely. And we thank you for it....but let's not pretend otherwise.
    • Niirs, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2Yah a lot of troops are from middle class families; you are stretching pretty far to say that most people who join the military were poor. Most just want the free school and travel; and if they don't like it they can get out after a few years. The reason this article is so valid is that the majority of the military is against the war and realize that we can not 'win' - after 5 years of this crap we are no better off and our military leadership and government leadership can't understand that. This war is draining the economy, killing our force and Iraq is no better off than before Saddam was in power.
      • Herostratus, on 02/06/2008, -3/+1*****... you are talking out of your ass. Look up the numbers.
        • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+2The numbers?

          What numbers?

          Oh, I get it. You watch too much Fox news, and they've hammered it into your head that since violence is down, we are "winning".

          They fail to mention that there is still a very fragmented government that can barely agree on which faction gets to handle trash removal, or which faction gets to run the interior ministry, or the police, or who gets what share of the oil, etc.

          It doesn't matter if the violence is lower than it was at the height of a three way civil war that coincided with a foreign based insurgency (from Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia). If there is no stability, the level of violence is irrelevant. If there are no basic services, if people cannot get jobs, or send their children to school, or have electricity for more than a few hours a day (if at all), or clean water, it doesn't matter what the ideologues at Fox News say in support of the failed Neocon agenda (see: "On Rebuilding America's Defenses").
      • Herostratus, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1(in reference to the people joining the army being from middle class families, the rest was pretty spot on)
      • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+2They can get out after a few years??? Are you living in a dream world? Have you never heard the phrase "Stop Loss"???

  • Frnnkdlxx, on 02/06/2008, -10/+11Keep Obama's name out of your mouth when speaking about the respected Ron Paul. Stop trying to make Warmonger Obomb-a into some troop supported big shot.

    Ron Pauls support from the troops = $249k
    Obomba's support from the troops = $less than 100k HA!
  • gibbwake, on 02/06/2008, -8/+11Obama is anti war? Hes a war hawk you idiots, and hes got Rockefellers man Zbig as his adviser. Ron Paul is the only anti war candidate.
    Zbigniew Brzezinski has endorsed your Obama candidate - Obama is no longer against the machine when the David Rockefeller protege, founder of the trilateral commission, and creator of Al Qeada via Operation Cyclone is behind him. Hes not just endorsed him, hes working for the campaign and opening speeches for him. Its not hard to figure out he will be the new foreign policy adviser as Obama has adopted Brzezinskis foreign policy.
    Obama has also said "Theres not much difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush’s position at this stage. The difference in my mind is whos in a position to execute." Thats one of the reasons they call him "Obomber". The other is that he said he wants to bomb targets in a nuclear bomb equipped country without that countries permission! Its time you all dropped this guy, youre being deceived - hes not anti war, hes all for the endless war on terror that "will not end in our lifetimes" as his blood relative Dick Cheney said.
    Read Shadows of Power by James Perloff for more info on Brezinski and the Council On Foreign Relations - http://tinyurl.com/3xac82 The anglo american establishment is backing Obama 100% with this endorsement - its probably worse than the military industrial complex endorsing Hitlery.
    Obamas wife Michelle is a director of the Chicago council on foreign relations too - A globalist establishment group formed by bankers and is dedicated to ending American Sovereignty - read that book I linked for more info on them. Obama is literally in bed with the anglo american establishment.
    Obamas take on attacking Iran is that the use of military force should not be taken off the table when dealing with Iran, which he called "a threat to all of us." Cheney would be proud.
    You are not winning anything but your own destruction with Obama. He's more of the same - just another skin color.
    Who would vote for Obama anyway? I could only see people voting for him if they love the way this endless war is going, want to end the country by joining the NAU, and are sick of the Constitution and bill of rights. He gives good sounding speeches, but theyre broad with no specifics and with "hope" as the main message. With the lack of details on his policies, hes obviously deceiving you all.
    • cheesehead, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1So Hilliary is a CFR and supported by the military industrial complex, Obama is CFR and is supported by lobbyists, Kuccinich has thrown in the towel. What now?
  • purpleviolin, on 02/06/2008, -2/+15Fox spins it "Do the troops hate the troops?"
  • nutsakharry, on 02/06/2008, -2/+6this is highly revealing.
  • mrzack, on 02/06/2008, -3/+5The Elites that created Hitler, is behind the United States efforts in Imperialism throughout the wars in the latter half and beginning of the past and current century.

    The ruling class 1 % want EVERYTHING, and NOTHING for the rest of us the 99.99%. They want it all without work. They want you to have all the burdens.
    • leodavinci, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Man, those are some old ass elites...
    • edebolt, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2"The Elites that created Hitler, is behind the United States efforts in Imperialism throughout the wars in the latter half and beginning of the past and current century"

      and in a few years when you get your GED then you might be able to construct a sentence above the retard level

  • sparkrainfir, on 02/06/2008, -3/+4filed under: "no *****"
  • DotSwag, on 02/06/2008, -3/+4They must not support our troops.
  • retawd, on 02/06/2008, -5/+4Don't believe everything you read on the Internet even if it really, really, really supports what you want to be the truth.
  • QuantumBios, on 02/06/2008, -5/+9Buried as inaccurate because Obama is pro-war.
  • Phyrex, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2Most politicians don't hesitate to send troops to risk their lives, as long as there are benefits for themselves. Bush pushed for an Iraq "victory" before the 04 election to boost his support, and then forced them to stay in hope of saving his image. And did I mention the oil and strategic position of Iraq? They have little idea about the risk the troops face, nor would they care if they and their family don't get sent to front line. Let's just say they are standing in a safe place to ask others to die for their good.

    Ron Paul is a rare kind of politician, and we need more of these politicians in the Congress.
  • Midtowner, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2The article seems to assume that soldiers are donating to Ron Paul because they're anti-war. Ron Paul stands for a lot more than being anti-war. The article takes one piece of evidence and assumes a conclusion which the evidence doesn't directly point to.
    • Niirs, on 02/06/2008, -2/+1Midtowner, trust me ..... the majority of the military is ANTI WAR.... well; I should say ANTI "This War". You know.... 5 years later and a gazillion dollars and no win in sight ... that war.
  • SchmuckofNI, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2The sad part out of this election is this: we are living in a two party dictatorship. Instead of being so damned passive about whats going on people need to get their heads out of their asses and do something about it! Its unfortunate that Ron Paul didn't get the votes, but it will be a launching pad for the next election if there is one..
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/06/2008, -1/+1Most people are afraid of acknowledging this, they don't want to know, or they are so over-extended in their mortgage, or they supported it for so long that they cannot admit they were wrong.

      Yes, both parties have played us all as fools. Yes, it is undeniable.

      But no, most people will not acknowledge this. They will expend all of their energy to deny that fact.

      It is too scary.

      It is too hard to reconcile this idea, intelllectualy.

      It is easier to keep believing in the story being told than it is to figure out that the story is just a story.


      It's funny, because the people in power gained their power by realizing that there was a story, and they refused to continue with that story.

      The people who run the world stopped buying into the story, and now they run the world for the people who still believe the story.
  • 89992, on 02/06/2008, -3/+7The problem with this article is Obama is not Anti-War, he just says he is. Ron Paul actually is.
  • PhilLesh69, on 02/06/2008, -1/+5Just think logically.

    The troops are tired, worn out and confused about what their mission really is, or serves.

    Many soldiers are on their 4th and 5th rotations, serving their 4th or 5th tours in Iraq or Afghanistan. None of them imagined they were enlisting into the military for this level of conflict.

    Think about it. These kids grew up in a time where we went overseas, did a job, and returned home within a few weeks, or a few months. It was never years, or year upon year. These guys volunteered with the idea that we were so strong that we could knock out any threat in weeks, maybe months. They weren't signing up for serving 3 or 4 combat tours.

    You have to wonder why suicide rates are as high, or higher, than during the Vietnam war. These guys are coming home ***** up. Seriously ***** up. They wanted to serve their country, and they got put through the grinder. Then, many of them were turned around and put through that grinder again, and some of them were then put through it again.

    Have mercy on these guys. They know more about what our political leadership will do to further a goal than any of us mortgage paying SUV driving Nascar fans will ever know. We can support the troops by putting a magnetic "support our troops" on our SUVs, which makes us feel patriotic, but these guys were blown up, shot at and had to live under seriously harsh conditions.

    Unless you ever sent a care package to anysoldier.com, to be sent to some random, anonymous soldier, you should shut the ***** up. If you support Bush, but have never sent a pack of ziplocks, a 32 pack of AA batteries and a dozen socks to some random soldier, you are a poser who wants to feel good about war while sitting at home enjoying your drywall or plumbing job.

    Some of us even sent a refrigerator to troops in Camp Anaconda.

    But we're just liberals.

    That shows how stupid the neocons are. I'm a lifelong conservative, but I disagree with Bush. I especially disagree with Rumsfeld and his theory of the evolution of military affairs. The military believes in winning, not some evolution.
  • DanOnTheMoon, on 02/06/2008, -4/+2McCanusface and Hitlery? What the ***** just happened tonight? ..***** it, I'm going to New Zealand.
  • edebolt, on 02/06/2008, -7/+3how come there aren't some stories about Ron Paul supporters jumping off bridges and slashing their wrists. Wowee 9 whole delegates. Ron Paul can cash those in for a free tank of gas at 7-11
    • PhreakMac, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2heh we got lots of delegates in MN - including me!
  • jerzyaltyangl, on 02/06/2008, -2/+4Ron Paul supporters are not weak, the more Ron Paul is censored the more we fight back and let his name be known. It's sad that most people can't stand up for there rights, instead they let the goverment and media make there choices. It's sad that those who are in prison have more freedom then the regular joe, they don't have to worry about paying taxes or bills, food and water and shelter is provided for them at free of cost and they don't have to pay for there health care. We have to pay crazy amount for our health care and a lot of time our health care turns and say we're not paying it. Sad that Cuba, Europe and Canada have free health care. Why can't we have that? Have you noticed those who survived 9/11 and went in to help are now sick and are not getting proper health care but those animals that help plan the attack our sitting in our prisons living with free food, water, shelter, no bills or taxes and free health care better health care then those who survived the attack and those who tried to help. Something wrong with this picture. Why do we have to act like the world police and go into other countries to make them follow what we do, waste our money in other countries when we have plenty of things wrong here that needs to be fixed. The motive of our "terrorists" is not because we're free, its because they don't want us in there home trying to change there goverment and ways. Wake up
  • LoneRanger85, on 02/06/2008, -5/+4OK, digger kids. Read this slowly and it might make some sense, even though you ARE logically deprived. I was deployed half of my 24-year military career. I would have paid good money too to spend Christmas and birthdays with the woman I loved and my kids, even though some of my deployments had nothing to do with danger or deprivation. The time I went to Southeast Asia a month after I was married stands out particularly in my memories. I know you people have absolutely no sense of duty, honor or country, and you don't appreciate in the slightest what our troops are doing for you, but even though our soldiers hate being away from their homeland, they are proud to be changing history for the better, proud to dying for something instead of living for nothing and proud to be members of the greatest military and the greatest country in the history of man.
    • Niirs, on 02/06/2008, -3/+4I salute you LoneRanger85. Thank you for your service. You are absolutely right; we are tired of being deployed to that craphole with no win in sight, it is tearing appart families, our soldiers are dying in Iraq instead of dying defending our own country. We are tired of this war ..... Get us out now....
      • LoneRanger85, on 02/06/2008, -2/+2Us? You are deployed? You've been in the military? I have news for you, an unaccompanied tour in Hawaii tears families apart just as much as a tour to a war zone. The troops don't need you undermining them, they need you supporting them. And I'm sure they'll be grateful when you say so on the next card that you enclose in a care package.
        • keenfrenzy, on 02/07/2008, -0/+0I'd love to send them care packages that included 1 way tickets home. That's how you show you really care about them and their families.
    • ratpH1nk, on 02/06/2008, -2/+6LoneRanger: no offense, and I thank you for your service, but currently the administration, and by proxy the troops are not doing anything for *ME* in Iraq. Unless you have been living under a rock there was nothing of interest in Iraq. No Al-Queada, no WMD, no 9/11 link etc... Unless, of course, you mean raising a generation of people to hate me and America. There is nothing more I would want than to pull 1/3 of them out, 1/3 of them redeployed, out of the way as a rapid response squad in case the ***** hits the fan, and put 1/3 of them back in Afghanistan where they really are helping me out. Maybe rotate every 6 months from there. It woulde be stupid to not mop up our mess over there now, but I digress.
      Again, the point was made earlier, you are told what to do by your CO/POTUS. I don't hold you personally responsible.

      Also, really bad form with the "no sense of duty, honor or country..." nonsense. You know damn well that many unpopular conflicts in our history have been the result of poor foreign policy. From domino theory in Korea and Vietnam, to covert operation in Central/S. America, to our current situation in Iraq. On the other hand, there have been fully supported (as much as you can get in a free society) wars. Afghanistan, WW II, WW I etc... Clear and present danger to the US, and were treated as such with sacrifice and patience by not only those enlisted and drafted, but by the country en masse.
      In the end, I respect their sacrifice, but someone has to sit back and say "is this really necessary". Afghanistan? Yes. Iraq? Initially, No, now yes. But not in the capacity it is now. The US army is the greatest Army in the world, certainly the best funded. But they are, for the most part, terrible cops. And that is what is needed now, cops. It isn't their fault, they aren't trained for that. This can be extended to the "war on terror". It is not a "war" per se, it is a complex undertaking that requires education, social reform, political reform, economic reform, and you guessed it, a lot of policing. Not the US Army's mission.
      • LoneRanger85, on 02/06/2008, -3/+1So, you just want to close the door, hide under the bed and let the rest of the world descend into chaos. You think that as the world's only superpower, we are not obligated to give something back. If we don't police the world, who will? The UN? Hah! All the criminals are on the police force.
        • keenfrenzy, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4Nowhere in the Constitution does it say we are supposed to control governments, kill citizens and build military installations abroad in order to promote the agenda of the rulers of the United States. You can't even say it is in the interest of the people when a vast majority don't believe in the war and want it ended immediately.

          The government we elect is supposed to represent us as citizens and keep our domestic interests at the forefront of all decisions made, but instead they spend the money they steal off of the paychecks we've earned to promote their own interests abroad, whether they be for personal gain or for the benefit of some false crusade to punish those who believe differently than they.

          It is not our responsibility as a nation to police the world, nor do we have the resources to do so. Our policing the world makes the false assumption that we are the law makers for all humanity and that what we as Americans believe and do is the infallible truth. When we can't even take care of our own people and keep our own economy under control, how can we tell other nations how to live their lives? Stop thinking that just because you're (most likely) white and (in comparison to the world standard) rich that we have the authority to dictate how everyone else on the planet lives.
        • ratpH1nk, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2@LoneRanger85:
          The part about "education, social reform, political reform, economic reform, and you guessed it, a lot of policing" is what I would do about it, in addition to the redeployment. I also know you know that your argument is morally dubious. By your method, who it next? Iran? N. Korea? You won't get much disagreement there from many people. What about Saudi Arabia? How about Egypt? Pakistan? Somalia? Sudan? Congo?. What about those nasty post-Soviet regimes in Asia? You see where I am going. Look at how much Iraq and Afghanistan are costing in terms of money, time, lives, now multiple that by n, where n is the number of countries you want so stop from descending "into chaos".
    • Herostratus, on 02/06/2008, -1/+5Dude, you might want to consider coming back to the states for a minute so you can see how much of a Totalitarian police state this once great nation that was supposed to be free has become. Maybe you will pick up arms to defend it from itself for a change instead of blowing the ***** out of some poor brown people cause your commanding officer told you to, cause the Military Industrial Complex told him to.
      • LoneRanger85, on 02/06/2008, -4/+1If you think this is another Nazi Germany, leave. The door is open. Maybe Germany would take you.
        • Herostratus, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2Love it or leave it... The great redneck slogan. As a matter of fact Prescott Bush our current President's grandfather, was one of the people who facilitated Hitlers funding and rise to power (Hitler BTW was a member of the Prestigious Bohemian Grove Club which the Bushes are members of as well).
          A brief review of the constitution (keep a dictionary next to you for those words beyond 5 letters that you will have trouble understanding) should indicate to you that this is no longer the country that was supposed to be. Of course if you read books you might actually know that already but you have obviously already disproved that by your prior commentary.
          I could, if I wanted to, move tomorrow to any country in Europe (I'm a dual citizen with full nationality for both the United States and the European Union) however my primary allegiance is to the United States and I am a die hard patriot with few equals. This prevents me from taking the easy way out. I will be one of those people who joins or starts the resistance movement here in the US (actually if you want to be technical I have already started said resistance movement our local chapter alone having nearly 100 members with additional chapters all around the nation see www.wearechange.org www.wearechangefl.org) that was so fundamental in ensuring that Germany was able to be overthrown and from which resistors got a fighting chance.
          Now go read a book and may you never again spew ignorance in my direction.
    • keenfrenzy, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4I'm pretty sure Rome was greater than the USA in terms of land control and economy, and they fell, just as we will for falsely assuming that our greatness gives us the authority to promote our agenda everywhere else on the planet.
    • carlieq25, on 02/06/2008, -0/+4It is unfortunate that you would confuse anti-war and anti-bush with "no sense of duty, honor or country, and you don't appreciate in the slightest what our troops are doing for you". I have nothing but respect for the American troops. I also believe that we should stop policing the world. I don't agree with the war in Iraq and I never have. That is not saying I am against the troops. This is not like Vietnam where some confuse being against the war with being against those fighting it. People in this country have great respect for the sacrifices that the troops make; however, the majority also believe this is a bull-***** war and the troops deserve to come home. All we want is for people like you to be able to come home and be with your families, stop risking your lives and in too many cases losing them for a mentally deficient man's self-serving policies.
    • OrigamiRonin, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2If you really did serve for 24 years, thank you. Beyond that, your message would be a LOT more compelling if it were less condescending.

      As a small example, if you really were in the US military then you are probably aware that you were a member of one of the best-equipped and most highly-trained military forces in the history of the world. The people you refer to as "kids" who are "logically deprived" and have "no sense of duty, honor or country" and "don't appreciate [the] troops..." are the very people who have paid for all of that training and equipment, not to mention the fact that they made it possible for you to have a career being a part of it. By your tone, I don't expect you to thank anyone for that or show any appreciation to the people who made your career possible. At least, not the ones who hold different opinions than yours.

      I am curious. You make a point to mention duty and honor. Was integrity never mentioned in your training? The basic concept that those in positions of command have a responsibility to not abuse that power, a responsibility to the troops under their command, and need to possess the character to admit and own up to their mistakes? Without that kind of integrity, "honor" is meaningless and what you refer to as "duty" is mere servitude.
      • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+2Don't worry. This guy is just pretending he served in the military. I grew up in the army. I know how it works. My father was a pathfinder, an airborne ranger. I grew up in Schofield Barracks, the home of (formerly, they've since been deployed in alaska and other places) the 25th Infantry Division. These were the guys who fought in Vietnam, and are now serving in Afghanistan and Iraq in small units.

        This idot wants to believe he's a lone ranger, but he's just a fool posing as some hot *****. If he were to say what he's said here in a bar outside Fort Benning, he'd get his ass kicked. He'd get his ass kicked clear and all the way back to wherever he came from.
      • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+2The 25th ID was the division depicted in Platoon. The "electric strawberry" unit patch. a strawberry with a lightening bolt passing through.

        The 25th ID is now serving in northern Iraq and also in Afghanistan.

        They have a few of the striker brigades.
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+1Having grown up on forward deployed combat infantry division bases, I can call you out as a *****.

      You dreamed up a great story having watched a few war movies. However, you are not even close to how the military works.

      Are you 15, dreaming of glory?

  • ratpH1nk, on 02/06/2008, -3/+4I forgot what I actually wanted to say. How is this "inaccurate"?
    • ratpH1nk, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2...and wtf would I be dugg down for asking a question? There is nothing in the article (yes, I RTFA). So the question still stands..
      How is this "inaccurate"?
    • OrigamiRonin, on 02/06/2008, -0/+2First, the headline alone disagrees with what many people want to believe. Secondly, it comes from thinkprogress.org, a site which many people do not agree with politically. Some of these people will bury the article as inaccurate for these reasons alone. I would bet money that very few of them read the article, they just have a habit of claiming that anything which does not fit within their narrow point of view is false.
  • truck87bp, on 02/06/2008, -3/+2On Jay Leno last night (feb 5th) The Jaywalk segment was the whole truth of Politics in America. Hardly a single person, of voting age, could identify pictures of anyone running for the Office of the President. My fellow Americans are mostly a bunch of Jackasses wrapped up in their iphones, clothes and cars. They will spend 2 days before voting on Nov. 5 watching TV to make their choice. At the end of the segment, Leno says, You get what you vote for! Even Leno knows Ron Paul is the only viable candidate running currently but isn't allowed to say so.
    SAD SAD SAD !
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1You do realize that they edit that for comedic effect and only show those people who can't answer the questions.
  • dnafrequency, on 02/06/2008, -1/+2Obama? An anti-war candidate? What a lie! He is a CFR candidate and will continue on the same horrendous path as Bush.
  • DerangedPenguin, on 02/06/2008, -3/+0Reality check folks. Those of us in the military service would rather stay at "home" drinking coffee, doing drills and polishing the bright work.

    Lets face it the pay is not something that you can exactly brag about, the work hours 24/7/365 would make a 40 hour job seem all too boring, and housing would most likely be considered substandard for section 8 usage, welfare abusers. How would the Katrina losers react to being given an entrenchment tool and canvas tarp and told to make a hole in the dirt until they can build themselves a new home?

    The health care system, the prefect model of national health care, prevents you from suing the doctor that nearly killed you, or the crappy post surgery care you get at Walter Reed at the hands of liberal minded nurses who bitch about having to work 40 hours a week.

    Yeah you get hazardous duty pay and combat pay in exchange for having barbarians shoot bullets and set off road side fireworks in your face, or daily risk of getting blown over the side of a flight deck into the freezing cold water 50 feet below. All these pro-pay benefits don't amount to a ant hill worth of ***** except when you go home and taste true freedom in all its forms.

    You give up the rights and freedoms that guaranteed by the Constitution and willing place yourself under the authority of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. A code of justice that says you can be thrown in jail just for being late to work
    Or sent to prison for telling your boss to go ***** him or herself, or be executed for simply refusing to go to work one morning.

    So why do military members do it, remember this is an all volunteer force? They do it so that people on digg can spread lies about what is really happening, they do it because soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines believe it is right and just, that some liberal (fascist look up the word and compare it to Hillary's and Barack's vision for America) minded individual can sit in front of a computer and say what ever the ***** hell they want to say about their country and its policies. In dictatorial countries you get hauled away in the middle of the night for speaking ill will about your country and your leaders. The Military of the United States has a history having to go to war when Professional Politicians ***** things up so badly that we have no choice but to take up arms and kill others. I would be for any candidate that wants peace, just make sure that the definition of peace is not like the one used in the former Communist Soviet Union. Peace as the absence of all resistance to communism and the Soviet Union. In a more modern fantasy the Borg in Star Trek experience peace, "Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated"

    I for one don't like the idea of being assimilated to any other culture but our own here in the The States. I would be willing to fight and perhaps die for Canada and Canadians, for the United Kingdom and Israel with its Jewish, Arab and Palestinian Israeli's. Yes even The French and France. Your true friends are the ones who are willing to sacrifice for you even if you don't always see eye to eye. Who would you be willing to fight for...?

    As for this story I think it is a load of horse apples. For one thing the military is required by the U.C.M.J. to remain detached from politics. Yes you can contribute to a party, but you can not speak for one candidate in public, the first amendment does not apply to you.
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+1You are an idiot. "Those of us in the military service" like you ever got off your fat ass and joined the military.

      I grew up in the Army. My father was a West Point graduate in 1964, the year before the long grey line, a classmate of Barry McCaffrey. He was the a platoon commander of the first US based ground troops sent to Vietnam for official combat, his platoon guarded a fire support base that supported the troops fighting the battle of "We wer soldiers" movie fame.

      If you served, you wouldn't be saying that *****. You are a poser. You don't even know.

      I lived my entire childhood on forward deployed combat infantry bases. My father was a pathfinder, a ranger, airborne infrantry. He did the things you want to imagine you did. He was 101st airborne in Vietnam, and served in the 82nd in Korea. So go screw yourself.
  • stevebee, on 02/06/2008, -0/+1Oh please. It is just not a fact. The rate of re-enlistment is very very high. Why? Because the soldiers, for the most part, believe in what they are doing.
    • PhilLesh69, on 02/07/2008, -0/+1You've never heard of the re-enlistment bonus. It is now almost 25,000 dolllars.

      Even when you know the ***** is *****, it is hard to say no to a bonus that equals your annual pay.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 53 of 53 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

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


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