digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

See the original image at mondoglobo.ning.com

Staggering Timeline of Bush Era Civil Rights Violations

mondoglobo.ning.com — The author has put together what may be the only complete timeline that delineates Bush's hits against our rights, as well as relevant Supreme Court decisions, and Acts of Congress that have occurred on his watch.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jonathani1, on 12/05/2007, -3/+124This is a phenomenal production and deserves the eyeballs of everyone who values freedom.
    • 5urr3al5am, on 12/05/2007, -6/+2Nice piece of propaganda... most links go to liberal blog spots.. come back to earth liberal
      • OriginalReplica, on 12/13/2007, -0/+0Learn the difference between propaganda and facts. Propaganda is based around an emotional appeal with unsupported claims. This timeline is facts backed with links to the sources of those facts. The supposed "War on Terror" is propaganda, all emotion no measurable effectiveness. The violation of The Bill of Rights is fact, the actions of the President are a matter of historical record and The Bill of Rights is a short, to the point, document that can be read and understood by almost every American. Get over your denial and face the facts.
  • RealSurreal, on 12/05/2007, -5/+83Can you say fascism ?
    • LordByr0n, on 12/05/2007, -2/+11Fascism!
    • Flamancot, on 12/05/2007, -3/+5Fascism!
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 12/05/2007, -24/+5get some perspective.
      • wakananda, on 12/05/2007, -0/+86ft above American fascism, watching the grave fill in. That's the perspective we should be working for, not minimizing current assaults on the Constitution by citing previous, thrwarted attacks - as if that had the least bearing on the matter at hand.
    • bgovern, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2Can I say "A Form of Government where the state controls the key industries"? yes. But I don't know what it has to do with the topic of the article.
    • cmorwhat, on 12/05/2007, -0/+0NEOCONSERVATISM!....same thing right?
  • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 12/05/2007, -43/+15Bill of Rights under attack since 1791. Learn more at your local history book (howard zinn or lowell)
    • jaymzdean, on 12/05/2007, -8/+34Amazing how the Bush Regime has done more harm to the Bill of Rights than everyone else going all the way back to 1791, isn't it?
      • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -19/+10Wow...if you really believe that, you certainly haven't studied much history...
    • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -20/+8What in the hell is up with folks digging people down for simply stating the truth?
      • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 12/05/2007, -19/+5It's ok, they don't need to have a perspective on things. They just need to be self-centered assholes that think their generation is suffering the worst.
        • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -15/+6OMG...compared to what my grandparents went through (the Great Depression), my generation (X) is flat out spoiled and over privileged. And compared to folks who lived through the civil war...sheesh...
      • feckineejit, on 12/05/2007, -5/+4dude they had no internets back then OMG so sad :(
    • buckrogers1965, on 12/05/2007, -0/+20I seem to recall women, blacks and gays gaining additional rights somewhere between 1791 and today.
    • johnhummel, on 12/05/2007, -0/+23We've moved back and forth on civil rights since 1791. And just because something is "under attack" doesn't mean that there can be greater harm caused along the way.

      In 1791, white landowners were "voting citizens". Eventually, this changed to "black and white males". Then "black and white females". Then it was "anybody over the age of 18, and you can't go making Jim Crow laws to prevent it".

      In 1791, we said "freedom of speech and no unreasonable search and seizure". Then we had the Alien and Sedition acts. Still later, we had the Supreme Court enshrine the Miranda Rights.

      So yes, rights have been under attack in 1791. And 1776. And 1651. And faaaaar back. But for the last 200+ years, as a world, we've generally been doing better. The world even agreed that many of these rights are for all people under the Geneva Conventions.

      Until 2001. Then, habeas corpus is gone if you're a "terrorist" - wait, make that "enemy combatant". Geneva conventions? Well, that's a "quaint" notion - throw it out. Trial for the accused? No, just lock them up in sensory depravation areas, then hit them with loud music to disrupt their sleeping patterns just like the studies in 1960's that showed you could torture a person that way without touching them - only call it "enhanced interrogation".

      Yes, rights have been under attack for a long time. But in merely 6 years, there's been a lot of rolling back of those rights while the US was shocked after 9-11. Luckily, people are starting to wake up and call ***** - and hopefully we'll continue to do so, before the next round of attacks weaken our rights even further.
    • bot001220, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2Guys, please don't feed the troll. Just block him and/or report him and move on.
    • Nidy1, on 12/05/2007, -6/+1Zinn is anything but unbiased. "The History of the People of the United States" is anti-US and pro-socialism. Take it with a grain of salt.
  • fairley7, on 12/05/2007, -4/+104If you think "it can't happen here," consider how blatantly the Bush Administration lied about Iraq and now Iran. Even the exposure of their lies did nothing to alter their behavior. Iraq and Iran were governments that didn't bow to US bidding, and they had oil. Therefore, they and their societies must be destroyed and replaced by compliant puppets. These criminals will do what it takes to grab more and more power, and if their feeble rationalizations are shown to be bogus, so what, no one is stopping them.

    Well, they are making similar rationalizations to strip us of our rights and to add to their powers. This so-called "war on terrorism" is simply a fabrication, the analogue of the lies that are being spun to justify the invasion of oil-rich countries so that they can control them. They also want to control US, to turn us into slaves. Unfortunately, too many of us are sitting back in denial, or apathy, or a sullen hostility.

    I recently read the Declaration of Independence. It never resonated to me before as it did this time. They too were under the thumb of the arbitrary and brutal authority of "King George." It can happen here. In fact, it has.
    • rjwusa, on 12/05/2007, -26/+8You forgot the standard "Ron Paul' for president line. < Rolling Eyes >
      • vanza001, on 12/05/2007, -7/+8STFU, This isn't about Ron Paul, this is about AMERICA ***** WAD!
        • rjwusa, on 12/05/2007, -7/+3Nice. If it's about America, why are you shouting me down and wanting to silence me? Or, is this not really about America, but your own opinion, and those who agree with you? I think I nailed it, didn't I? ;-P
        • rabidbob, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3*wooosh!*

          Hear that?
      • psyjoniz, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1glad you could come in behind and take care of that oversight

        RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT!!!! :)
    • XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, on 12/05/2007, -13/+9There was no brutal authority under King George. The revolution was entirely because our rich merchants wanted to get richer. They used the justification of selfless people to help them. Remember the big fat signature of John Hancock at the bottom of the Declaration? That was our biggest and richest merchant. He was "suffering" under the duties and limits the British imposed on American trade which was already prosperous. By the way, you can argue that the British had a right to tax us because of the protection their soldiers provided and debts made during the French and Indian Wars.

      Follow the money trail, that'll find you the motive of everything.
      • buckrogers1965, on 12/05/2007, -4/+3Why do you hate America?
      • johnhummel, on 12/05/2007, -0/+5R-ight. There weren't british troops kicking in the doors of people that disagreed - which was the start of the "no unreasonable search and seizure".

        There weren't taxes on things to discourage the colonists from bringing up their own industry from a raw goods perspective. And those taxes were without representation. The colonists wouldn't have minded the taxes - if they had the same rights as a British citizen to vote on whether they wanted the taxes to be laid in the first place.

        As for "right to tax us for protection", suddenly, I'm seeing a parallel here. Odd that the Iraqi's were, from the Bush administration's first pronouncements, going to "pay the US back in oil" for us "liberating them from Saddam". Now, the Iraqi provisional government gave away rich oil contracts to US companies.

        Funny - I guess that's a tax that the Iraqi people get to pay for being protected by the US during the second Persian Gulf War. While we're at it, I'm going to go ask some money of my neighbor down the street as "protection money" against his windows being broken.
    • wakananda, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Don't underestimate the head of steam that can be built up by "sitting back in sullen hostility." In the future it may be our greatest national resource.
      • netant, on 12/05/2007, -0/+4No, its just a form of posing.

        The only thing sullen hostility can lead to is violent rebellion. Which may be a necessary thing in the future, but not a desirable thing to have.
  • Aviatrixt, on 12/05/2007, -7/+41T-minus 412 days, baby.
    • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -5/+21Uh unnn...he's going to declare martial law and become dictator for life...
      • DeadElephant, on 12/05/2007, -2/+8I'd kill him.

        FBI knocking at my door in 3....2....
        • wakananda, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3The FBI might kill him, actually. Even those accustomed to corruption as a way of life might balk at open dictatorship in America, and move to restore at least a viable appearance of democratic govenment.
    • AshamedAmerican, on 12/05/2007, -7/+31The truly sad part is that's about 2,918 days too goddamn late.
      • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -28/+5Yawn...your self-hating spew is boring. I'm sure you get a kick out of it, and it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy...but it's simply pablum. And not very tasty at that!
        • AshamedAmerican, on 12/05/2007, -3/+22SELF hating? No I happen to be fine with myself, its the fascist dictators in place and all their henchmen I hate. Why would I make a comment about hoping our future generations will learn of their treachery if it was America I hated so much? Not too much of a thinker are you? Next time get a clue before you judge someone, and some intelligence before you try and make another sub-par witty comment.
    • Fungyo, on 12/05/2007, -2/+0Is he leaving ? Heard of the North American Union ?
      http://nauinfo.blogspot.com/2007/11/anti-north-ame ...
    • kinerry, on 12/05/2007, -4/+3Depends on who gets into office

      If it's anyone other than Ron Paul, consider us all screwed for infinity and counting
      • revenge7, on 12/05/2007, -0/+4Contrary to popular belief, Ron Paul isn't the only good candidate.
  • Flamancot, on 12/05/2007, -3/+25sweet fancy moses.... i don't want to be around if and when the ***** really hits the fan. can you say american holocaust?
    • wakananda, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3I'm outta here in a few months. If the situation is workabe, I'll come back eventually. But the prospects are not good.
  • AshamedAmerican, on 12/05/2007, -4/+50One can only hope this will end up in the history books of future generations.
    • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -19/+4Unlikely. Historians deal in facts, not the fantasies of the brain dead. In another forty years, the Kool-Aid kommandos of the daily kos, etc. will be remembered (if at all) as silly lunatic twits. Well, actually most objective observers seem this sort of leftist crap as that already, anyway.
      • Flamancot, on 12/05/2007, -2/+10you sir, are a stupid idiot.
        • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Just as you are a most articulate commentator.
      • netant, on 12/05/2007, -2/+6Do you even know what iconoclast means????
        • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Oh, very much so.
        • psyjoniz, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1lets here why you named yourself iconoclast - seriously - i'm interested
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/06/2007, -1/+1I should go to the effort for someone who cannot spell two four letter words out of a nine word sentence? Right.
  • jaymzdean, on 12/05/2007, -5/+36"They hate us for our freedoms."
    Well said, George, well said.
    • MikeGlaz, on 12/05/2007, -4/+19Replace "They" to "I", "us" to "you" and "our" to "your" and you'll find out what he really meant to say.
      • jaymzdean, on 12/05/2007, -3/+8Exactly my point. I'm digging you up.
      • revenge7, on 12/05/2007, -6/+3Replace "They hate us for our freedoms." with "Death to America(n freedom)."
    • gak001, on 12/05/2007, -1/+31See - Bush is being proactive. He's trying to make them hate us less by getting rid of some of those freedoms.
      • cmorwhat, on 12/05/2007, -0/+4HAHAHAH! bush is a genius!! i bet he has a nucular powerd brain!!
      • psyjoniz, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1LMFAO - and the truth comes out - ole boy really is smarter and lookin' out!!
  • MercedRocks, on 12/05/2007, -42/+5These are "civil rights" violations?

    2001 - Presidential directive delays indefinitely the scheduled release of presidential documents (authorized by the Presidential Records Act of 1978) pertaining to the Reagan-Bush administration.
    - US Supreme Court rules that medical necessity is not a permissible defense against federal marijuana statutes.

    Pfft.....the sun still seems to rise and fall in the same direction each day. "Leftjobs" never cease to amaze me. I really wish we had a decent 3rd party in this country so the right-wing and left-wing nutjobs would both just shut up for a change.
    • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -13/+3Wow...love how folks can blame the actions on the Judicial branch on the Executive branch...but not surprising, since most seem to think Bush is somehow making the dems in control of congress just go along with him...
    • jgzman, on 12/05/2007, -2/+11For the record, we could nuke the entire US into ash, and the sun would continue to rise in the east, set in the west.

      Yes, a silly pedantic point, but that particular phrase really gets on my thungas.

      Second, yes, they are. Congress says "release the documents" and not just as an opinion, as a law. I have the right to see those documents, BY LAW. The President decrees otherwise. Second, if the government makes my medicine illegal, my civil rights have been violated. I have the right to the best medical care I can buy, or that can be provided to me.

      • Azerael, on 12/05/2007, -2/+10Every day nuking the entire US into ash begins to look like a better and better option to ensure the rest of the world still has the opportunity to continue to watch the rising sun.
        • Zarchon, on 12/05/2007, -9/+1Are you an American? If not then bring it on. If you are then please start us on our way to destruction and take yourself out. Thanks.
        • SemiSarcastic, on 12/05/2007, -3/+0Seeing how your from a different country I suppose it would be a good idea for you. However, non-Bush voters still live here. lol you know that kind of talk only proves one thing: your not so different from those people like Bush. Are you sure you'd be okay having the children pay for the sins of others over things they can't fully understand yet? Because, radiation doesn't care who's showered by it.
        • wakananda, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3At a certain point, it becomes a matter of other countries feeling that *their* children are safe from the American crazies in power now.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 12/05/2007, -4/+6OMG He found two notes out of the pile which by his opinion aren't valid violations!!!
      That proves everyone who didn't vote republican is an idiot!

      I don't smoke marijuanna either, since I don't care if it's restricted, I can call anyone who does smoke it an idiot!
      Presidential Records??? Hell I don't need to see if the government is lying.

      /Ignorant POS
    • phauwn, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1Merced is a dustbowl full of loony toothless meth addicts like you.
  • Shaggy6ster, on 12/05/2007, -4/+63How do people ever justify having voted for this man?
    • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -6/+25I apologize for doing so.
      • biotch, on 12/05/2007, -4/+1But youll probably go ahead and vote for the next republican in line
        • RonBurgundy76, on 12/05/2007, -0/+7Doesn't matter much anymore. Democrat = Republican = same old *****. Most of them are corrupt and won't change the status quo.
    • Azerael, on 12/05/2007, -3/+12They didn't.
    • revenge7, on 12/05/2007, -6/+34Every time I see a "W'04" bumper sticker, I want to ***** kick the driver's ass.
      • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -24/+4Hey douchebag, I still have three Bush-Cheney stickers on both my vehicles. Bring it on. As far as I'm concerned you libtard vermin are as much my enemy as the jihadis and I would derive just as much pleasure from introducing you to my close personal friends Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson.
        • arcooke, on 12/05/2007, -4/+17There's nothing quite as pathetic as trying to act tough over the internet.
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -11/+4Oh, as in "I want to ***** kick the driver's ass." ?? Because I certainly wasn't bluffing.
          • biotch, on 12/05/2007, -3/+2no not as in "I want to ***** kick the driver's ass"
            general expression != personal threat
        • Scheitbag, on 12/05/2007, -2/+10Hey everyone! its another Internet tough guy...
        • lycanter, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3typical for the genre
        • cmorwhat, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1Wow. Thats pretty scary. Your attitude i mean, not the guns. I'm from TX, i got plenty of them, but that doesnt mean i use them to threaten people who dont share my own beliefs. and another thing...why the ***** do you need 2 vehicles? isnt one enough? really dude. calm down and turn off BillO hes lying to you. We arent the enemy. He is.
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2When some scumbag says he wants to beat up on people with bumper stickers for politicians he hates, I take it as a threat. Perhaps I didn't phrase it as well as I should, but the bottom line is that if someone like that came at me, I'd have no compunction about putting him down like the rabid animal he apparently is. Two vehicles? When you grow up (no slam there, BTW; you are just very obviously fairly young) you may be married. It's silly, I know, but these women really do expect to be treated as equals. ;-) Note to the frothing mouth crowd: that last line is irony / a joke. Seriously, though, I hope when you grow up you will develop the ability to distinguish between propaganda (e.g., blimp moore, the daily kos, etc.) and unbiased news analysis (O'Reilly). If you want to complain about conservatives, aim your comments at Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, etc. O'Reilly is where the NY Slimes was before they began selling out to the left in the 1960s.
          • ITpolitico, on 12/05/2007, -2/+1Woah you're calling O'Reilly unbiased? That's the biggest load of ***** I've ever heard! And no that doesn't mean that I get all of my "news" from dailykos or "blimp moore" either. It just means that I know when I smell *****. And O'Reilly absolutely REEKS of it.
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2@ ITpolitico:

            OK, then you buy into what SeeBS and their fellow travelers put out? Are you old enough to remember Edward R. Murrow? Huntley and Brinkley? These are examples of broadcast journalists when it was about reporting the news rather than framing it to suit leftwing ideology. O'Reilly is middle of the road, as much as the left may hysterically deny this. Why do you think he, Fox and AM radio are so popular? Because O'Reilly / Fox present both sides of the story while the typical talk radio show is conservative and there is a huge market for this. For the last quarter of the 20th Century, the left-biased media had the airwaves and most of the press to themselves and they used to it create this surreal Lewis Carroll fantasy that *they* are the middle ground.
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2@ ITpolitico #2 . . . .

            Also please note that by all measures - circulation, viewership, ad revenues - while the moderate / conservative media continue to flourish and grow, the voice of the left - broadcast TV, the two Slimes (LA & NY) and other large city leftwing papers, newsWEAK / time, etc. - attracts fewer in the general population. Now, some will rush to say this is due to the Internet - and to a degree this is undoubtedly true - but this only means the moderate / conservative media maintain that edge in the face of additional competition. The 20% or so who live on a Kool-Aid diet may dislike it, but there are far more Americans in the middle - and at least as many on the right - who are not especially interested in the views of maureen dowd, pinch sulzberger, rosie o'pig and the rest of the leftwing drum beaters.
      • JoEBlack982, on 12/05/2007, -2/+10lol you threated to shoot him with your guns? What a pansy.
        • RonBurgundy76, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3No kidding. Whatever happened to good old-fashioned mano y mano fisticuffs? Relying on his gun first only confirms our suspicion that he's really just a puss.
      • Snarfy, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3Holy crap I thought I was the only one.

        You are forgiven if you have a bush 2000 sticker, but if you have a "W04" sticker you ***** knew better and you still voted for him. What really gets me is that he won in 04 with > 50% vote, but now his support is ~ 25%. Who are all of the douche bags who voted for him in '04 but have changed their minds since? Those are the people that need to by lynched in the name of the constitution.
        • undergrace, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1Um, isn't it good that half of the people that voted for him have finally woken up to the truth?! I didn't vote in '04, but I'll admit that if I had, it would have been for Bush... but I was also incredibly ignorant (and only 20 years old, very apathetic towards politics) and just saw the championed "Us vs Them" mentality this two-party system propagates. I reasoned "I'm a Republican, so I support Bush" - and left it at that. People are starting to wake up to the truth of the corruption and theft occurring in Washington and are educating themselves for this next election. I think it is the *remaining* ~25% that *still* support Bush that we need to be worried about, not those that finally woke up and saw the light.
    • Zarchon, on 12/05/2007, -12/+41) better than the other choice.
      2) Just because you hate him, and since I doubt you have ever voted conservative, doesn't mean I should.
      3) Just because I don't agree with some of his policies doesn't mean I don't agree with others. Since my views do not agree 100% with anyone else out there, I pick what I think is important and vote accordingly. I despise the left for being hateful, devisive, and hypocritical. I despise the right for not holding true to conservative views. The Liberal left ALWAYS sucks, the conservative right only sucks when non-conservatives pretend to be conservative and then aren't. For me it is "Always sucks vs. sometimes sucks". Pretty simple. And now you know how I justify hving voted for Bush. (twice) and will vote Republican this next election too.
      • DeadElephant, on 12/05/2007, -3/+2I don't care how you got to that conclusion. m'still gonna have to digg you down for voting for bush.

        Me, I was too young at the time.
      • netant, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2What was conservative about King George?

        He exploded federal spending.
        He engaged in international militarism.
        He eroded constitutional rights of citizens.
        He abandons illegal immigrant enforcement.

        What a tool you are for claiming Bush is a conservative. Neo-con, maybe.
      • biotch, on 12/05/2007, -1/+2There are many right wingers who hate the lefties and visa versa. And just because left wingers hate whos in power now means nothing. The republicans hated just as bad during the Clinton years. I would argue that the right is FAR more hypocritical than the left. Have you even paid attention to all the scandals that have broken within the last couple of years? Its all republicans doing exactly what they preach against, gay bathroom sex propositioning, child propositioning. Not to mention the legal things they do that they preach against during election time, raising discretionary spending, nation building, etc....
    • BelXul, on 12/05/2007, -3/+8I almost voted for him. While standing in line, I recalled several articles I had read in the news and what stuck out was his Vietnam War record. He was bailed out of going when his number came up, and I thought to myself, "If he ditched responsibility on that, and his businesses were also getting bailed out, then what isn't this guy going to bail out on?" The buck is supposed to stop where? Apparently the bill will be left in someone else's hands. In the end, I couldn't stomach Gore, which got me trying to think about as much as I knew about Nader. I decided he was the best route at the time.
    • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -16/+3VERY easily. By far the lesser of two evils. In 2000 al the inventor, like most libtards, couldn't find his ass with both hands and color-coded directions. And the traitor kerry of 2004 should be in Leavenworth or six feet under. The question I have is how could people so hate this nation as to vote for either one of those maggots?
      • rabidbob, on 12/05/2007, -3/+1"The question I have is how could people so hate this nation as to vote for either one of those maggots?"

        How could you hate America so much as to vote for Bush? A war that was unjustified, an economy in tatters, civil rights headed in the same direction. Fifty years of relative good will towards the US down the drain.
        • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2Hmmm . . . truth in usernames . . . RABIDbob . . . unusual honesty in one of your ilk.

          Did you skip all but the final sentence in my prior comment? Gore was and remains a dolt, kerry committed treason and has been crapping on this nation ever since. There is no way I would allow (as in vote for) either of them to run a hot dog stand, much less my country - which I love far more than you can possibly understand.

          If you are speaking of the effort to root out terrorists when you say "unjustified" then don't bother to read further; you are an idiot. Moving along, despite all the Monday morning quarterbacking, there was intelligence (confirmed by the agencies of other countries, including France and Russia) which indicated saddam was still actively producing WMDs. The intelligence was vetted by the governments / intelligence services of many nations and seemed accurate enough for them to sign on to OIF. But then neither of us will convince the other of our viewpoints. The economy is hardly in tatters. It is going through one of its periodic downturns, triggered in large part by greed on Wall Street. There is an old saying: "bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered." We saw it with the S&L scandal, the dot-com blowout and now the subprime collapse. Considered long time investment makes money; a rush to riches is a gamble and this time the house won. ALL politicians (or 90% of them) attack our Civil Rights, mostly by choosing the ones which they wish to defend and ignoring the ones they find troublesome. This has been an issue since Washington left office. Don't forget the attacks on dissent by that liberal icon lincoln or the socialist schemes of another such icon, fdr - not to mention his attempted packing the SCOTUS! Bush is not the first, last or worst. How about the anti-First Amendment "Campaign Finance Reform" legislation? Freaky feingold and RINO mccain gave us that abortion. The good will is still there, although the well has been poisoned by the traitors among us who propagate the lies - the worst of which is the 9/11 conspiracy insanity.

          OK, there you go. Short answer why I voted for Mr. Bush twice - he was, and remains, better - by at least two orders of magnitude - than the other choices.
          • rabidbob, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2The reason you voted for Bush twice is that you live in a fantasy world just as bizarre and twisted as the 9/11 conspiracy idiots. I suggest you actually educate yourself, especially about the last 20 years of history. Happy to help.
        • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2Mao and Ho Chi Minh had similar education programs; I'll pass.
  • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -1/+43John Warner Defense Authorization Act is passed. The act allows a president to declare a public emergency and station US military troops anywhere in America as well as take control of state based national guard units without consent of the governor or other local authorities. The law authorizes presidential deployment of US troops to round-up and detain “potential terrorists”, “illegal aliens” and “disorderly” citizenry

    Hmmm, disorderly citizenry.
    • MadN, on 12/05/2007, -4/+11"disorderly citizenry." = non-NeoCons

      I had a German great uncle that was in the SS, he died in a gas chamber for speaking out.
      I believe we are coming to the same day; Pre-destiny?

      Anyone who thinks Bush will leave office in 2009 is insane; he cannot leave, or he will face war crimes.
      • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -15/+4Go easy on that LSD - it makes you seem crazy in addition to your obvious stupidity.
        • cmorwhat, on 12/05/2007, -0/+0man icono, you just dont shut up do you? listen i really would like to know you because when this ***** happens i want to find you and tell you...look, i told you so.
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Chris, if such a thing should come to pass, you would find me on the front lines of those seeking his immediate eviction by any means necessary. Just because I don't buy into this paranoid leftist babble (and such it is) does not mean I place Mr. Bush over the Constitution. And no, I don't shut up, as much as the loons might like me to do so.
        • psyjoniz, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1starting to think you are just a paid troll
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Just starting to think . . . well, for a leftard that WOULD be an improvement. Good luck with the project and please come back once you can tie your shoes.
    • andy17null, on 12/05/2007, -2/+9*chh*
      You, Citizen - Pick up that cup.
    • jon30041, on 12/05/2007, -1/+5You better ***** believe I'm gonna be one of them if martial law is declared. Ooooh yeah.
      • tamckissick, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Is that you Mr. Newell? You seriously sound just like someone I used to know who's first name was spelled the same.
  • cherwilco, on 12/05/2007, -3/+50after years of telling everybody I know about the bush (nazi) administration, "I told ya so" doesn't quite cut it now does it?
    • Zarchon, on 12/05/2007, -11/+3Obviously you know nothing of the Nazi's other than what you have read on Digg. You do a disservice to those who actually lived under a Nazi regime.
      • BelXul, on 12/05/2007, -1/+8I actually wrote a paper on that issue. It never got published because it really scared the hell out of the editor considering how similar things are to the final days of the Weimar Republic.
        • netant, on 12/05/2007, -1/+4Don't sweat it. Naomi Wolf just published a book on it.
  • Mofo, on 12/05/2007, -34/+5He also made a black man secretary of state, and a black woman and appointed a Latino attorney general.
    • jbird71, on 12/05/2007, -2/+23Oh, right. I forgot about the new Federal Minority Point System. For every minority in your cabinet, you get to remove one of the articles in the bill of rights.
      • revenge7, on 12/05/2007, -2/+10Native Americans are worth 2 points.
    • 16x9, on 12/05/2007, -1/+5Gee whiz. He's an alright kind of guy then, isn't he.

      If we discover that he ever helped an old lady across the street then I'l certainly think he's a wonderful human being.
    • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -19/+4You're getting dugg down because you said the truth...seems some folk don't like the truth. Or they're just racists. Or both.
      • 16x9, on 12/05/2007, -2/+10He said the truth?!?! What's that supposed to mean?

        No one is denying that president Bush has placed into responsible positions people from a wider pool of ethnic variety than we are used to seeing. I think that's great! But doing so certainly hasn't make him a good president. And frankly, I find most offensive your implication that we who look for more in a president (like competence, for example) are "racist."
    • ghamal, on 12/05/2007, -2/+14So what? 'm latino. I don't think Alberto Gonzales is a role model for latinos or ANYBODY else. I'm human before I'm latino.
    • wakananda, on 12/05/2007, -1/+2I agree with Harry Belafonte, that these black repubs are essentially "house negros" that in no way represent or care for the ethnic group they come from. They are, for the most part, tools of Big Oil.
    • DangerCollie, on 12/05/2007, -1/+2"He also made a black man secretary of state, and a black woman"
      Which one was Condelizza Rice?
  • zhulien, on 12/05/2007, -0/+29It's actually very funny and sad at the same time - a country that could have had the potential to be a role model for the world but instead becoming what they promoted Russia as being a couple of decades ago. Thank god USA exists to do this rather than were I live, but hopefully they don't follow suit here given that Howard is out! Honestly though, I feel sorry for you lot having such a loser in power, a dictator no less changing the country's economy and reputation for the worst. Growing up I always looked up to the USA, over the last decade or so, it has been a continuing spiral down - it could be fixed, but at this rate I don't know when. If all goes well, Bush will get life in prison! Come on US residents, you should be able to get him in front of a court!
    • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -6/+6Keep on holding out whatever hope you have...but Bush/Cheney aren't going to be charged with any crimes. And in the slight chance they were? Expect their successor to pardon them, regardless of party affiliation.
    • Azerael, on 12/05/2007, -4/+5You think Rudd is better? Labor is like the Democrats over in the US, just another branch of the same party backed by the same corporate powers. Like the civilizations before us, the age of democracy is over. We will descend into fascist states and then collapse into anarchy, emerging once again to create the latest social systems to fail. The human race is not fit to rule over itself.
    • DeadElephant, on 12/05/2007, -0/+6You think your sorry, we have to deal with him >.<
      Why couldn't that rogue pretzel finish him when he had the chance!? WHYYYYYY!
  • libertao, on 12/05/2007, -2/+5Did anyone else read this as "Bush Equal Rights Amendment Civil Rights Violations"?

    ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendmen ... )
    • Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2I've noticed that too. I think it's a glitch in digg/firefox.
  • usgovterrorists, on 12/05/2007, -12/+22Bush is the world's greatest terrorist!
    9-11 was an inside job!

    "Former Italian President and the man who revealed the existence of Operation Gladio
    Francesco Cossiga has gone public on 9/11, telling Italy's most respected newspaper that the attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad and that this was common knowledge amongst global intelligence agencies."
    • obxjdt, on 12/05/2007, -22/+5STFU!!! You're 1 of 5 people that still believe that *****!!!
      • GhostyBoy, on 12/05/2007, -2/+1Not the case, my friend. Simply not the case.
    • revenge7, on 12/05/2007, -5/+11They knew about it, but didn't stop it. It wasn't quite their fault, but they let it happen to take advantage of the situation.
      • jon30041, on 12/05/2007, -4/+5Isn't not stopping a crime akin to being an accessory to crime in usual cases?

        Why does that change with the more powerful someone is? That really irks me, sir! Verily, I say!
        • obxjdt, on 12/06/2007, -0/+2I'll let the state police know that I suspect you might drive over the speed limit so they can arrest you before a crime happens...
    • Meccadeath, on 12/05/2007, -8/+3You sound like Al-Qaeda. Maybe someday Ill get the opportunity to meet you in a dark alleyway . ;-)
    • gak001, on 12/05/2007, -2/+8Source?
    • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -6/+4It is truly amazing that a life form so incapable of reason can recognize speech, much less put words together, however irrationally.
      • ITpolitico, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1What the hell is your problem? Do you have to be a dick with every word you say?
        • Iconoclast25, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1*I* have a problem? Did you come out under a full moon? Do you actually buy into this vacuous conspiracy theory insanity? I guess you do, or you would have understood the relationship between my observation and the crap this drooling fool posted. I only insult / disparage / mock leftist twits. Perhaps they are merely brain-washed rather than brain dead, but this is impossible to determine at second hand.

  • bratpack8, on 12/05/2007, -3/+18This is truly disgusting, but if anyone thinks it all started after 9/11, then they need a history lesson. Think FDR, Wilson, Johnson, Lincoln, Teddy Rosevelt, Clinton, and on and on and on and on. It really has to stop.
    • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -8/+8Oh, FDR didn't suspend any civil rights. He certainly didn't round up anyone with slanted eyes and throw them into internment camps.

      Actually, there was a huge debate as to which side to support in WWII - had Japan not been foolish enough to attack us, I think it less than unreasonable to figure we'd never have entered the war. Sure, we did engage in lend-lease and such actions, but a huge chunk of the population was actually pro-Nazi.

      Now those were really scary times...luckily, the weapons of yesterday didn't permit what can happen today.
      • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -1/+15Franklin D Roosevelt, under Presidential Executive Order number 6102, confiscated all privately held Gold in the United States on April 5, 1933.
        • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -12/+2You know that's not what the order did...dugg down for blatant dishonesty!
        • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -0/+11Section 2. All persons are hereby required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933, to a Federal Reserve bank or a branch or agency thereof or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System all gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates now owned by them or coming into their ownership on or before April 28, 1933, except the following:

          (a) Such amount of gold as may be required for legitimate and customary use in industry, profession or art within a reasonable time, including gold prior to refining and stocks of gold in reasonable amounts for the usual trade requirements of owners mining and refining such gold.

          (b) Gold coin and gold certificates in an amount not exceeding in the aggregate $100.00 belonging to any one person; and gold coins having recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins.

          (c) Gold coin and bullion earmarked or held in trust for a recognized foreign government or foreign central bank or the Bank for International Settlements.

          (d) Gold coin and bullion licensed for the other proper transactions (not involving hoarding) including gold coin and gold bullion imported for the re-export or held pending action on applications for export license.
    • GhostyBoy, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1You are right, but 9/11 did send it into hyper-drive.
  • obxjdt, on 12/05/2007, -25/+4does anyone else think it's odd that all the links go to left wing blogs??? No facts, but lots of opinions...
    • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -3/+11did you rtfa?
      /not a lefty
    • jetboyterp, on 12/05/2007, -8/+3Odd? Not for the Digg front page...
    • BleeBlap, on 12/05/2007, -2/+12Yeah the New York Times, USA Today, Wikipedia, Wired and the text from Supreme Court decisions are definitely left wing blogs.
      • DangerCollie, on 12/05/2007, -2/+1When they can't read they can't tell the difference. The only way they know is if it comes over the flashy picture box in the living room tuned to Fox News.
    • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -9/+3"Logic in the mind of a liberal is like a snowflake in the Sahara: lost, alone, and soon dead from the hostile environment." Personal diary, 1972.
      • RonBurgundy76, on 12/05/2007, -2/+5Ever wonder why you're not a famous writer? I don't.
        • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2Nor do I . . . I don't have the patience for it.
          • RonBurgundy76, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Well at least we can agree on something :) Yay diplomacy.
  • jetboyterp, on 12/05/2007, -28/+5I've seen a LOT of anti-Bush crapola, but this one really takes the cake. Bush Derangement Syndrome is alive and well here at Digg! You're all losing your rights! Let's all move to North Korea! Or Sudan! (as long as you mind what you name your teddy bear)
    • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -2/+13John Warner Defense Authorization Act is passed. The act allows a president to declare a public emergency and station US military troops anywhere in America as well as take control of state based national guard units without consent of the governor or other local authorities. The law authorizes presidential deployment of US troops to round-up and detain “potential terrorists”, “illegal aliens” and “disorderly” citizenry

      Bush destroys "Posse Comitatus" and you think this is crapola?
      • jetboyterp, on 12/05/2007, -12/+3So you think Bush is going to do all this....when? Tomorrow maybe? As for "rounding up" potential terrorists, illegals, and the disorderly, GOOD! Sooner the better!
        • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -0/+5Maybe he never will but down the road who knows. And you do know that potential terrorists could be open to wide interpretation like for instance people who disagree w/the govt. They won't round up illegals because they want them here, how else could millions of them get here?
        • jetboyterp, on 12/05/2007, -8/+3That's where you're wrong, metric7....on that "wide interpretation" thing. You can disagree with the govt. all you want...but you can't plot to, say, blow it up. No matter what you guys think...and no matter how many times you tell yourselves...Bush is not a dictator, nor a fascist. You haven't lost one, single right. None. If you have, I'd love to hear what it is...
        • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -1/+7You do know it's (or was) illegal for the armed forces to be used internally against the citizens. But the groundwork is being laid to change this. That is the problem, one of many.If you research this you'll find out a lot of things that may change your opinion. Don't just dismiss things because they go against what you believe, see for yourself. I'm a right wing veteran not some leftist hippy idiot , don't think that a dictatorship can't happen here. Gotta hit the rack, g-night.
        • ScionAltera, on 12/05/2007, -0/+4You won't be so enthusiastic when they come for you. They'll start with the really dangerous folks first; authors, pundits, columnists and people who post anti-government messages online. Then they'll come for people who use drugs or pirate software and music. They'll come for people with too many piercings and tattoos, people who are homeless, people who are Iranian, Iraqi, Syrian, and Libyan, and people who are friends with those people. They'll come for people who are known to own lots of weapons.
          "All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country." -- Hermann Goering
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2Actually, if such a thing should come to pass, the first group they will go after will be those who possess firearms, as they are the only group with a chance of resistance. Words and ideas inspire, but they will not defeat a determined enemy under arms.
    • MaTT2011, on 12/05/2007, -2/+11You, sir, are a PHENOMENAL idiot.

      Please do not breed, for the good of the human race please do not breed.
      • jetboyterp, on 12/05/2007, -10/+3How about if I name my first son "Mohammed"? That work for ya?
        • MaTT2011, on 12/05/2007, -2/+7Well then, you're just a huge fan of "stupid", aren't ya?

          Yea, it would appear so...
        • TheGreatTK, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3Congrats on getting added to my blocklist. Kindly go DIAF.
      • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -5/+2Well, MaTT, sadly, your parents obviously failed to get the message and now the world has yet another drooling libtard as a result. Did you ask them if you could stay up this late?
        • MaTT2011, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3LoL, i always love hearing "libtard" , it highlights how little some people know about liberty and American democracy. President Bush himself is a liberal in a liberal democratic society....so your usage of "liberal" cleverly combined with that of "retard" is a hilarious illustration of your own idiocy. One is a liberal when they believe in personal liberty and the security of personal liberty by the actions of government; so are you trying to say you hate liberty? You do realize that liberty is the reason America came to be in the first place, right? Or do you just use the word "liberal" simply because you cant come up with any other, more appropriate, label for those who oppose your intellectually stunted views? But most likely you are just another neo-con who believes that sacrificing liberty in the name of a false sense of security is worth destroying the greatness of the United States over.....and in that case your use of "libtard" as a label is frighteningly appropriate and unamerican.

          I'd be willing to bet you don't have the slightest idea what America is about and what makes it such a great country; as indicated by your attempts to slander individuals like myself who wish to defend Liberty, and thus America, from the individuals who threaten it both within and without.
          • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3Ah, so you wish to bandy semantics? Granted, I was using the 'lib' as in 'liberal' - but as it is used in colloquial speech, to categorize those on the left / liberal / touch-feely side of the political equation. Will it make you happier if I use 'leftard' instead? I certainly wouldn't wish to hurt your feelings, Forrest.

            Yes, I believe in personal liberty . . . very much so, in fact. I don't put much credence in "the security of personal liberty by the actions of government" . . . rather the opposite, especially when there are scum like the clintons in charge - I remember Waco. As to the allegation about sacrificing liberty for security, Dr. Franklin already expressed my view on the topic. Where we disagree - at least on internal threats - is that I see the greatest domestic threat to liberty from the left with their willingness to sell out to our enemies for money (e.g., the clintons), power (e.g., kerry and kennedy), both of these or other reasons. I see conservative speakers assaulted for their temerity not to kowtow to the leftist / PC party line, moderate and conservative viewpoints suppressed and mocked, core values attacked. English simply does not have the vocabulary to express the depth of my contempt and hatred for the lefties who do these things, hence the creation of words such as libtard. This President has done things with which I do not agree, but he is nowhere near the monster the leftard maggots depict him as being.
      • sieteRevueltas, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1I remember this jetboy from other topics, with equally retarded ill-informed comments. This user is to be ignored because he is exactly that - a phenomenal idiot.
    • Meccadeath, on 12/05/2007, -14/+3Right on brother! Most of these clowns are Al-Qaeda sympathizers or completely ignorant.
      • MaTT2011, on 12/05/2007, -2/+8You just one upped this guy on the stupid scale; your mother would be proud. And by proud i mean ashamed.

        Its our duties as americans to defend the constitution and the bill of rights; but apparrently you think that is a terrorist activity which just about the most ass backwards thing possible. As such i also formally request that you to refrain from spreading your obviously deficient genetic material into the human gene pool. You have proven yourself, and your genes, to be unworthy of replication. Good day to you, sir.
        • metric7, on 12/05/2007, -2/+4"You just one upped this guy on the stupid scale"

          Cosign.
      • jon30041, on 12/05/2007, -1/+3... WOW. You know, we don't sympathize, the empathize. That means trying to figure out why things are happening. Which is a good way to fix relations problems.

        http://dulceetdecorumest.org/wp-content/uploads/20 ...

        Because if you don't love Calvin and Hobbes, you have no soul.
      • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -5/+1Not entirely; some are simply misguided or terminally stupid .
    • phauwn, on 12/05/2007, -2/+2ah yes, as long as we have more rights than the North Koreans everything is A-O-K. All I want is the liberty granted by the constitution... not some measure in relation to one of the worlds most opressive regime.
  • badqat, on 12/05/2007, -11/+2Hahaha! I'm LOL!
  • openj, on 12/05/2007, -7/+6What an amazing Christian. God is omnipotent and can smite you immediately for any perceived violation. Why would you want anything less from your government?
    • DeadElephant, on 12/05/2007, -2/+5Bush has violated what being alive is all about. Why hasn't God struck him dead yet?
    • noguy, on 12/07/2007, -0/+0DeadElephant, I believe that openj was intending to be VERY sarcastic. and God doesn't interviene in that way... Humankind has freewill, nomatter what Bush does.
  • MaTT2011, on 12/05/2007, -4/+10Yup, thats our Bush! Our incredibly incompetent, idiotic and ass-backwards Bush.

    If there is any justice in the world then history will judge this guy to be exactly what he is: A total doosh-bag.

    I fart in his general direction...
    • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -5/+2Well, MaTT, it is clear your farts must be far more intelligent than your expository writing. The larger question is which is your head and which is your anus? You better mark one of them with an "X" so people can tell them apart.
    • cyskate, on 12/05/2007, -1/+0Digg + for the Monty Python comment.
  • searob1, on 12/05/2007, -1/+10Remember, Republican attack dogs were dogging Democratic presidential candidates just as they're doing today. It would be sad if we get another Bush-like Republican.
    • pintomp3, on 12/05/2007, -0/+11or a bush-like democrat. please don't let hillary win either. obama would be ok, kucinich better.
  • LoJack, on 12/05/2007, -1/+12To compensate, we've expanded our right to invade any nation. Yes!
  • revenge7, on 12/05/2007, -0/+17This article is so depressing. Its bad enough knowing about all of this *****, but seeing it all in a list is too much.
  • Meccadeath, on 12/05/2007, -15/+2We are the fascists? Yeah right! If the extreme left, America haters had their way all us conservatives and republicans would be rounded up put on trains and sent to the gas chamber for un-politically correct thought.
    • jaymzdean, on 12/05/2007, -1/+10um...you mean NEOconservatives. Which is what YOU are. Real conservatives HATE Bush. NEOconservatives, like you, HATE LIBERTY and the U.S.A.
      • SemiSarcastic, on 12/05/2007, -8/+1Um are you sure? Because I don't see the difference, and by the way, you would, you just haven't tasted power yet.
    • DangerCollie, on 12/05/2007, -1/+3"America haters had their way all us conservatives and republicans would be rounded up put on trains and sent to the gas chamber for un-politically correct thought."
      So tempting. I'd settle for letting you form your own country...somewhere else. Then we could sit back and be mildly amused at your antics instead of being equally yoked with the massively retarded.
    • ndavisAA, on 12/05/2007, -1/+3Wow, if all the NEO-Con Left the country, I could play poker online (I still do), we can further stem cell research and we can cure my father of diabetes and my grandfather of Alzheimer's. Nice!
  • vanza001, on 12/05/2007, -1/+19Its already been decided. I think this is bigger than Bush... even bigger than neo-con. When Hiliary comes into office she's going to continue the neo-con agenda. We're about to have neo-cons on both sides of the isle. At least in terms of what programs make it into existance. Actually its gonna be worse cause on top of that we'll have socialist programs too. It's really sad actually. I totally belive a revolutionary power has taken over our government. I think it all has alot to do with Skull and Bones and Bilderbergers, whatever they call themselves. They are the collection of mostly ridiculously powerful rich people who advocate a NWO and who actively work towards one in all that they do.
    • DirtySnachez, on 12/05/2007, -0/+5Check out the movie Zeitgeist. no foolies.

      http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ watch it fully once without dismissing it as conspiratorial BS, and then make up your mind.
      • GhostyBoy, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3Seriously. This was a real eye opener for me and I highly recommend everyone take a couple of hours.
  • captbbq, on 12/05/2007, -3/+8This started long before Bush.... (Ron Paul anyone?!)
  • linkcma, on 12/05/2007, -0/+5I think I should print this out and hand them around my college.
  • CaptainSponge, on 12/05/2007, -0/+9I was reading for ages, and then I realised I was only up to the beginning of 2003...
  • sodoh, on 12/05/2007, -0/+4We can only hope the constitution was written on soft paper so that it still has one final use.
  • weebit, on 12/05/2007, -0/+4Wow Bush has done quite a bit of damage. I kind of feel sorry for the next President. After all they have to sort through all of this crap and re-enter new bills to block all of this crap. Plus I bet cha there is plenty that the public doesn't even know about. I sure wouldn't put it past Bush to go behind our backs.
    • buckrogers1965, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1It is very difficult for the executive branch to give up power once they acquire it.
  • TheGreatTK, on 12/05/2007, -1/+8What scares me ***** is that a good deal of people think that bush is an idiotic moron.

    Nonono, an idiotic moron would be someone like.. Jack Thompson. Someone who does things that you can point and laugh at.
    Bush is 9001x more dangerous. He's not an idiot, or a moron. I daresay he's thought his cunning plan all the way through.

    I'm calling a bet that SOMETHING will happen between now and the 400 odd days before election that will end up with bush staying in power for some reason. Probably another "terrorist" attack or identical malarkey.
  • omababy, on 12/05/2007, -1/+5"...when good men do nothing".
  • genetini, on 12/05/2007, -16/+2You people are so full of *****! Half of you have never done anything in your lives except to ask for everything you have! Some of us have actually been to Iraq or other places while people like you sit back here in the states and complain all the time.....Why don't you all do something for a change, and stop whining about the things you feel your entitled to, what have you ever earned?
    • mwalker05, on 12/05/2007, -1/+8We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

      you dont have to earn anything, they are freebies. that being said what have you ever earned? besides minimum wage?
      • ChoiceMad, on 12/05/2007, -1/+2Excellent response except for the last part... very juvenile
    • phauwn, on 12/05/2007, -2/+3Geneti thinks we should all earn our constitutional liberties by, perhaps, killing an Iraqi. :D What an idiot.
  • kerouachomsky, on 12/05/2007, -0/+5Seriously, what is this dude's problem? *above* This is exactly why our civil rights are deteriorating, because people like him blindly support the government's policies no matter HOW egregious, under the pretense of "PATRIOTISM." I'd like to point out a few interesting points:
    1) Just because Iraq under Saddam or Nazi Germany may have had worse civil rights violations, does NOT mean that we should accept civil rights deterioration.
    2) When he mentions "why don't you do something for a change," who does he assume is trying to take our freedoms away from us. It's certainly not the "terrorists." It's really not a conspiracy whatsoever that the Bush administration has made a concerted effort to take our freedoms away.

    I CANNOT believe that after 7 years of civil rights violations, BLATANT lying, aggressive militarism, and ruining our economy people in this country will still stand behind this administration.
  • fixedcoma, on 12/05/2007, -1/+1Certainly no respect you don't have to offer!
  • paulpica, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2A great list to keep in mind how much has to be undone in the future.
  • ZetaSagittarii, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2It's getting harder every day for me to reconcile the image and respect I had for America only 10-15 years ago with the one I have today. I try to balance it with the acknowledgement that the people are the same everywhere and they just want to go about their lives in the most convenable way available, and that almost nowhere is the government the representative of the people. However, the downward spiral on which your country is engaged is even more evident when viewed from outside, and that makes me sad and worries me. You people deserve so much better than that!
  • gordonj, on 12/05/2007, -2/+4LOL, I hope the americans enjoy stewing in the pot of ***** they created for themselves! Their country is ***** and heading for a major self destruction and it's all because they let themselves become weak and apathetic; always talking big about freedom, but not backing up their melodramatics with actions to actually maintain it for themselves. They let their country get stolen by fascists who found it all too easy to distract attention away from their actions by creating media whirlwinds about the threat to freedom posed by dark skinned people half way around the world, while the rights and freedom of their own people were systematically dismantled by their own government! All the rhetoric in the world can't save them now.
    • cmorwhat, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2could you please provide constructive criticism instead? dont you think we know how bad it is? where are you from by the way? i would really like to know so i can tell you how much america helped dig your ass out of the hole that everyone was in after WW2. if it wasnt for us the entire world would be soviet communist right now. a little respect please
      • Iconoclast25, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2Er, Chris . . . there is this cute trick you can pull by clicking on the user name to bring up a profile. Your buddy gord is allegedly from Ireland. Now, you are too young to remember and probably insufficiently conversant with the events of WW2, but Ireland was theoretically neutral in the war, but the sympathies of much of the population were with the Nazis due to their hatred of the British (the hatred was not entirely unearned). Consequently some of the Irish, such as this chappy, are a bit less appreciative of the sacrifices the US and the UK made to save the world from the Nazis.
        • gordonj, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Cmorwhat: I can't think of any constructive criticism other than stand up for your rights as a nation. Sometimes there's nothing you can do but laugh like hell (and not in a humorous way). And by the way, the whole "we saved your asses in WWII" is getting a bit old considering how much the US conducts warfare and gets involved in world politics. It wasn't like the US won the war ON THEIR OWN, but I agree that they played an integral part right at the end (because they were sitting on the fence until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour), just as all the nations that fought against the Nazis played an integral part. If it's respect you want then your nation has to get off its pedestal and partake in global politics without a sense of complete self importance. Take the lead in tackling global problems like climate change, poverty, education, disease and prove to us you guys are the best, or shut up about it.

          Iconoclast: That's some nice spin there. I make an observation about the continual dismantling of rights and freedom in America by a right-wing governmental regime and you imply that I am a Nazi sympathiser. You truly have learned a lot from your government. While sympathy for Nazis during WWII MIGHT have been high in Ireland (I wasn't alive so I don't KNOW), there is much less bigotry, hatred and other ideals espoused by the Nazis found here than in your land of freedom and democracy. To be honest I never thought too deeply about how appreciative I should be about who won what war because realistically that attitude could be projected onto any war ever waged and history is always written by the winners.
    • republicker, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2So, you blame citizens for governments actions? I think your a little off base. Every country in the world has been oppressed by thier governments, and I'm willing to bet where-ever you reside, you dont have a fraction of the freedom we currently have. And why?, Because your too gutless to overthrow your government or they have already stripped you of your right to bear arms. We might be slowly losing our freedoms but you can bet that when it starts to hit home with more regular joes you will see another revolution in the states. Mark my words. Ireland what a pisshole of freedom.
      • gordonj, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Governments represent citizens, in democratic societies. If a government's actions go against the interests of the citizens then it is the citizens' priority to keep the government in check. That is not happening in america. Actually maybe you should read about democracy and democratic systems from around the world. The Irish democratic system is far superior to the american system in terms of proportional representation of the voters. Please do tell me how Ireland is a pisshole of freedom. I would like some examples to substantiate your ignorant claims.
  • ghotli, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1I guess they will just have to throw me in jail for a felony if I ever receive a gag order. There's no way in hell i'd follow a law that so blatantly violates my first amendment free speech rights.
  • jeremyduffy, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3Now if he'd only add a counter at each date for the national debt, this would be golden.
  • Blue_Eon, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3What is just as sad as the erosion of our rights is that people don't seem to care when you bring it up, or they think you're sensationalizing things. This is proof positive right here and people just don't want to admit it.
  • greendalek, on 12/05/2007, -3/+5While I agree that this list is pretty comprehensive, it most emphatically does NOT help the cause when it is so rife with misspellings and poor grammar. Truly, that may not seem important, but I assure you "the enemy" will pounce on this fact and capitalize (no pun intended) all over it. When critical issues like this come across as poorly-worded blog entries, they are very easy to dismiss as wingnut conspiracy theory and are not afforded the serious scrutiny/consideration they deserve. So, with that in mind:

    1. Learn the differences between their, they're, and there.
    2. Learn the difference between principal and principle.
    3. Learn the differences between you're and your.
    4. Learn the differences between to, too, and two.
    5. "Teh" is forgivable once or twice in a document. 15 times per page is a bit much.
    6. Capitalize your goddamned I's. You aren't e. e. cummings.
    7. The phrases "should of," "could of," and "would of" only exist in Shel Silverstein poems.
    8. "Dyeing" is something you do to Easter eggs.

    (And confound it, stop spelling it "Isreal." Yes, it's real and you really need to accept that fact. Along with all those "rouge" nations --just how much makeup can one terrorist network SELL, anyway?)

    In short: use your goddamn spellchecker before you upload.
    • Bilabrin, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2Let me guess....lit major?
    • MrESaulved, on 12/05/2007, -2/+1What an incredibly pedantic ***** you are. Oh dear, should *****-head be hyphenated, *****?
    • psywiped, on 12/05/2007, -0/+3although you are right about the grammar and spelling, it does not take away from the message he is trying to get out.
  • siwu, on 12/05/2007, -0/+2"May, 2007

    National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51) establishes a new post-disaster plan (with disaster defined as any incident, natural or man-made, resulting in extraordinary mass casualties, damage or disruption) which places the president in charge of all three branches of government. The directive overrides the National Emergencies Act which gives Congress power to determine the duration of a national emergency."

    Scary. Don't be surprised if there's a new 9/11 before the 2008 elections.
  • Mykol225, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1I want to apologize to EVERYONE for voting for Bush! I feel ashamed.
    • republicker, on 12/05/2007, -2/+1You should be ashamed for voting for a repub or democrat.
  • doublehead, on 12/05/2007, -1/+2If people don't start standing up, our country has had it. 99% of all politicians should be hung for treason.
  • glitternbells, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1YO HO, HOIST THE COLOURS
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXg4yuGS5CM
  • jlhoben, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1And how many protests?
  • gooniegoogooz, on 12/05/2007, -0/+0it's sad that countries we refer to as "turd" world, or third world, have and would protest, in the streats, against the threat of tear gas, detention, even death, at the very first sight of this sort of activity from their governments. Think Pakistan, Myannmar, etc.. We, as Americans, do not. Why? Because, we have things like Paris Hilton, Britney, and corporations (like bad loans, television / excessive marketing, credit cards, etc). So, LSD is banned, but this stuff is our drug.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 58 of 58 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.