What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- SmartAssProds, on 09/03/2008, -1/+7I looked on the Us Magazine web site to find a larger/better version of the Palin cover, but didn't see one. I'm curious as to what the "lies & scandal" are. Surely they weren't part of the "it's really her daughter's baby!" nonsense...were they?
- xman8, on 09/03/2008, -1/+8Are we in Russia, China?
- planet87, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2Marxists are in charge... It's hard to tell.... maybe Myanmar
- curtmagurt, on 09/03/2008, -1/+6Shocking Isn't It!! If you get a chance you need to see Newt Ginrich giving it to MSNBC after Lieberman speech. Classic!
- KiltedMile, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1Newt is awesome! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8zXi90EVeg
- KiltedMile, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1Newt is awesome! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8zXi90EVeg
- treetop23, on 09/03/2008, -1/+3Here's Newt: http://newsburglar.com/2008/09/newt-on-the-experie ...
Its a classic.- legolas68, on 09/03/2008, -1/+2Classic Mr. Newt.
- KiltedMile, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1Expanded here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8zXi90EVeg
- LeonHRodriguez, on 09/03/2008, -0/+3Is the picture super tiny for anyone else? If so, could someone post a mirror?
- l3um, on 09/03/2008, -4/+1
- whorelock, on 09/03/2008, -2/+2I long to be like you, high!
- jabberwolf, on 09/03/2008, -1/+1This has a clearer shot:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/09/02/pds-alert-us- ...
And I know its from a shedevil of a site but it does show the different biases. - akhomestead, on 09/04/2008, -1/+2Turn off your TV. All these people are here just there to keep us fighting between ourselves. The best thing I've ever done is cancel my cable subscription. It's biased but it's elite and non elite biased. They (the elite) control the tv so they get to control what we talk about instead of us investigating it ourselves. I doubt O'riley or Olbermann believe half the crap that they say but they get paid a lot to do it and if stretching the truth raises ratings and its about things the producers what to cover it's ok. How many of us research what people we like say..Same with polls, I don't think polls are there to tell us what people are thinking they are there to tell us what to think. People are sheep and they like to be apart of the crowd.
- gavinhudson, on 09/04/2008, -1/+2I think the real question is why is, when we in the USA focus on women in politics, why does all of the attention tend to go to either sex scandals (see the Bill Clinton or Palin scandals), how "cold/manipulative" she is (see Hillary Clinton or Rice in the media), or else how many cookie bake sales she's attended (see any First Lady reports)? Aren't we missing some important questions and degrading women by this kind of coverage?
This isn't always true, but too often I find it is. - bananasluggy, on 09/04/2008, -0/+2Frankly, politics has been too dirtied by marketing. We've gone from having people offer themselves up as representatives of the "people" to instead having brands ("Democrat" "Republican" and now, "Independent" which merely means "up for grabs") being offered up with catchy slogans and decorative sayings for the consumption of the People. (Ok, it was like that most of the time, but we've got it down to an art form.)
I don't think most Americans (and this goes across the board as far as demographics is concerned... everyone is prone to this) could handle the old-style form of politics, the old-style debates, and the old-style speeches. It's hard to address anything of serious weight in an hour (your average news program) especially if you lop off 15-20 minutes for commercials (not to mention the problems inherent in having a news station trying to be objective when they need advertisers peddling crap to pay the bills.)
We're a Jerry Springer nation, distracted this way, distracted that, our heads full of slogans and slurs. It's hard to get hands on simple and plain facts (X happened, Y happened, Z happened) and even more difficult (as far as thought processes go) to look at the facts and try to understand what's going on under them. Yes, X happened, Y happened, Z happened... but what's it mean? How do they relate? What the hell is going on? Into which jar ought I to toss my little ball?
I find it funny... women were originally denied the vote because it was feared they'd vote for "personality" over "policy," it was feared that they were too fluffy-headed to put aside their emotions and look at reality with an objective eye. Today we've got a nation of fluffy-headed voters.
We've also got a government which panders to fluffy-headed voters by appealing to emotional issues (abortion, homosexuality, drugs) instead of focusing on things that are more distant from the average person's life. Most people don't really understand all the intricasies of foreign policy or America's shifting place in the world or the nature of "red-tape" politics (everyone wants thing B to change, but thing B was locked into place by person Q 15 years ago and there's diddly that can be done about it). But politicians still need people to vote... so rather than try talking over people's heads (and making them nervous) they bow down a bit and toss a few emotional issues out there, hoping to garner votes for their party.
Isn't that the height of patronization? It's basically saying that you're too stupid to understand anything serious, so let's promise to pick on gay people for you, as we're sure you can at least understand the concept of being scared of people who are different from you. Delicate international policy? You can't understand that. Let's talk about drugs being "evil" instead. You can understand that, right?
I do blame our educational system (and no, it's not the fault of the parents, as how can you expect a lot of people who were themselves products of a crappy system? Where were they supposed to gain this vast store of knowledge from?). Without a solid educational system, you can't have a democracy.
Where's the required logic courses? Statistics courses? Chemistry? Biology? Basic physics? Economics? World geography courses? The version of geography I was taught was, "Here's America. There's Europe... there's China. There's Africa. There's Australia. That's Russia. That's it." My "World History" book was mostly, "This is what this country gave us, this is what we got from those guys..." American history was, "Indians, fish, Thanksgiving, Industrial Revolution, World War One, some guy named the Kaiser (did he build hospitals?) World War Two (we saved the world from the Nazis... yay us!), happy suburbia, Vietnam (hippies!)..." The Korean war never happened, as far as the books I was given were concerned. I didn't know about it until I was 22. How sad is that? I though it was an island. I knew one guy who thought Hawaii was in Mexico because that's where it was represented on all the maps (how do the people of the area of Mexico onto which Hawaii is often placed feel about that?)
We're too powerful a nation (though more like a bully who doesn't know he's stepping on kindergarteners on his way to the jungle gym) to be so clueless. I blame the fact that we share boarders with only two countries. Most of the rest of the world has to bump elbows with other nations... they have to be more in tune with things.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is