What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
229 Comments
- jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -6/+301Let's be clear here. Rush wasn't defending video games per se. He was saying that we can't blame these shootings on any particular societal ill, violent video games included. He included gun control, immigration, religion, rich kids, America, and a bunch of other things that aren't to blame here. He was basically warning against pop-sociology and pop-psychology.
People like to feel like they can do something to prevent this sort of thing from happening. It's scary to think that you have no control over some things. Rush was saying that we should stop before reforming gun laws or banning violent video games or restricting immigration or taking any other drastic measures because those things didn't shoot fifty people. Some nutjob shot fifty people. And there's no legislation that will insulate us from nutjobs. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -67/+239Limbaugh? Sensible?
*brain explodes* - dongcha9, on 10/12/2007, -6/+160wow...a week ago i agreed with Geraldo, now I'm agreeing with Rush Limbaugh. I have no words.
- jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -7/+153Oh, and by the way, generally conservatives (Rush being a prime example) are very individualist. Of course, that means they believe in tying actions to individuals, not societal problems. So it really shouldn't surprise anyone when a conservative commentator is against blaming video games (or anything but the perpetrators) for violence. Methinks most of you have never really listened to Rush Limbaugh before.
Not to mention that the guy was an adult, so there's no legislation that could have been passed that would have kept him from violent video games. - Nobi-Wan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+140"So you gotta be real careful here not to paint with broad brushes on these things. You gotta be very careful not to plug this into your own individual political prism, because then you become no different than what the Drive-Bys are doing. If you just wait, eventually we'll find out more than we want to know about this guy, and you're going to have to listen to what's reported about this guy with keen ears, and you're going to have to read with sharp eyes out there, because the Drive-Bys are going to report about this guy in ways that will advance their political agenda because that's what this story is to them."
Sounds like Rush would be very anti Jack Thompson. It's good to see that there are still some people with SOME sense out there and willing to take another road than jumping on the bandwagon for their own political motivations.
I'm glad to see how he unapologetically stands by the fact that the INDIVIDUAL is to blame, not TV, music, movies, video games, and even guns. Billions of people own all of these things but it seems people seem to forget that it's the crazies who take things to the extremes. The focus today (by politicians) is that the government is supposed to be accountable in shaping the way children grow up and it's society's fault when things like this happen...and stupid moms and dads accept this without question because they don't have to take the blame. The reality is that the focus has been taken off the family and these kids are growing up in a screwed up way. - NoStoppingUs, on 10/12/2007, -7/+122you know, i heard this on his show yesterday, and i thought "oh man, if only diggers could hear this", but i thought there was no way in hell rush limbaugh would ever make it to the front page. i give you guys some credit. you can be sensible at times.
this, however, should be no surprise to anyone. while i believe that violent video games certainly dont help our cause, we also cant blame them. it seems americans have lost all sense of self responsibility, and god forbid we actually have to take credit for our own actions these days. he made the point by asking how many people were truly horrified and shocked when they heard this. i was shocked, but when you've seen this ***** all before - on the news, in the movies, in video games - you DO become desensitized from it, whether you want to admit it or not. that doesnt mean i'm going to go shoot up a college campus though, and i blame nothing but the psycho son of a bitch that did this. not society, not the weapon, not his imaginary girlfriend(s), and not the rich white kids he envied.
unfortunately, things like these will only increase as society becomes more desensitized to death and carnage, and im also amazed at how many diggers are pro-gun rights. for as liberal as you ***** are, when push comes to shove, you guys can see past the ***** when you need to. i love you, all. - nonprophet27, on 10/12/2007, -11/+74seriously, Geraldo AND Limbaugh being the voices of reason? it's bizarro world/twilight zone stuff
- AmZa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+63Personally, I think Cho Seung Hui is to blame.
- mochzr, on 10/12/2007, -42/+102You know at first I thought the title was a joke.
- tituspullo71, on 10/12/2007, -5/+63if anyone ever listened to Limbaugh, they might actually agree with alot of things he says. the problem is most people tune out certain people because their politics don't agree or they've heard things taken out of context. one of the problems we have in this country is people are so polarized they don't want to listen to the other side, they just want to name call and act childish. i bet most people who comment here never once listened to Limbaugh you just read about someone's opinion and formed your own based on that. and you liberals claim to be open minded.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/12/2007, -22/+76Anyone seen any airborne pigs recently?
- dreicher, on 10/12/2007, -4/+57Way to completely miss the point of an article! Perhaps, if you've read to the end you would have seen the part where he says
"See? I can sit here and speculate all day long, just as the Drive-Bys were doing all yesterday and last night. Maybe it's not enough God. Maybe it's the culture of death on the part of the left. Maybe there needs to be more religion in the public square. Maybe the tarring and feathering of religious people, which happens in the Democrat Party and the American left, is responsible for this. We can play this game all day long. I'm telling you, this happened because we had a nutcase who had some sort of grievance somewhere, and we can sit here and blame aspects of this country all we want -- and if we fall into that trap, we are going to be making a huge, huge mistake."
or when he says
"...Maybe they're not too young to learn that there are many things in life larger than self, and maybe being able to take comfort in a relationship with that which is larger than self ( i.e., God) would have a calming effect on some of these people who go absolutely nuts and lose their sanity. But that's even arguable..."
So, double-digg-down to you for making me actually DEFEND Rush Limbaugh! - Charlotte_Web, on 10/12/2007, -5/+54The Maha Rushie on the front page of Digg?
Wow, miracles DO happen! - spartan777, on 10/12/2007, -2/+44Republicans actually have a history of knowing better than to blame violence on video games, this shouldn't be surprising.
- cablemonkey, on 10/12/2007, -10/+51Normally I can't agree with much that Rush has to say....but for once I'm shocked that he actually got it right this time...complete shock. I'd almost go to the point of awe....
- NoStoppingUs, on 10/12/2007, -5/+45@titus
i would agree with that. many people hate rush, but have never listened in for more than 2 minutes. he spends most of the time reading news articles and giving his analysis of events, whereas air america (which i HAVE listened to for more than 2 minutes .:shudder:.) spend their time calling names and making fun of the other side. theres also a big misconception that people like rush and sean hannity dont give others a chance to talk. thats completely false as i tend to find myself wishing rush would hang up on the callers who go on and on and on. even though most people on here may not agree with everything he says, people should at least give him a real chance. i mean, you dont have to like the guy, but there is no sense in having pure hatred for him when youve never tuned in for a substantial amount of time. im agnostic, and he rarely brings up religion, which is why i like him more than sean. - jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+38You missed his point. He said that this issue is being hijacked by people with political agendas. He brought up the religion and prayer thing as a hypothetical right-wing example of that (you don't get that implication as clearly in the transcript because he likes to use voices when he's saying something he doesn't believe). Later on he said (in the same paragraph):
"But that's [religion in college] even arguable. But can you imagine the leftists hearing me say this now: More prayer, more religion at our university? "Separation of church and state!" would be the template there. "What are you trying to do? You're trying to force a religion on people!" No, no, no, no, no. No, no, no, no! You don't understand. You can't possibly because you're irreligious. But it's no different than going out and saying, "Hey, we need gun control," after the fact."
Note that he pointed out that's not what he wants by saying "no" nine times. And then he reiterates his point by connecting the analogy to talks about gun control with respect to the shootings. In his next paragraph, he proposes a new hypothetical -- maybe foreigners are dangerous! Let's evict all non-citizens! He then goes on to say:
"We can play this game all day long. I'm telling you, this happened because we had a nutcase who had some sort of grievance somewhere, and we can sit here and blame aspects of this country all we want -- and if we fall into that trap, we are going to be making a huge, huge mistake."
I know it's fun to hate on Rush Limbaugh, but I think you're misreading the transcript here. - saigumi, on 10/12/2007, -7/+41Obviously, you never listen to him, probably because you heard some soundbite and prejudged him an idiot. Rush, in a true conservative fashion, always says that the individual is to blame and should be accountable for their actions.
A true liberal, on the other hand, would say that it's a problem caused by an outside factor and we need more laws to protect people.
Conservative = We don't need any more stinking laws. This is considered "pro big business" as it doesn't limit how these companies can jack you over directly.
Liberal = Apply laws in Liberal amounts. We need laws to protect you while brushing your teeth, the toothpaste may be tainted. We need laws to make sure you walk on the sidewalk. We need laws to make sure you don't buy a videogame that may affect you. We need to make sure you don't listen to the wrong music. - jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -3/+34"So what is the real problem? Hard to say but I bet it has a whole lot to do with agressive societies and not guns themselves."
Well, you don't see rioting in the U.S. but you see it in France. People aren't killed in riots at sporting events in the U.S. Every society has its problems.
Rush's whole point is that this guy was a wacko. You can't blame society for creating wackos. It's almost like a force of nature. And, yes, Rush was tying his arguments in part to gun control, but he was also commenting on sentiments like the ones you just related. In short, "Agressive societies" did not cause this guy to shoot a bunch of people. He shot them. Stop trying to draw some grand conclusion from insane behavior. - compaqdrew, on 10/12/2007, -4/+35Rush gets a lot of bad press, but that's primarily because he's saying things the mainstream media is afraid to death of saying, and they hate him for it. This hate takes the form of misportraying his position and flat-out lying about what he supports. Here's a brief overview:
Rush often gets pissed at Bush, over everything from immigration policy to economics. He feels that Bush isn't a true conservative and has in many ways channeled conservative philosophy into support for his own agenda.
Rush often gets pissed at everyone in Washington, because "I've said it before and I'll say it again, there is no elected conservative leadership in Washington." Rush characterizes many Republicans as "blue-bloods" and claims they are closet liberals masquerading as conservatives in order to garner votes. He criticizes the disparity between their supposed ideology and their actions.
Rush routinely criticizes people like Al Sharpton and other radical-types and calls them the racists that they are.
I could rant on and on for a page about this. If you like Rush, fine, if you hate him, fine. But at least listen to a couple of his shows and form your own opinion based on what he actually says, instead of some out-of-context quote by some media outlet. If you talked for three hours on an internationally-syndicated radio show every day, people could pull choice quotes out of your dialogue too. - Bond007, on 10/12/2007, -8/+30Actually, I have. Those icy patches of hell are full of them at this time.
- ddales, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24There is definitely going to be a huge call for review of gun laws but nothing will come of it except more fighting. Sad in a way but I'm not so sure gun control is the answer either.
Canada - Almost as many guns as the US but just a fraction of the deaths caused by firearms each year.
Germany (where I currently live) - Firearms are strictly controlled and somewhat difficult to come by for the average citizen.
So what is the real problem? Hard to say but I bet it has a whole lot to do with agressive societies and not guns themselves. - goatomatic, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25You see, this is what happens when you actually listen to someone BEFORE making up your mind about what they are saying. Rush hasn't changed positions here, he's always been saying these kinds of things. If only people would listen to him without someone (mainstream media) telling them how they should think about him and what he has to say, I think most people would agree with him.
- dreicher, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20"It has been shown that availability of guns increases crime. That's a fact."
Please cite a source, or does "That's a fact" count as a source these days. It may very well increase firearms-related deaths; however, a quick Google reveals that overall personal crime rates go down over time.
"Do you want to live in a society where everybody goes around with a weapon in the pocket, like cowboys?"
I don't own a gun, do you? Although it is well within my right to do so - I choose not to. Guns are readily available and legal throughout most of the US - where is the "everybody goes around with a weapon in the pocket". Its also within my right to burn the US Flag, but near as I can tell, there hasn't been an outbreak of flag burning.
"Are we not beyond that in today's societies?"
No, apparently we ARE NOT! In case you missed it, yesterday's society included some crazed ***** opening fire on 50+ people at a college. - pathy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21I don't understand why people troll forums/comment sections.
Well, okay, forums perhaps, as you can spam a ton of crap and be really annoying, but things like the comment section of Digg, where most people who read them won't bother replying, and you'll just end up with your comment grayed out? Ehh...
I can see why you can do it in online games and chatrooms to get a reaction, but comment sections, really? Is it worth it? - saigumi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Couple anecdotes for you:
Most of you are too young, but back in the 80's, there was a huge backlash on early rap and the use of profanity in songs. Listen to Bon Jovi's "Shot Through the Heart" and try to figure out why it was banned from radio with Tipper Gore (Al's wife) leading the charge! 2 Live Crew banned from being sold? Tipp and companies doing.
Video Games/Rap Music... Lieberman? Democrat.
Now, this starts to give a glimpse into a true conservative's perspective on why it's hard to vote Democrat. I don't want to give up rights by having tons of new laws created "For the Children!". - Vtorch, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22People who are very surprised about Rush's comments are ABSOLUTELY and TOTALLY IGNORANT.
RUSH has never blamed violence on video games. Never, ever, ever. He always blames the individual, which is the right thing to do.
SO for all those who think that RUSH IS "FINALLY BEING RATIONAL".....you are WRONG. He has always, ALWAYS been rational. - TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22@f4st4word
"His opinions are worthless."
Thats funny....because for some reason you think YOUR opinions are worth something..... - profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18@ubuntuedgy
Your comment immediately reminded me of Querntin Tarantino's comments from over in the videos section (talking about Kill Bill): http://digg.com/videos/comedy/Quentin_Tarantino_OWNS_Movie_Reviewer_on_Live_TV
Jan: Why the need for so much gruesome, graphic violence? Why not let us imagine a little of it?
Quentin: Because it's so much fun, Jan! Get it!
Jan: Oh really? I'd like to see you walk down the street and get attacked by some kids who'd just seen your movie.
Quentin: Aah, but (I can't hear the next few words) see Jan, you're all messed up 'cause you're talking about real life, and I'm talking about the movies. You gotta get it straight. If you wanna talk about the movies, we'll talk about the movies; if you wanna talk about real life, we'll talk about real life.
So yeah, we live in an aggressive society that enjoys seeing violence for entertainment value ("Because it's so much FUN!"). I'm no psychologist, but I'd say that people have violent tendencies anyway, and without some sort of violent entertainment to diffuse those tendencies, we'd be in a hell of a lot worse shape. And this is not a recent thing: Roman gladiators back in the day come immediately to mind. - TheFederalist, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20It amazes me how much Digg hates conservatism. You've got absolute idiots out there spreading leftist propaganda, and no one says a thing. But anyone with a conservative view is called names and dugg down. How mature.
So Rush Limbaugh makes a good point, but instead of rooting for him, all people can talk about is how surprised they are that he showed any intelligence?
makes me sick sometimes. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17I think a lot of the confusion here is that video games can be likened to a violent cartoon of sorts and easily dismissed as fantasy.
Rap videos and music are trying to be more serious and more likely can have an effect on younger kids who may find it difficult separate the fact from fantasy.
I could argue that Ludacris would be a poorer role model than Master Cheif, - jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Americans, in case you aren't one, value self-dependence. In fact, self-dependence is a type of liberty. You don't have to wait for someone to do something to get what you want.
How does this apply to gun control? Let's say your house is being robbed. If you have no weapons to protect yourself with, your options are to either run and call the police or hide and call the police. Either way, you're in danger and your stuff is probably long gone because cops don't show up at your door in 30 seconds. The possibly dangerous person with unknown motives is in your house for minutes on end. If he has a gun, you're helpless. Do you not see how having the option to own a gun is a freedom in this instance?
Guns are freedom because it gives you a means to protect yourself in the crucial minutes when it hits the fan. It could be a home invasion, a riot, a breakdown of civil services (Hurricane Katrina), a rape attempt, or a random psycho murderer.
"Isn't that what is all about? Saving lives?"
Yes. And guaranteeing the freedom to save your own life if you choose to. If you think guns are that dangerous, don't own one. Move to a gated community with 24 hour security.
Finally, I reject your analysis of murder as being something that can be predicted (prediction is required if you're going to prevent something) when a certain set of stimuli exists. We're talking about human psychology here. You can't break it down like that. When you try to, you implicitly remove the responsibility of the action from the murderer and place the blame on society. Interestingly enough, the VaTech murderer placed the blame for his actions on society, just like you are.
And I know it feels nice to think that we can all do something together to rid the world of murder, but we can't. It's a fact of life. Evil happens. There's always another mass murder. There's always another natural disaster. There's always another world war. Gun rights that Americans guarantee themselves provides them with more options when the next evil happens. - andydickme, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14These are some of the most sensible comments I've ever read on a story about a conservative here on digg, ESPECIALLY one centered on the comments of Rush Limbaugh. And to think, most of you guys have actually read the article or listened to his words BEFORE making a judgment, that's just CRAZY. Now if only us diggers could actually turn sensible comments like these and the ones regarding Al Sharpton's hypocrisy into something more powerful...
On a second note, Limbaugh's tact is much better than that of Hannity's. If a caller disagrees with Hannity, Hannity automatically labels him/her a whining liberal and cuts him/her off. That's why I only listen to Neal Boortz and Limbaugh. And Clark Howard!!! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17@macmcrae
You like to pretend you're intelligent too, but that doesn't make it so. Maybe you should start looking and listening for yourself instead of just following the other sheep. - dreicher, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13"And I do believe they have video games in Britain, so what's the difference? Hmmmm"
A few differences:
Organized crime in NY
Higher congestion of population in NY
Lower instance of overall personal crime than UK [1]
Take a look at the home burglary rates in the UK. Granted, the victims aren't dead, but living in constant fear isn't exactly living. The quote was inflamatory, at best. There have been numerous studies correlating increased gun ownership with lower overall crime rates. Also, look at the crime trends in the US vs. Europe. Admittedly, it probably has much more to do with immigration in Europe than anything.
[1] The Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2006747,00.html - overbyte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12apart from suicide bombs in israel (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1197051.stm ), iraq (http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/02/africa/web0402-iraq.php ), britain (http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/world/suicide+bomb+death+toll+up+to+33/423367 ); huge inner-city gang problems throughout the world (including britain) with multiple stabbings and shootings (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5023872.stm )... i can't be bothered to continue this list for you
don't make idiotic and ignorant comments like this please - ubuntuedgy, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19We live in an aggressive society. That is what this whole issue is about. It is not that violent video games cause anybody to act out, or gun ownership, or music, it is the fact that we enjoy violent video games to begin with, and violent TV, movies, violent sports. Come on, who doesn't like a good brawl in a hockey game, or watching UFC!? Our entire society is aggressive. It is the nature of capitalism and the product of 200 years of aggressive actions all over the planet. We are born into it. Think about the Romans; they had certain societal norms that you were born into and accepted; the coliseum, expansionism, etc. We also are born into that type of society, but to a lesser extent.
Please don't read into this and think that I am claiming that all Americans want to buy a gun and go shoot people. I am simply saying that we, as Americans, are aggressive, at everything: business, etc. It is not a bad thing, but the unfortunate side effect is that some wackos take it to the extreme.
I like to play CS. Why? Well, it is fun and it is aggressive! I want to bust a cap in someones ass (virtually)! Why does the game sell so well, why do all violent games (halo, etc) sell so well? It is the entertainment that we seek. It doesn't change us...we already wanted it. Everyone here knows that even if video games did not exist, that crazy bastard would have done what he did anyways. He was sick in the head, obviously. But the fact remains, we live in a very aggressive society. - Steve95613, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Mega-Dittos!
- overbyte, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11sorry - digg blew my links
israel - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1197051.stm
iraq - http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/02/africa/web0402-iraq.php
algiers - http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/world/suicide+bomb+death+toll+up+to+33/423367
britain - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5023872.stm - TheUberDork, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14I'm truly shocked that limbaugh defended video games. and whats more is he is correct. how many millions even billions of people have played, or own, a videogame console or otherwise, even finer but still definitely in the billions of those gamers own, play, or have played violent video games. How many of them on the whole planet have actually gone out and shot people (military aside) I'm going to guess high and say maybe in the hundreds. 100
- AmZa, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Seriously. Humans have this thing called "free will". Of course, an individual's will is affected by external influences, but I don't understand how people can oversimplify the workings of the mind so grossly. I view statements, such as those of Jack Thompson, as an outright insult to the study of psychology. These people do not fully understand the complexity of such issues.
- jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@cancelorallow
Good point, but the conservative approach would be to have private organizations campaign to influence parents and society at large to be more discriminating (by complaining to Ludacris's tour sponsors and political figures who took donations from him, for example). Conservatives would not advocate bans on video games or government-run rating systems or any other kind of censorship. Which, to be fair, is pretty much O'Reilly's approach. - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9"There is a logical connection between pretending to shoot people and shooting people."
Most of the people I know play Madden. They have, however, never randomly tackled me. - spartan777, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9there's a big difference between role-models in culture (who these rappers and other musicians tend to be, unfortunately) and video games. No kid is going to emulate Lance Vance only from playing GTA a lot. If he does emulate GTA, you will always be able to find a different root problem.
On the other hand, musicians (the term I prefer to 'rappers' since mcr is about as much to blame as tupac) are legitimate role-models. (Fortunately) People tend to compartmentalize video games as 'only video games,' and musicians (unconsciously) as role-models. They think "i wanna be like tupac" or "i wanna look like the guy from MCR." Then, almost unconsciously, kids will think, oh, what is he? Buddhist? I wanna be Buddhist, that's cool" ~OR~ "oh, he hates life? yeah, life sucks." (or something to that effect). Nobody is going to want to emulate Lance Vance or Gordon Freeman in real life. - TubaTechno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Considering the attack took place in a "GUN FREE ZONE".....i don't see MORE laws deterring criminals who want to break them.....
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Yeah ... Of course there's that "Carrying the water" speech of his the day after the midterms that turned me off. His core beliefs are solid, it's his tendency to put party over principle that I don't like.
- jobenly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8@atoken
The religion in universities thing has already been discussed in these comments. It seems pretty clear that you're just misunderstanding Rush's sarcasm. - bjsiders, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Limbaugh is getting more and more Libertarian as time marches on. Like many conservatives, he's a big believer in giving the individual the education and training to pursue his dreams, and blaming nobody but the individual if he fails to capitalize upon those opportunities. In this case, it's not America, or American education, or guns, or video games, or television, or anything else that is responsible for Mr. Cho's conduct, but his own individual and independent volition. Or, as Rush says some kind of "sickness" or mental problem. Some people are sick or evil, and they do sick or evil thing that cannot be explained away by finding something else to blame it on. Rush (and myself, as a libertarian) see such branding efforts as vehicles through which government can expand its reach into our lives and tell us what's good for us. It's not that we fear video games will be banned, but the government will want more control over content, rating the content, distribution, and that means it'll want to set up a national board to set national standards that often don't resonate at all in the local community, which is where, if anywhere, such things should be legislated.
I think many Diggers would find odd synchrony with people like Limbaugh on a number of issues. I've heard Limbaugh express opinions that suggest that he finds the conduct of the RIAA to be wasteful and ludicrous. I remember on one show he was talking about bad business and said something like, "Hell, you've got the music labels out there suing their own customers, suing junior high kids for making CDs off the Internet, like this is anything new. It was trading tapes and now it's downloading and suddenly we have to sue somebody over it." - InfidelAl, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10O'Reilly is not a Repub
- bsmeteronhigh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Wait until we find out he was acutally addicted to "Dance Dance Revolution".
-
Show 51 - 100 of 230 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is