Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
I am Anomaly
14740 Followers
Can You Digg It Brotha
2324 Followers
thedailybleach
95 Followers
Comgen & Dr. Socks' love child
12544 Followers
Frank Luska
318 Followers
wuggasladySep 4, 2011
If they aren't getting paid for it, they're even dumber than their comments.
LOLGOPSep 4, 2011
Is that even possible? An IQ can go just so low.
murxSep 4, 2011
Roomtemperature is the new average....
cmdrtacyoSep 4, 2011
Isn't Obama a socialist?*
*Hoping to get hired as a right-wing internet troll
starmanjonesSep 4, 2011
i'm a head hunter for the private sector. i can guarantee a troll job for 2 grand.
sloppyjoes7Sep 4, 2011
How is it possible to be dumber? Well, all you have to do is:
1) Think Republicans are the "big government" party.
2) Think the rich aren't taxed.
3) Hate religions, while considering yourself tolerant.
4) Rip into Ann Coulter, while quoting Bill Maher the very next second.
5) Hate corporations, while loving unions.
6) Read Paul Krugman and agree with him.
7) Fall for every conspiracy theory that attacks conservatives.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
DavidM01Sep 4, 2011
I guess on Digg the following is 'small government':
1 Government control of healthcare. Including forcing people to purchase it.
2. Government interference in the housing market by two entities not bound to shareholders, making an actual profit, etc.
3. Government taking control of the largest US automaker, including telling its CEO to step down.
4. Spending 4 TRILLION dollars in 2.5 years. Which took those evil republicans 8 years ( actually not true since Dems controlled Congress since 2007 ).
5. Stifling the financial markets with higher taxes, Carbon taxes, increased regulatory requirements, etc.
6. Stopping new oil drilling in surveyed areas for over a year.
Then they sit back and watch the economy tank and blame Bush.
If it wasn't so pathetic it would be funny.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mlw4428Sep 5, 2011
1) Lots of countries with better credit ratings than we have, have FULL universal healthcare coverage. So this point is moot.
2) Done prior to Obama and as one of the Repub's favorite things to say about Obama (when concerned with the war) Bush didn't fix it. This point is also moot.
3) It saved jobs and is actually getting back on its feet, unlike AIG and other banks. Their current CEO drove the company into the ground (no pun intended). This point is moot.
4) You're making a conflicting point. If it took Repubs 8 years (and not true since the house was "Democrat controlled") then part of the 2.8 Trillion in spending is the Republican's fault. Point = moot.
5) What new taxes? Hell GE paid $0 in federal income taxes and received subsidies while posting huge profits. New regulations? What'd us taxpayers spend to fix the giant ass oil spill? Then there was another shortly after that. Your point is moot, yet again.
6) Perhaps you should check out: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/15/rick-santorum/rick-santorum-says-barack-obama-has-raised-stop-si/
Obama has actually allowed MULTIPLE new drilling sites. You're either a bold faced liar or a moron who should do some research or shut the f**k up.
Point DESTROYED.
Nothing you've made points on is valid and #6 shows you're adept to making s**t up. Sit down before you hurt yourself.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
DavidM01Sep 6, 2011
1. No one has better CARE, our credit rating you can chalk up to profiligate spending.
2. Actually video exists on youtube which has Barney Frank and others blocking investigation into Fannie/Freddie.
3. The unemployment numbers disagree with you.
4. The total deficits under Bush before the Dems took control of Congress doesn't equal the FIRST deficit under Obama/Pelosi/Reid.
5. Ge paid no taxes? You mean the DNC's best buddy? What a coincidence....
6. No deep water sites, and many of the ones granted elsewhere were started under Bush.
No points destroyed, you are simply confused.
Its amazing you are still defending these jokers.
mlw4428Sep 6, 2011
1. What "rating" system are you using for "CARE"? From the many surveys I've seen coming from outside the US (many other countries) we've got higher death rates for people inside the hospital, clinical mistakes, etc.
2. Wasn't Bush the President then? Isn't there a Republican Congress now? Why is this s**t still going on? You can blame both parties.
3. No they don't. I didn't say it would cure unemployment...it just helped by not adding MORE people to it. Don't skew what I'm saying for your poor point.
4. Deficit spending is still deficit spending. If you're going to blame the Dems you should also blame the Repubs.
5. It's a Republican Congress. It could be fixed at any time your party wishes it to.
6. Wrong. Read the article, Shirley.
"In addition, since February of this year -- following the lifting of the moratorium and confirmation of the industry's ability to meet subsea containment requirements -- the government has approved 48 deep-water permits requiring subsea containment, covering 16 unique wells. Another 40 permits not requiring subsea containment have also been approved since October. The operators were required to come back and meet the modified standards."
88 deep sea permits have been approved since February. As for when they were started, what does it matter? It does take time to review them and the fact is these permits were APPROVED by Obama administration, not Bush.
I reiterate: I destroyed many points and you're confused.
anomaly100Sep 4, 2011
I think there are a few <cough> on Digg.
shadow408Sep 4, 2011
Digg is mostly know by nerds and such. Those swarming armies are at the Yahoo site
killersquirelSep 4, 2011
I know they are here on digg. Some of them even accuse others of getting paid for more liberal comments.
justokSep 4, 2011
like you
killersquirelSep 4, 2011
Ah, a perfect example of what I was talking about. Thanks justok, for proving me correct.
The difference is that I'm not getting paid for posting MY opinion, but if I was getting paid for this I would gladly pay my taxes for the work that I do.
superkendallSep 4, 2011
Well we know Anomoly gets paid from ad revenue on freakoutnatiion. It's not hard to imaging you are employed there also, gaming the site for revenue. I'm sure you have got quite a lot of nice stuff from Digg revenue already. Are there any liberals left here *not* being paid? If you aren't you wold seem to be rather silly.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
killersquirelSep 4, 2011
Ah supertool, you can believe what you want. My posts have clearly shown that I'm an independent who holds both Democrats and Republicans to blame for the problems that we are now having.
You have proven on many occasions here on digg that you are nothing more than an uneducated troll. Feel free to believe what you want.
justokSep 4, 2011
@killersquirel so you get 2 paychecks. Good for you.
killersquirelSep 4, 2011
Ah justok, not very bright are you?
superkendallSep 5, 2011
Actually killer, the frequency and content of your posts would make one believe you are a sock puppet of Anomoly Or Novinator, and helping to drive traffic to sites they run.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
killersquirelSep 5, 2011
Actually supertool, I just really enjoy exposing tools such as yourself. I can careless if you want to believe whatever you want to, it doesn't change the fact that you're nothing more than a tool.
And from many of your posts one can gather you're an uneducated tool.
I also find it funny that you would comment on the frequency of my posts. Your comments are over 14,000 and mine are over 700. Hmm.... Who exactly is the tool or sock puppet as all you paid right wingers like to say?
superkendallSep 4, 2011
So it's pretty hilarious that a guy who runs Freakoutnation, getting direct advertising revenue from digg leftists, is saying that libertarians are getting paid for anything.
How much in ad revenue do you gross each month again?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
particleman420Sep 4, 2011
maybe you're new to this "internet" thing, but that's sort of how it works on sites with no subscription fee.
starmanjonesSep 4, 2011
assuming for a minute it is happening... you do have something against free markets and making money. :D
superkendallSep 5, 2011
Not at all, just that it strikes me as odd he would complain about anyone else doing what he is doing. I think it's perfectly dine to game Digg for money, though again I would say you are morally obligated to admit when doing so to make it clear of your connections.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
h8f8kesSep 5, 2011
I suspect most of the funding for comes from anonymous donors.
It's not like the world is beating down their doors to read the same tired talking points all the liberal blogs receive from their masters.
biotchSep 5, 2011
Yeah how dare they make money from ad revenue! Its unamrrrikan I tell ya!
mrjeferwintoyoububSep 4, 2011
This article is a lie. We do not exist. We are not working for the man. We aren't. I mean I'm not. I mean they're not. Them. Oh, crap.
anachronusSep 4, 2011
There is really no need for anyone to pay to dumb down online conversations as there are more than enough willing volunteers.
EnlightenedDiMeSSep 4, 2011
Anyone ever think the rise of people who want fiscally conservative,socially moderate or liberal policies is just a response two the failure of all of the failures and ignorance of the two parties in prominence at the moment?
EnlightenedDiMeSSep 4, 2011
Wow I f**ked that up.
starmanjonesSep 4, 2011
lets see... clinton good. bush bad. obama damage control.
republicans extortion... crash the economy... subvert the american government...
no its at best naive...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
EnlightenedDiMeSSep 4, 2011
In the Navy, if we screwed up damage control this badly our ship would sink. Which is what is happening.
starmanjonesSep 5, 2011
in this case the boat was half full of water when the skipper came aboard.
he's trying to get back to port but the engine room is refusing to turn up the screws... or the other way around depending on the metaphor...
they sealed the hatch and the crew is bailing with buckets while we negotiate...
i guess you are in the engine room?
EnlightenedDiMeSSep 5, 2011
Well, by your metaphor the ship already would have sank.
tripzeroSep 5, 2011
Libertarians are hardly right wing. Many ideals expressed in libertarian-ism appeal to both left and right.
skyler827Sep 4, 2011
Why does everybody think hypocritical right wingers and genuine libertarians are the same thing? Genuine libertarians support civil liberties, equal rights and are opposed to war. Right wingers in general support countless wars in the middle east, fewer rights for minorities, and a corporate welfare system. They are not the same!
The "right wingers" are motivate by their leadership's desire for power and money, but genuine libertarian progress benefits no special interest, but society as a whole. There may be "right wing internet trolls, but I cannot see how anyone could afford to pay people to promote genuine libertarian ideals. And no, I don't smoke pot.
sloppyjoes7Sep 4, 2011
Right wingers, in general, support libertarian economic policies.
starmanjonesSep 5, 2011
so lets define that...
leftwing: we need rules so that everyone gets a fair shot, we avoid monopolies and other unethical practices.
libertarian: hey whatever you can get away with is ok.
rightwing: we need laws to keep the riff raff from getting in appropriate control over what we do.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sloppyjoes7Sep 5, 2011
Huh?
I understood your leftwing definition, but not the others.
berkanaSep 4, 2011
The problem is that the well meaning libertarians have been manipulated by corporate interests. The biggest donors and manipulators of libertarian think tanks such as the Cato institute are the Koch brothers, who, while professing libertarianism, have used every means to manipulate the dialog and the discourse of our nation for their own corporate interests. Even Ron Paul himself said that the Tea Party is now corporately owned:
http://digg.com/news/politics/ron_paul_the_tea_party_is_now_corporately_owned
As an example, Libertarians ought to, by principle of their philosophy, be ardent supporters of net neutrality, recognizing that in this case, corporate interests can threaten grass roots movements and liberty of speech by virtue of their private ownership of our communication networks. Yet you see libertarians, as a whole, being against net neutrality, arguing that any such regulations protecting networked communications from corporate interference as being government infringement of corporate "rights". This makes no sense at all unless you recognize that corporate interests are manipulating the discourse of what is regarded as libertarian doctrine.
Ditto with the topic of climate change; libertarian doctrine protects private property and public resources, such as clean air and water. Stopping pollution that harms public resources is not contrary to libertarian doctrine (as Ron Paul explained in his own campaign site back when he was hot news in 2007), but libertarians as a whole have bought into and embraced the corporate distortions about climate change and lies about the consequences of regulation that attempts to correct it. There is no good reason why libertarianism is so inconsistent and pro-corporate on such topics.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
macparrotSep 4, 2011
OK here's the problem. While I don't doubt that there are people paid to write stupid extreme right-wing comments, does anyone here really believe that there aren't likely to be left wing astro-turfers as well? Or are you so confident in the things you believe in that there can't possibly be any counter-argument to any of it (be careful how you answer that and think it through first)?
particleman420Sep 4, 2011
why does it matter? would it make it acceptable if it were so?
macparrotSep 4, 2011
No it doesn't make it acceptable, it's the artificial outrage and assumption that my political viewpoint (let's call it viewpoint A) is somehow above reproach and criticism. That the politicians of the party I favor (let's call it political party B) are incorruptible and in the history of Party B there have never been any mistakes and everything is the fault of those losers who vote for Party C!
When the reality is that my political viewpoint A is just as capable of being the wrong approach to some problem (though of course I can never admit that) and that my Party B has just as many assh**es and is capable of just as much corruption as Party C. Not to mention how most likely a good number of politicians of Party B would be just as willing to sell out for votes as those terrible people in Party C.
And yet here we are in political Digg submission after another with the same people on both sides doing nothing much more than trading insults with shouts of, "THEY SAID IT FIRST!" like that means anything. Some of you (again on both sides) have gone to the trouble of finding out as much as you can about other submitters and commenters in the real world and posting it here.
What the hell is wrong with you people that you honestly believe that someone willing to take the time to post on Digg is going to change their minds about something political because of your well reasoned and/or insulting post? Really? All of you need to grow up and realize that this (Digg) ISN'T the real world and that nothing you say here (including my own comments) means a hill of beans.
norman619Sep 4, 2011
Exactly. Dugg. It's only wrong when the other side does it. It's perfectly OK when your own side does it.
killersquirelSep 4, 2011
@macparrot - While I completely agree with you about how this is digg and it doesn't matter because this isn't the real world, I would have to respectfully disagree with you on the changing minds part.
I have many times changed my mind on an issue because I was given more information, a different way to look at it, or other reasons. I think the main problem we have in this country is that people have stopped thinking on their own.
I had a conversation in real life with somebody I know who said to me "It doesn't matter because you are not going to change my mind and I'm not going to change your mind." That's a sad reality that is in the real world.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
The problem is the internet is already left leaning, so it's more likely to have leftists on here. The right on here is more of a group of radical trolls than a political entity. They spout insults and circle jerk the same tired and beaten arguments through every thread. It tends to make people scratch their head and think they're either dumb or paid. You can tell me it's slightly odd thag as SOON as they notice a thread there is 20+ comments in a thread circle jerking stuff like "liberals are idiots" or "Obama's a socialist" in a conpletely off topic way.
Personally: I assume they're paid because it saves more of my sanity believing they're out for a quick buck than believing so many of my fellow members of humanity are so absent minded. The ignorance they spout is slightly depressing, in a sad way.
h8f8kesSep 4, 2011
"spout insults and circle jerk the same tired and beaten arguments"
You may want to review your own comment history and do some soul searching buddy
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
That's your big point? Denial? Weak as s**t son.
h8f8kesSep 4, 2011
Son? Are you channeling mollydog now?
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
Denial + red herring = a bad counter argument.
PyriteGenieSep 6, 2011
Notice his replies are never like his opening comments. His notecards didn't go that far from debate class.
moonriderSep 6, 2011
The internet is more libertarian than liberal (or conservative), and that is true whether or not liberals and conservatives like it or believe it. Unfortunately, the internet is also more libertarian than society as a whole.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
The problem is the internet is already left leaning, so it's more likely to have leftists on here. The right on here is more of a group of radical trolls than a political entity. They spout insults and circle jerk the same tired and beaten arguments through every thread. It tends to make people scratch their head and think they're either dumb or paid. You can tell me it's slightly odd that as SOON as they notice a thread there is 20+ comments in a thread circle jerking stuff like "liberals are idiots" or "Obama's a socialist" in a completely off topic way.
Personally: I assume they're paid because it saves more of my sanity believing they're out for a quick buck than believing so many of my fellow members of humanity are so absent minded. The ignorance they spout is slightly depressing, in a sad way.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
noctuSep 4, 2011
wrong digg is mostly left leaning and has very little room for middle ground
elephantstompSep 4, 2011
Of course there could be, however there is a whole lot more money in promoting the right-wing ideology.
dustbunny52Sep 4, 2011
What you are saying is probably true, but it is easy to figure out who is worth listening to. Ask a question that requires thought, like "particleman" did up above. A person being paid to make comments probably makes money by the quantity not quality, length of comment or thought. If a thoughtful response occurs, like yours, the author is a reasoning being trying to explain his position. If the response is a short one or two line rant, or another rip and read party line comment, then it is probably time to call a troll a troll and move on.
I do tend to believe that it is more likely to be happening on the conservative side. The conservatives as a group have much more expendable cash to throw around in an effort of this sort than the liberal side. The liberal side usually needs to band together as a group to do things like this, as in MoveOn.org. The conservative side typically just needs one deep pocket, as in either Koch brother or a corporate leader.
moonriderSep 6, 2011
I agree with everything you said up to the period at the end of "and move on". If you had left it at that, I would have dugg you up. But instead you went into attack mode on conservatives.
Frankly, as one who is neither conservative nor liberal I see that both sides are equally guilty of underhanded tactics, outright lies and their own version of "trolling", here on Digg, on other sites, in newspapers' LTEs and in politics as practiced by the elected and movers and shakers.
(Really, what IS up with that "two sides" bit? There are almost ALWAYS more than two sides!) For instance for libertarians the important thing is individual rights, for the liberals it is collective rights (really there is no such thing), and for conservatives it is corporate rights (there SHOULD NOT be this thing, either).
So anyway, I did not digg you up, but I didn't digg you down, either.
dustbunny52Sep 6, 2011
While I agreed that both sides did it, I do not feel that both sides are equally culpable. I laid out my observations as to why I felt the culpability was not evenly split. The "trolling problem" that seems to be going on is just another offshoot of the "too much money in politics problem".
I find your "why two sides?" comment interesting. I can hardly imagine a libertarian group that would throw their money together to pay someone to troll first against liberal programs and then later against conservative programs. Don't get me wrong. I am sure that there are "amateur" libertarian trolls on the internet. I just cannot imagine that a libertarian group would collect money and pay someone to do this. As a group, doesn't it kind of go against their principles?
moonriderSep 6, 2011
You are correct that something like that goes against libertarian principles.
My "why only two sides" wasn't directed at this topic, it was general, it was about our entire political system. There ARE more than two sides, there are more than three sides that we, the People, allow our media and our politicians to limit us to only two sides of any issue is absolutely stupid. That we have allowed the two biggest political parties to set the rules for elections and debates, effectively silencing all the other voices out there who are NOT part of those two, is even more stupid. Life is not black and white, neither is politics.
berkanaSep 4, 2011
Astroturfing 1) costs a lot of money and 2) the pattern seems to orbit around issues that major corporations have a lot at stake in. While it is not implausible that any side of the spectrum can carry out astroturfing, at the present time, corporate interests and lobbying groups serving them seem to be the ones doing it, and at the present time, corporate interests are aligned with the right wing.
ronaldm131Sep 5, 2011
Yeah, the person who submitted this article is one.
holysinSep 5, 2011
No, they do it for the sheer joy just like the rest of trolls regardless of their political status.
quadeSep 4, 2011
I don't know if they're really getting paid, but they are definitely dumbing down the conversation on Digg. Whether it's Libertarians or Teabaggers, if you dare mention the fallibility of non-liberals, they come out in droves.
cntlscrutSep 4, 2011
herr derr Obama and Al Gore invented the internet so that they could spread librul lies about global warming and obummercare. And they did it all with the super secret underground taxes they stole from your grandmother's death panels that your great great great grandchildren will be paying for with their souls.
This is not the amurika that the founding jesus' fathers fought the french to win their freedoms from the chinese for!!!
Jesus/Palin '12!!! Drill baby drill!!!!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
EnlightenedDiMeSSep 4, 2011
WTFisthisgibberish?
dauntless1Sep 4, 2011
A fairly accurate multisampling of the various talking points found in any given right wing circle jerk.
quadeSep 4, 2011
That's still more intelligible than most Teabaggers and Digg Patriots.
zirchxworldSep 5, 2011
Why must you call them Teabaggers? they are just fellow citizens wanting a little fiscal responsibility. this is a good thing.
brian1625Sep 6, 2011
Fiscal responsibilities? they like war. The TeaBag movement is not a Ron Paul movement, it hasn't been for years.
BuckSwallowsSep 4, 2011
"Whether it's Libertarians or Teabaggers, if you dare mention the fallibility of non-liberals, they come out in droves."
I've only seen it and experienced it the other way around. Why? Because the majority of Digg is left-leaning. Still don't believe me? Pay attention to the front page and how many articles are from politicususa, huffpo, fon, alternet, mario, NYT, the Atlantic, treehugger, salon, tpm, motherjones or any other sites that are on the following list:
http://backwardtimes.com/2010/12/top-100-liberal-progressive-websites-for-2010/Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
quadeSep 4, 2011
...and there they are...
BuckSwallowsSep 4, 2011
I wish I got paid for taking 30 seconds out of my morning to write that.
Knowing this article's coming from Al Gore's media group called "Current" I'll have to go out on a limb and say it's heavily biased towards one side. They'll lead you to believe astroturfing has been monopolized by the Right when indeed it's prevalent on both sides of the political spectrum.
Take a harder looky see in the comment section next time there's another politicususa article marginalizing/demonizing one of the GOP candidates and you'll see something like 20:1 examples of astroturfing from the Left.
laywastetheskySep 4, 2011
Actually the article is from AlterNet. Do they pay you not to click through, or is it just too much of a hassle for you?
BuckSwallowsSep 5, 2011
Yeah, but it's on Current.com.
killersquirelSep 4, 2011
Yep, and they still rant about how all the media is liberal. They're all out to get them.
moonriderSep 6, 2011
The media is neither liberal nor conservative, the media is authoritarian, corporatist, and statist.
jimintheocSep 4, 2011
You have been proven correct by the many leftards who digg you down...
noctuSep 4, 2011
diggers mistakes teabaggers for libertarians because the tea party was libertarian before it got highjacked by the neocons
Closed AccountSep 4, 2011
Is this a misnomer? Right Wing Libertarian?
LOLGOPSep 4, 2011
Aren't some libertarians more right wing than others like conservative democrats?
Closed AccountSep 4, 2011
Yes, this must be so
superkendallSep 4, 2011
I have been a libertarian my whole life, registered independant and never joined either major party. I have voted across the whole political spectrum, unlike many here on Digg who would only ever consider voting for one party...
The problem is that you can't define libertarian as right or left wing. I am strongly fiscally conservative, but also strongly support pro-choice and gay marriage... so what is that position? It doesn't seem to gave a name that fits "right" or "left". The closest description I can really find that divides the two sides we really have today is "statists" , where you have those that believe the state should control your whole life and those for much more limited government power. Statists believe that something like gay marriage should be defined from on high, while non-statists would say "why the hell does the government say who can get married anyway"?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
h8f8kesSep 4, 2011
Fiscally yes.
jimintheocSep 4, 2011
LOL means "lame obama loser"
novenatorSep 4, 2011Submitter
I think there is certainly an intersection point between the two. One John Birch Society guy I was debating with who called himself a "libertarian" called the Libertarian Party "freaks", and I find that a lot of times someone who defines themselves as a libertarian is really just the typical religious ultra-conservative who likes to smoke pot.
A good example of a right wing libertarian would probably be linuxperson on digg. He has some libertarian views but is mostly just a traditional ultra-conservative.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
According to demographic polling just released the tea party movement in general is not some independant new wave of ideology, they're simply the ultra right wing out in force. The numbers that changed from identitfying republican and identitfying tea party after it's inception where almost exactly the same. Same old bag, new name.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
norman619Sep 4, 2011
And history has shown us we can trust polls oh so much.... I love how when people have no real proof to back up their slams against a political target they resort to pointing at polls as proof.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
If you're seriously inferring that scientific polling takes a back seat to your subjective layman's experience with ideology then I'd say your comment is a shining example of the amount of intelligence we can expect from a typical right winger on digg, and another example of why people think your kind is being paid to spout such ignorance.
norman619Sep 4, 2011
Polls are only as good as their questions. That rat Lunz or whatever his name is demonstrated that pretty clearly. You can design questions to get a desired response from the bulk of the people you intend to poll.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
Do you identity as a republican?
two years later
Do you identify as tea party?
If you're suggesting that this is biasing the polling, then it probably has more to do with confounding variables of limited intelligence for republicans/tea parties than it does ideology. But, that's your suggestion, not mine.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
http://www.gallup.com/poll/141098/tea-party-supporters-overlap-republican-base.aspx
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_movement#Membership_and_demographics
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
http://www.gallup.com/poll/127181/tea-partiers-fairly-mainstream-demographics.aspx
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
It continues like this in just about every valid poll there is. You're better off accepting science on this one than remaining agnostic about the origins of the movement.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
anomaly100Sep 4, 2011
From my experience, Linux is mostly [if not 95%] Republican. I get along with libertarians and can usually find some sort of commonground politically [for example, Blinker]. Linux defends any Repub in the threads, no matter how much proof, links and back up you have to what you're saying. Like many Repubs, he will stick his fingers in his ears saying, "La la la la la la la! I can't hear youuuu.!"
norman619Sep 4, 2011
Sad thing is we see a lot of that here.
fadedvisionSep 4, 2011
Libertarianism is not practical. If you can think of one libertarian country I will show you anarchy. I'd like a country where beer was free, trees grow beef jerky, and everyone can fly but you don't see me out there trying to make it a political reality. Libertarians = blind ideologues. I would like to see the internet in a libertarian world... because it wouldn't exist.
h8f8kesSep 4, 2011
Libertarianism like any other philosophy has to be tempered to reality in order to work properly. Singapore is very close to a Libertarian society in some respects, whereas a country like Somalia is more of an anarchy.
Libertarians ≠ blind ideologues any more that progressives, neocons etc. ≠ blind ideologues.
fadedvisionSep 4, 2011
No, liberals are pragmatic if anything at all.
tripzeroSep 5, 2011
I can think of one nation... The United States when it first started: Limited Government, no income tax, free-market capitalism, non-interventionism foreign policy etc.
ren1999Sep 5, 2011
linuxperson didn't type in standard English one day and was determined to be pretending to be an American. I think that perhaps our Digg Patriots aren't Libertarians or Republicans but rather Foreign Nationals encouraging the economic collapse of the U.S. by trolling the majority.
freelibertineSep 4, 2011
If the Libertarian Party is "Right Wing" and anti the government's Drug War, does that make the Democrat and Republican Parties "Left Wing" and pro the government's Drug War?
If the Libertarian Party is "Right Wing" and anti the government's warrantless domestic spying on Americans, does that make the Democrat and Republican Parties "Left Wing" and pro the government's warrantless domestic spying on Americans?
Personally, I never really liked the "Left Wing" / "Right Wing" labels because it tries to fit some odd 300 million different American individuals into just two limiting boxes.
muxmasterSep 4, 2011
This is wrong, the author does not know what a true Libertarian stands for. Right Wing Libertarian is like a oxymoron, a non sequitur.
bossm4nSep 5, 2011
Of course he is wrong, but the submitter doesn't care about that. To him, anyone who not an extreme left progressive is both wrong and an enemy of the state. There is no reasoning with him and there can be no compromise in his opinion.
dollar0dot02Sep 4, 2011
Right Wing Libertarian = Anarchocapitalists
Left Wing Libertarian = Anarchocommunists
theghoulSep 4, 2011
They are easy to spot. Look for keywords such as:
"Odumbo"
"Obozo"
"The Messiah"
"The Chosen one"
"George Soros"
"Marxism" (when none of them a have clue as to what that truly is)
"Socialism"
"Communist"
"Ayers"
"Kenyan"
"Long Form"
"Hero"
"Job Creators"
"Acorn"
..man, I could on for pages.
I just click the "Bury", "Downvote" or ignore as necessary.
cranelakeSep 4, 2011
I think we all know the answer to this.
sloppyjoes7Sep 4, 2011
Well, that would depend on how paranoid you are. If Diggers are largely paranoid, which is partly true, then they might actually believe this.
skyislandSep 5, 2011
"Truth is the enemy of the State" - Truth is what's under attack again by the 'State and Corporate players' through 'technique known as' trolling. Tell the truth and the very essence of Fascism is embodied in the techniques and motivations of the corporate state.
To repeat a lie, to drown out the voice of opposition until people believe the lie that tickle down works, that the sky is not heating up due to human caused CO2 emissions, that the globalization of corporate power is OK.
The minister of NAZI Propaganda during Hitler's time knew of many things and how to manipulate and silence opposition but he is not the one who came up with corporate shills trolling the internet to poison the intelligent debate that would otherwise thrive there..
ALEC related right wing think thanks, US Chamber of Commerce and Koch brothers.
Big oil, coal and insurance hedge schemes of all stripes backed by big finance and cartel.
Then along comes the little guy with the internet. Will anyone listen; will anyone care.
The world is one place now and communications can be almost instant.. Debate about what's going on can take place or it can be rubbed out. So to those who get on line to stifle the voice of others I would like to ask you when if not now is the internet as critical to those who would try to keep the Earth alive? Why do you work paid or unpaid for obstructing constructive thought of others?
I was going to write on Afghanistan and the tremendous pressures that keep instability there. How Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem that begins;
"Oh, East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God's great judgement seat;"
How that time is upon us now.. How all nations, tribes and people must work together now.
charlesdkraussSep 4, 2011
I admit, I felt a little naive after reading this. It makes perfect sense. Now I know why, at least some of the idiots I debate with, are so illogical and irrational, they are just being paid to do so. No matter what I or anyone says is going to make them change their mind. Wow...
moonriderSep 6, 2011
Here's the actual explanation for not being able to change the minds of some (most?) people:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=full
crbonesSep 4, 2011
Well, this can work both ways...
xrmbSep 4, 2011
over at msnbc you get that feeling... even non political stories quickly get dragged into Obama bashing.
drmobutuSep 4, 2011
I have suspected as much...for example, check out the comments section, at SFGate
BlackSheepReportSep 4, 2011
If people are being paid to dumb down the political and economic conversation, It's more likely that it is the establishment political types doing so. Why else do comments sections turn into a bunch of tiny Levins, Hannitys & Limbaughs trading insults with a bunch of tiny Maddows, Matthews, Schultz and Olbermanns? Besides, nobody needs to be paid for progressive liberals and neocons to dumb down a conversation on politics and the economy.
barackalypseSep 5, 2011
No idea, but I do know angry leftists are dumbing down online conversations by accusing everyone who disagrees with them of being paid shills, tea baggers, or racists.
WikkelspiesSep 4, 2011
Right wing internet trolls, frequently also racist & white supremacist, not to speak of holocaust denying/historical revisionist (aka bunkum), have been a feature of the social media since the internet took off in the early 1990s.
The early message boards, modelled on the bulletin board prototype, were a favourite hang out since - in those days - few required registration or displayed DNS nos.
A troll could submit every post under a different name, impersonate others, the whole shebang.
The fun, and a lot of it was just a game, was trying to pin them down by their habits, nuances, & tendency to use same words & phrases, make the same spelling & grammatical errors, etc.
I have followed one such forum from 1998 to the present day, from its start as a no holds barred message board to its current status as a moderated discussion forum dying a natural death as competing social media like Facebook & Twitter lure former members away to a lively and interactive world where the user is in control, not some nameless, faceless moderator.
Trolls can become persistent, obnoxious, over the top and out of control. Traditional discussion forums rely on the moderator, often asleep at the helm or - worse - a card carrying member of the troll union, to keep the
peace.
On Twitter I block spammers & flamers: three strikes (nasty comments) and you're out.
You don't have to like anything I say or believe anything I believe, but don't make it personal. You don't know me; I don't know you. In real life we might become friends solving the world's problems together. :)
http://openforum.gargoyle.co.za
alienkidSep 4, 2011
I don't know about getting paid but I know that there are misinformation campaigns http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/27/1010778/-BREAKING:-Leaked-Rove-email-singles-out-Daily-Kos?via=tag
fadedvisionSep 4, 2011
Call me paranoid but I never underestimate the cold blooded nature and ruthless dishonesty of the multinational corporations who dirty the waters in our political dialog and also kill our political system to the best of their ability.
When are liberal groups going to start feeding me some cash. I kick conservative ass at least 3x a week and I never get paid jack for it.
bdbrSep 4, 2011
Having a father who is ultra right wing (but doesn't participate in internet forums as far as I know), I can tell you people like that don't need to be paid to express their opinions. He was telling me a few days ago about how common it is in his red state to strike up conversations about how much they hate Obama. I thought this was kind of strange, because everywhere I've lived it's considered rather rude to spout off political views with strangers.
superkendallSep 4, 2011
Really? Because is my experience I've seen liberals a lot more likely to drop into tirades against Republicans unbidden. Conservatives usually have to hide views from others lest we are outcast, because generally a conservative can accept liberal friends but not the other way around.
h8f8kesSep 4, 2011
I have seen it from both sides. One uncle is a hard-core leftist that rants about palin, beck, et al while my brother is law is a hardcore neocon.
Makes for an interesting time at Thanksgiving.
superkendallSep 5, 2011
Do they fight much? My own family has people on both sides (and me in the middle), but for some reason they all get along famously. It's just that as a group we pretty much never discuss politics, but everyone knows where everyone else stands on things...
richardomonglerSep 4, 2011
Remember when political discussion on Digg were about policy and not political pissing contests?
Also novenator posting an article complaining about how partisans are bombarding forums with ideologically charged chatter?
*coughironycough*
johnnysoftwareSep 4, 2011
I would like to see more if there is something motivating a sizable number of bloggers other than their natural, personal opinions, to say the things they do in both professionally written published articles by news media and by supposed independent individuals on social media conversation/discussion threads.
Things are now looking a lot more like a dance of ants with bribes in their pants than true personal discussions or journalism.
I think the FCC and FTC should investigate.
Ironically, since the government [or contractors] has commented in articles and RFPs that it should create a bunch of false user IDs on social media systems, it may have to investigate itself as one of the players in these misdeeds. That would seem to pose a moral/legal quandary.
zirchxworldSep 4, 2011
paying trolls to troll is ridiculous.
aserer511Sep 4, 2011
I look at the comments that some of these mouth breathers, with whom I vote come election time and I fear for our nation
Many are not my generation and will be dead soon enough
johnnysoftwareSep 4, 2011
There is something funny going on.
ProChoiceGrammSep 5, 2011
Nick Garcia of Ignite Consulting was paying shills at the time CSU Stanislaus invited Sarah Palin to speak but refused to acknowledge that they were paying her to speak.
http://palingates.blogspot.com/2010/05/fear-and-loathing-in-turlock-csu.html
ThankmelaterSep 4, 2011
s**t that means I cant be a libertarian now scence everybody thinks my party is like the repulican party oh well....
vintage_verbenaSep 6, 2011
We must do as we're told
endgameSep 4, 2011
LOL, some of the stuff that ends up on Digg is hilarious...and dumb like this news story, really people?
ncgmacSep 4, 2011
Really? In the technology section instead of the political section. Must be troll bait.
puddmasterSep 4, 2011
i always suspected this. i mean, just read the comments in any yahoo news article.
nygenxerSep 4, 2011
"That’s how you control the online dialogue and give our ideas a fighting chance.”
Ideas get a fighting chance in the arena of debate. Generally speaking, RIGHT WING IDEAS SUCK and so they do not survive debate or withstand close examination, which is why conservatives have to rig the game.
I know for a fact that some you out there are paid internet trolls.
reinaldomccl81Sep 4, 2011
novenator is the real troll. I just read many of his diggs, his reddit account, stumbleupon, as well as, the articles he wrote ... LOL ... the troll is calling everyone else the troll, the only difference is that this pseudo elitist starts the conversation (in social media,BYW that is what social media is all about - communicating - not just with those who are lemmings and agree with any and all of what you say) and as it is with all ignorant regressives, once someone states their opinion/thoughts that conflict with theirs then Freedom of speech in the United States, which is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws are no longer applicable to them
vermifaxSep 4, 2011
They definitely populate SodaHead.com.
Dumbing down political discourse is big business.
Ask Palin, Limbaugh, Hannity & Beck.
particleman420Sep 4, 2011
we'll be able to tell which ones of ours are getting paid by which ones dont answer, or how they answer
kalvinbSep 4, 2011
Oh hey look, another left-wing conspiracy theory. Meanwhile it's the statists doing this in China, not individualists. So wouldn't it be more likely that liberals are getting paid to post their idiocy on the internet?
jazzbeauxSep 4, 2011
Probably just as many if not more liberal and republican trolls. So what? -10 for bias.
superkendallSep 4, 2011
That's odd, I was just going to ask if left-wing political trolls were getting paid by the strawman attack.
norman619Sep 4, 2011
I find it funny how they leave out the left's species of trolls. Both have invaded Digg and made it their home.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
The left leaners here are most likely from here. The right wingers here travel in packs and systematically troll threads one by one with the same insults and talking points. A lot of which comes from old dogg, digg patriots twitter/facebook, and probably other chat sites around the internet. If you don't believe me just google any of those terms and you'll see for yourself why everyone has an indication that they're paid.
norman619Sep 4, 2011
So... you are telling me the left isn't doing the same? C'mon now... I remember how Digg used to be a place to have adult conversations. Then we started getting the left and right trolls rushing in. What you said only reflects a bias on your part because it sounds like you are saying the left does not do this. This article is political BS pointing at one side and ignoring the other.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
There probably are leftist bloggers that take their following here, but not in the fashion the right does. The right spouts the same talking points over and over again. What little leftist trolling going on here is easily drowned out by the right's ignorance. Digg is not a place for conversations, it's a place to argue. If you want an actual convo, I'd suggest reddit.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
norman619Sep 4, 2011
Again you are just stating your belief not facts.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
If you're really going there it'd help your point if you posted some facts to back up your point.
slang4catSep 5, 2011
Little Johnny Fisher appeared on Digg four months ago and has since become the "authority" of all things Digg and everything else. An egotistical windbag of the first order both childish and naive, everyone has a smart aleck nephew who is going through the same insufferable phase
bwiiiSep 4, 2011
I find it ironic and completely apropos that @johnnyfish is the first commenter on your post, ready to hurl the "WRONG"'s and "STRAWMAN"'s around. Christ, this interwebs needs no dumbing down - the bottom feeders gladly swim up...
BuckSwallowsSep 4, 2011
What do you expect from Current? It was created by Al Gore!!!
jimintheocSep 4, 2011
Norm, you can't reason with sweet little Johnnie. It's best to just smile at him like you do to the other short-bus kids and just keep going about your day.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
Don't really know if they're actually paid, I just assume so because it's less scary to imagine people being paid to spout the same wrong talking points all day than to think people that dumb are really voting. For f**ks sake, they get completely trounced in arguments, and copy paste the same argument into a new thread.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
superkendallSep 4, 2011
Since you say the same thing day after day why is it we cannot assume you get paid?
We know Novenator and Anomoly get ad revenue off the site. So it seems really likely to assume someone like yourself posting just as frequently would also derive revenue from Digg.
JonathonFishenatorSep 4, 2011
You must mean reality. You see we're really not too different. I don't like Obama stand alone either. Only difference is I'm willing to tell the truth about his term. Your kind goes knee deep into ignorance and lies to justify your position, much like your current third rate politicians. It's getting old to many of us, independants like myself included. If your party would stop reverting to childish bulls**t to advance your politically and religiously charged ideology you might get somehwere. Instead I see a party of liars and incompetence, and you think people are going turn out for you? It's that kind of logic that's going you 2012.
A f**king 37% Obama is beating the GOP in polls for 2012. What other signs do you need that you're going the wrong direction? Guess you'll find out more next fall that you need more that false criticisms and talking points to get the presidency.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
superkendallSep 5, 2011
"your kind" - why are you so deep into the politics of demonization? Why can you not admit there are people that are different and not all one single group?
JonathonFishenatorSep 5, 2011
Because your group comez here to circle jerk?
jazzbeauxSep 4, 2011
Probably just as many if not more liberal and republican trolls. So what? -10 for bias.
joystickenvySep 5, 2011
So how do I get a gig getting paid to disrupt discussions on the internet....;)
wilke2000Sep 4, 2011
Self-professed libertarians should read some Emma Goldman. She was an individualist, anti-statist, pro labor, believed in individual liberty, and fought for economic equality. She demonstrates the intellectual poverty of contemporary libertarianism, and demonstrates clearly that Obama is no leftist.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
superkendallSep 4, 2011
Obama is however the ultimate statist, so I'm not sure where you are going with that argument. How can you say the architect of Obamacare, where the government forces you to buy high-priced insurance plans, is not a statist AND a corpratist?
Emma Goldman is good to read though, you are right about that. But really you need to think long and hard about where Obama is in relation to her arguments.
skyler827Sep 4, 2011
can you name one of her works that really shines above the rest? I think of myself as a libertarian but if she has a good case I want to read it, but I'd prefer something like a single book as opposed to everything she wrote.
m3g4tr0nSep 5, 2011
Short answer: Yes