What is Digg?206 Comments
- rawg, on 06/26/2008, -1/+29Clark was a 4 star general and Supreme Allied Commander Europe during the Kosovo war and didn't lose a single American soldier. He was the valedictorian of his class at Westpoint and also a Rhodes scholar. He commanded forces in Vietnam and was shot 4 times by the Viet Cong but still shouted orders to his unit and successfully fought them back.
His military experience towers over McCain's, who graduated near the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy, who lost five planes as a pilot and was captured and held by the enemy in Vietnam. McCain has never led a unit bigger than a platoon and has never been in a position to develop military policy or strategy. - n8gray, on 06/25/2008, -23/+51Clark is dead on. McCain has *not* been tested as a military leader in any meaningful capacity. There's absolutely no reason to think he would make a better CiC than Obama.
- Digitel, on 06/26/2008, -2/+24Cant wait for November
- gawilcox, on 06/26/2008, -11/+28So does every story from the Huffington Post make it to Digg? Perhaps Digg should just be a mirror for the Huffington Post! Seriously, after doing a little search there are 75 pages of Huffington Post stories on this site. WOW!
- rawg, on 06/26/2008, -2/+16I don't understand why people equate being shot down and held prisoner by the enemy to military leadership experience. I don't want to downplay the sacrifices made and suffering endured by McCain in the POW camp but it doesn't automatically make him a military genius.
- Radsciencegeek, on 06/25/2008, -20/+34McCain doesn't even know the difference between Sunni's and Shia, and which side Iran has been supporting in Iraq!! We DON"T NEED more 4 more years of McSame!
General Clark, as Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, clearly UNDERSTANDS geopolitical strategy; and certainly how it must apply for that region. In fact, much of Obama's positions towards Iraq and the ME has mostly been consistent and in agreement with General Clark's positions since 2003!
And on this point, both Obama and Clark would be an invincible ticket for the DEMs this November!! The DEMs must NOT take chances! The GOP must capitulate with the disgrace they deserve for misleading our country into the sorry and dangerous state we face in the decades ahead. An Obama/Clark ticket projects REAL LEADERSHIP that will insure total victory for DEMs and assure our hopeful nation that a positive CHANGE is just months away! - spriggig, on 06/26/2008, -0/+11The President isn't the only race, make sure your representatives truly represent you. Go to Congress.org and check their voting record. Throw the bums out if they seem a little stale.
- bullcutter, on 06/26/2008, -2/+13If you think McCain is the answer, you're even more wrong.
- andy314159pi, on 06/26/2008, -7/+16McCain flip flops so much I don't even know what he stands for. That guy changes his political philosophy more than he changes his socks.
- rawg, on 06/26/2008, -0/+8Why not? Republicans aren't the only ones who've fought and died for our country.
- vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -0/+8@Iztikeit - When McCain runs on the platform of security stating that he has meaningful military experience, you kind of have to attack him when his platform is basically a lie.
- kelly, on 06/26/2008, -17/+24Wow. We FINALLY got an article from Huffington post on this site.... one that made the republican nominee look bad.
The fact that these two things happened on digg is incredible by itself, but that the two events happened from the same source?!
What are the odds?!?!?! - rawg, on 06/26/2008, -1/+8I know you're trying to be dismissive but I would take Carter II over Bush III any day. It's not an accurate comparison anyway.
- ph1sh55, on 06/26/2008, -0/+7I'm pretty sure they put direct digg links on their 'news' site so their readers digg it from there. Imagine if the bigger news sites did that! 'bird stuck in tree in florida' 4523 diggs
- j0hnk377y, on 06/26/2008, -13/+20The sad part is - it's June and we have 5 more months of this crap cluttering up the front page.....
- rawg, on 06/26/2008, -0/+7It's relevant because a 4 star general is challenging one of the pillars of McCain's campaign, his military experience.
- dmwhipp, on 06/26/2008, -10/+16Voted in sync with Bush 95% in 2007 and 100% in 2008 through May 15 according to Congressional Quarterly. Compare Bush, McCain and Obama:
http://www.stopthinkvote.com/compare.html - cheezintern, on 06/26/2008, -0/+6"Then, like Obama, you could be for kittens, puppies, and sunshine without explaining to anyone what that actually means."
Correction: "Then, like EVERY AMERICAN POLITICIAN EVER TO LIVE, you could be for kittens, puppies, and sunshine without explaining to anyone what that actually means."
There we go, now it makes sense. - synaesthesia, on 06/26/2008, -3/+8Somebody is vying for the veep spot...
- bjornski, on 06/26/2008, -0/+5Now that would be an interesting move.
They'd have their "hey, we've got a black guy too!" moment.
But I don't know if his latest views on the war would be accepted to well by the pro-war crowd.
But to spite the Democrats, many Republicans might hold their nose and vote for it.
Interesting, I'll keep my eyes open on that one. - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -0/+5@Iztikeit - Ok I'll concede that he does have "some" meaningful experience being in the military, however you have to realize that a president like McCain will actually make us less safe. The reason why Americans are being attacked are because of our involvement in the middle east. There is no single larger reason then this. Having a president like McCain that has an itchy trigger finger, only increases the chances of another domestic terrorist attack. This has been proven again and again by security experts such as the National Counterterrorism Center.
Watch this clip that was on NBC News last year: http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/17/scott-redd-ntc ... - bjornski, on 06/26/2008, -2/+7Then why doesn't he talk about them?
- rawg, on 06/26/2008, -0/+5McCain supported the surge but it was proposed by Petraeus not McCain. The whole point of the surge was to stabilize the region so that we could reduce troop levels so if it has been successful (i'm not saying it hasn't) then shouldn't we start bringing our troops home?
- LawLSUVA, on 06/26/2008, -8/+13What is the deal with all of the Huffington Post news stories? The website is complete propaganda, and both sides can admit that.
Surely, diggers can find better stories than ones from a website that is just pure spin. - inactive, on 06/26/2008, -6/+11LOL
Look at the keyboard patriot bad mouthing a 4 star General who has seen more military experience than Mccain.
***** you. - JoeVet, on 06/26/2008, -0/+5He's not opposed to groveling for their votes either. McCain has traded his reputation as an independent for votes from the extreme right. I would have been happy to vote for him before. Now he is just another neo-con ass kisser. Too bad, really.
- chrispchiken, on 06/26/2008, -0/+5The reason Bush supports him to be president is to be pardoned for war crimes.
- JoeVet, on 06/26/2008, -1/+5His insightful writing is required reading for all army officers hoping to advance to the grade of LTC and above. His book is included in the army's intermediate level education. So if you want a strong military then I guess we all care what he says.
- fascfoo, on 06/26/2008, -0/+4I see your point, but Huffington Post is still better than Fox New in terms of pure bias. It's not *that* bad.
- MasterGrief, on 06/26/2008, -2/+6I believe a more effective way of addressing the issue would be as follows:
Stop with the Huffington Post submissions! You people claim a hatred of biased reporting at Fox News, yet you continue to promote articles attached to an obviously biased "internet newspaper". What makes this side different? The political party? The slightly-less-moronic writing? Perhaps it's the Environmentally-Friendly section of the site? Whatever the case, give it a rest already, please. - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -2/+6@j0hnk377yj - That's right - because the US Election isn't that important.
People all around the world have their eyes on this election, but let's not discuss it on Digg! - rootsm3, on 06/26/2008, -6/+10WC for VP
- Someguy101, on 02/19/2009, -0/+4It happens when you get old... you forget things.
Do we really want someone driving the country that isn't safe behind the wheel of a car? - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -1/+5Three?
- yogurtslinger, on 06/26/2008, -4/+8McCain's reason for running for president.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vIAfBqWOL4 - JK1150, on 06/26/2008, -13/+17someone who ran for the democratic presidential nomination isn't supporting mccain??
- vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -0/+4@SpartanErik - I think that is pretty much common knowledge. The fact that he voted FOR Bush's platforms just because he was campaigning is a big problem itself.
- vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -0/+4@ Omega037 - You are right. He'll be worse.
@ DaDrake - You make a good point as well. He pisses off conservatives, and he pisses off liberals, and because of his similarities to Bush Independents don't like him. Where will he get any support to get anything done? - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -1/+5@N0bammy - I'll agree with you that Carter was bad, but how is Obama even the slightest bit like Carter? If anything Carter is like Bush.
1. Gas prices soared under Carter and he was unable to bring prices back down - Sounds like Bush to me
2. Carter was responsible for one of the highest inflation rates in history. His economic policies had no effect on fighting inflation whatsoever. Have you looked an inflation and the worth of a dollar recently? Yeah - exactly. Sounds like Bush to me.
3. He was not able to protect Americans abroad from terrorist attacks. Again - sounds like Bush.
4. Carter listened to AIPAC when it came time to deal with Iran, and it's happening again - sounds like Bush to me!
One thing: I think very highly of Carter. The problem with him is that even though he had great morals, he started to back down and listen to all other groups instead of his own conscience, he just didn't fight for what he believed in and US suffered because of it, however his negotiations as ex-president far outweigh the problems we faced under his presidency, so even though I compared Carter to Bush - there are fundamental, and political differences. I merely stated facts for N0bammy so he could see policy wise it is impossible for him to compare Carter to Obama.
N0bammy - Please take a history lesson! - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3@Omega037- How in the world do you not know who you are going to vote for? I wish I've met people like you because I don't know anyone that is undecided. I know people who "don't care", but not anyone that is actually going to vote and not know who they support yet.
Maybe you want to go to www.bigredmat.com - granted it is a liberal blog - but I do try to as honest and unbiased as possible in my postings when it comes to McCain so it doesn't turn into another Huffington Post. - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3@Iztikeit - The operative word here is "HAS BEEN". He has changed his tune starting in early 2004. Even though I consider myself a democrat, even I had to at least look at McCain as possibility in 2000. It was stupid conservatives that attacked both him & his wife personally that changed him. McCain isn't the same as he was in 2000. Too bad, then we would have 2 viable candidates running for Office instead of just 1.
- biotch, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3No one said he was in the senate.
Bush doesnt have to be in the senate to agree with an issue in the senate. - vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -1/+4Don't you think that if he runs on a platform of security and military experience that he should fill out the SF-180 form so we can see his true performance?
This is why the left keeps attacking his statements that even though he is a war hero, his military experience does not help him be a better president. If he understood why we are being terrorized (our involvement in the Middle East), he would change course instead of staying inline with Bush. - bullcutter, on 06/26/2008, -2/+5Maki isn't an Obamatard, just a Populo-tard.
But its true that anti-McCain stories shouldn't hit the front page so much anymore unless they have some new or original information that might convince the undecideds to vote for Obama -- otherwise we're going to experience some serious Oburnout before (Obama crushes McCain in) Nov.
And yeah the HuffPo *****'s got to stop, seriously. - SpartanErik, on 06/26/2008, -1/+4Sorry but the HuffPo trolls are digging you down.. I tried to stop them but that thumb only works once :(
- vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -1/+4@JimmyIkon - So what is?
- ralph12c41, on 06/26/2008, -0/+3Shock...Huffington post dumping on the Republican candidate and the mandatory Digg up of anything Huffington. Anyone else getting bored with Digg?? Not much of significance here any more.....
- inactive, on 06/26/2008, -1/+4I thoroughly agree. Obama needs either Gen. Clark or Jim Webb for VP... as I have a sneaking suspicion that McCain might come up with Colin Powell!
- inactive, on 06/26/2008, -2/+5Surge has done ***** all, dude.
- vinod1978, on 06/26/2008, -2/+5As an Obama supporter the only positive point here is that a military official supports him, but it's not really news given his party affiliation - but this article was meant to try to get swing voters, and Independents on Obama's side. The article isn't as interesting as the comments that are actually here on Digg. It's crazy to see how many people are not supporting Obama simply because of the amount of Huffington Post articles on Digg.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 208 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is