What is Digg?24 Comments
- RobScot, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I couldn't agree more!
- dogster, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8Yahoo, several days after being informed, still does not have a page for Ron Paul.
- archtoplee, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The Major Media, the Popular Press, Big Media, or any other moniker you choose, is like a fat,lazy,and envious ogre. It hates competition and can't stand anyone to truly "think outside the box!"
- shootdashit, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6i'm not. what i'll be surprised by is if they don't sabotage him with questions to make him seem unreasonable or however they deem to portray him to confuse the sheep that watch their channel. Paul is quite consistent though, so hopefully they don't hit him with something too diabolical.
- larethdf, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7So the Ron Paul campaign is both underfunded and paying thousands of people at the same time? He really can walk on water! :)
- dukeeeey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Seen this ?
Ron Paul pops up in this too defending the people from the tyranny of the banks and big corporations who are running America ..
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=508480636464562194&q=freedom+to+fascism+duration%3Along&hl=en - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5awwww...poor mainstream media has to struggle. so sad....waah!
lol - libertylover1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Lets Take this Cult label down before it becomes yet another label the NEOCONNED cult tries to paste on us.
The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
(This doesn't apply to me, I don't agree on every issue with Dr. Ron Paul. However he in his entirety I agree with the most of any of the candidates currently running. So for being unquestioning that wouldn't apply at all, I am pro-choice to a degree and anti-partial birth abortion, I think there is a certain point in the process when the fetus has obtained homestead rights. But a complete ban on abortion would be a mistake and I like the fact that Dr. Paul considers this a states issue to decide. So at least he wouldn't mandate a federal total abortion ban. I also agree that taxpayers should never ever pay for or subsidize abortion. I would think the fact that I don't agree 100% qualifies as having questions.)
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
(No this isn't true either, many who like Ron Paul aren't particularly thrilled with his immigration stand even if they agree with his ending welfare to immigrants. Because they feel immigrants should be motivated to work and contribute to society and not become additional leeches on the welfare system. And if you ever bothered to do some research before you posted this hit piece you would have know that fact.)
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
(Who qualifies as wider society? I think people who believe in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are the wider society. Those who still hold that dear are just the poorer society so our message is ignored and suppressed by those who have money to buy media favor. I guess in your world the wider society is the one with the most money.)
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group.
(What unethical behavior are you referring to? I suppose we would have to consider your lack of research and shameless attempt at producing propaganda as being somehow ethical. As a supporter of Ron Paul I haven't engaged in any unethical behavior. Now many have accused other Paul supporters with unethical behavior but where is the actual evidence so far it has only been accusations. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I guess in the writers world of this reply you are guilty at the time of accusation. Now we do have evidence of people posing as Paul staffers sending inflammatory emails to media organizations but no proof exactly which candidate they are working for at this time. Maybe when that comes to light you can call that candidate's supporters a cult or at least unethical. )
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
(Well DUH! this is an election, all the candidates are interested in gaining new members and support. Are they also cults? They do this so they can win the election. It is kind of a requirement in successful election campaigns to gain supporters and votes.)
The group is preoccupied with making money.
(Again DUH! Didn't anyone ever tell you money is the mother's milk of politics. Without money you can buy air time, you can't purchase ads and you can't effectively reach the voters. And again I dare say all the candidates are preoccupied as well as their supporters with making money for their campaigns. Under this definition all of them would be cults.)
This checklist taken from the book, Take Back Your Life: Recovering from Cults and Abusive Relationships by Janja Lalich and Madeleine Tobias (Berkeley: Bay Tree Publishing, 2006).
(Well wupty freakin doooooo! If it doesn't apply it really doesn't mater who published it or the fact that it is in a book at all. You could post quotes from books full of inflammatory rhetoric. Does the fact that it was publish somehow validate it? What are you going to pull out quotes from Mein Kampf next?) - Netwarrior, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Its pretty easy to see why Ron Paul is being squelched out of the mainstream media.
So ya think we have a "free press"? Check out who owns who, and who owns what you think.......
GENERAL ELECTRIC --(donated 1.1 million to GW Bush for his 2000 election campaign)
Television Holdings:
* NBC: includes 13 stations, 28% of US households.
* NBC Network News: The Today Show, Nightly News with Tom Brokaw, Meet the Press, Dateline NBC, NBC News at Sunrise.
* CNBC business television; MSNBC 24-hour cable and Internet news service (co-owned by NBC and Microsoft); Court TV (co-owned with Time Warner), Bravo (50%), A&E (25%), History Channel (25%).
The "MS" in MSNBC
means microsoft
The same Microsoft that donated 2.4 million to get GW bush elected.
Other Holdings:
* GE Consumer Electronics.
* GE Power Systems: produces turbines for nuclear reactors and power plants.
* GE Plastics: produces military hardware and nuclear power equipment.
* GE Transportation Systems: runs diesel and electric trains.
==================================================
WESTINGHOUSE / CBS INC.
Westinghouse Electric Company, part of the Nuclear Utilities Business Group of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL)
whos #1 on the Board of Directors? None other than:
Frank Carlucci (of the Carlyle Group)
Television Holdings:
* CBS: includes 14 stations and over 200 affiliates in the US.
* CBS Network News: 60 minutes, 48 hours, CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, CBS Morning News, Up to the Minute.
* Country Music Television, The Nashville Network, 2 regional sports networks.
* Group W Satellite Communications.
Other Holdings:
* Westinghouse Electric Company: provides services to the nuclear power industry.
* Westinghouse Government Environmental Services Company: disposes of nuclear and hazardous wastes. Also operates 4 government-owned nuclear power plants in the US.
* Energy Systems: provides nuclear power plant design and maintenance.
================================================================
VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC.
Television Holdings:
* Paramount Television, Spelling Television, MTV, VH-1, Showtime, The Movie Channel, UPN (joint owner), Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, Sundance Channel (joint owner), Flix.
* 20 major market US stations.
Media Holdings:
* Paramount Pictures, Paramount Home Video, Blockbuster Video, Famous Players Theatres, Paramount Parks.
* Simon & Schuster Publishing.
=============================================
DISNEY / ABC / CAP (donated 640 thousand to GW's 2000 campaign)
Television Holdings:
* ABC: includes 10 stations, 24% of US households.
* ABC Network News: Prime Time Live, Nightline, 20/20, Good Morning America.
* ESPN, Lifetime Television (50%), as well as minority holdings in A&E, History Channel and E!
* Disney Channel/Disney Television, Touchtone Television.
Media Holdings:
* Miramax, Touchtone Pictures.
* Magazines: Jane, Los Angeles Magazine, W, Discover.
* 3 music labels, 11 major local newspapers.
* Hyperion book publishers.
* Infoseek Internet search engine (43%).
Other Holdings:
* Sid R. Bass (major shares) crude oil and gas.
* All Disney Theme Parks, Walt Disney Cruise Lines.
======================================================
TIME-WARNER TBS - AOL (donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign)
America Online (AOL) acquired Time Warner–the largest merger in corporate history.
Television Holdings:
* CNN, HBO, Cinemax, TBS Superstation, Turner Network Television, Turner Classic Movies, Warner Brothers Television, Cartoon Network, Sega Channel, TNT, Comedy Central (50%), E! (49%), Court TV (50%).
* Largest owner of cable systems in the US with an estimated 13 million subscribers.
Media Holdings:
* HBO Independent Productions, Warner Home Video, New Line Cinema, Castle Rock, Looney Tunes, Hanna-Barbera.
* Music: Atlantic, Elektra, Rhino, Sire, Warner Bros. Records, EMI, WEA, Sub Pop (distribution) = the world’s largest music company.
* 33 magazines including Time, Sports Illustrated, People, In Style, Fortune, Book of the Month Club, Entertainment Weekly, Life, DC Comics (50%), and MAD Magazine.
Other Holdings:
* Sports: The Atlanta Braves, The Atlanta Hawks, World Championship Wrestling.
=======================================================
NEWS CORPORATION LTD. / FOX NETWORKS (Rupert Murdoch) (donations see bottom note)
Television Holdings:
* Fox Television: includes 22 stations, 50% of US households.
* Fox International: extensive worldwide cable and satellite networks include British Sky Broadcasting (40%); VOX, Germany (49.9%); Canal Fox, Latin America; FOXTEL, Australia (50%); STAR TV, Asia; IskyB, India; Bahasa Programming Ltd., Indonesia (50%); and News Broadcasting, Japan (80%).
* The Golf Channel (33%).
MEDIA HOLDINGS:
* Twentieth Century Fox, Fox Searchlight.
* 132 newspapers (113 in Australia alone) including the New York Post, the London Times and The Australian.
* 25 magazines including TV Guide and The Weekly Standard.
* HarperCollins books.
OTHER HOLDINGS:
* Sports: LA Dodgers, LA Kings, LA Lakers, National Rugby League.
* Ansett Australia airlines, Ansett New Zealand airlines.
* Rupert Murdoch: Board of Directors, Philip Morris (USA).
*(Phillip Morris donated 2.9 million to George W Bush in 2000)* - reiner15, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I'm surprised Fox is even letting him in on their debate.
- sailyn, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Who are these people who dig all the Ron Paul stories down? Are they bought and paid for by the media who want to keep the success of Ron Paul quiet? Could be .....
- Misesean, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3If the Ron Paul campaign could afford to pay for all the support you guys claim they're paying for, he'd be a shoe-in :)
The only ones "spamming" around here are you morons who post "this is spam" 50 times in every single thread that even mentions Ron Paul. - pc93, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Go Ron Paul!!!
- libertylover1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I can tell you right now BigD isn't going to tell you who he is supporting or who is paying him as a post here.
The fact he didn't address all of my comments and selectively edited what I said out of context, got me thinking. Maybe he is misrepresenting and selectively pulling elements from the book he is quoting. Elements which he thinks he can make stick to Ron Paul supporters. Unfortunately, I am not going to buy the book to reply and don't have time to go to the library to check one out. I did wiki cult though and that article is all tied up as being contested so no help there either. So I will say what I think he is not listing which is usually seen as a requirement for any group to be called a cult.
Cult members are isolated from family and friends and only encouraged to associate with other true believers. If any of you out there are like me you do what I do. Which is to pester family and friends about Ron Paul. I tell them that they really need to evaluate the positions of Ron Paul and see if they too agree that he is the best candidate. Some like Ron Paul some don't but we still talk to each other so the isolation element isn't applicable at all. There is no Ron Paul compound is there? If there is, I might have to file a retraction.
I will also readdress the contention that we have unquestioning devotion to Ron Paul. That is totally false, I only gave one example where I differ from Ron Paul. There are others and if a candidate that had a chance to win the election were to come out, I would support that candidate with the same zeal as I have done for Ron Paul. At this time in the race there is no such candidate out there. I wouldn't call that a testament of devotion to a leader. And I think I represent a significant number of thoughtful individuals who are currently strong supporters of Ron Paul but not devoted unquestioning followers.
As for being unethical the requirement is that all the members must engage in unethical behavior, in fact it states their leader teaches them to engage in unethical behavior. Ron Paul has admitted he is no expert on the Internet, yet somehow we are to believe that he is teaching people to engage in spam ect... This also presumes that none of the other candidate's supporters are doing the exact same thing or that those with huge budgets don't have the funds to hire unethical individuals to do the same thing on their behalf. How is it only the Paul supporters are unethical when politics for years has been full of back room deals, propaganda and spying on the competition. (Watergate just one example. The minimum security prisons have their share of other politicians that engaged in unethical behavior. Even if I think most are being scapegoated. Hiding the fact that they all engage in some degree or another of unethical behavior, even if it is from over zealous supporters unknown to the candidate themselves. ) It would have to be a leap of blind faith that only Ron Paul supporters engaged in such activities. Now as I understand it unethical behavior would have to be the dogma of the group as presented by their leader. Please show me where Ron Paul encouraged, instructed or demanded that his supporters engage in this unethical behavior. **crickets chirping** I thought so no such evidence exists.
I personally would like it, if people would stop paying attention to polls Internet or otherwise and think for themselves. Decide which candidate best represents their own views on good governess and support that candidate. The wider society whoever that might be and is a very allusive claim to be making for any group. I think polls are that same as research the person paying for the poll is going to get the results they want because the polling company or research firm wants to please their customer. It is near impossible to remove bias from the equation and polls are presented as thought they are able to accomplish this illusive feat. - Cutkomp, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6Haha, just saw this one come through buried as spam a few times... pussies.
- Guydevice, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@ bigdave:
"The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law."
Ron Paul's ideology that we should uphold the Constitution *is* law. We should still research all of the issues and come to our own conclusions, though.
Who is currently your favorite presidential candidate? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1By day's end all the wannabe assassins who believe that the trinity is Ronald Reagan, GW, and Rush Limbaugh and once had Hillary in their sights will now be gunning for Ron Paul...and the Secret Service will suddenly be blind when that goes down!!!
As in 1968, gonna be a whole lotta assassinating going down:( - Guydevice, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ah yes, that argument. Why was there a hearing to overturn a supreme court ruling if it's unconstitutional (correct me if my assumption about the hearing is wrong)?
Most mainstream candidates support the war in Iraq and pander to special interest groups, so I don't know of a better choice. Who is your choice right now? - wasaka, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1BIG DAVE, to start with, you need to know what a cult is and how one functions. You clearly do not. There is a more complete definition of the word "cult" is found in the book titled, Captive Hearts, Captive Minds, by Madeleine Landau Tobias and Janja Lalich (same author you quoted from).
"Cult: A group or movement exhibiting great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea, or thing, and employing unethical manipulative or coercive techniques of persuasion and control (e.g., isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility or subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency upon the group and fear of leaving it), designed to advance the group's leaders, to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community."
In a Christian-cult the risk is high. One is told they face the prospect of either heaven or hell - the psychological pressure placed on a recruit can me overwhelming (if they buy the premise, that is). In the Ron Paul for president movement the risk is also high, while eternal damnation isn't on the table, what is at stake is the future of our great Republic. However, the key difference is Ron Paul members support him because they agree with his principles, and they came to support him on their own --- not because they were recruited and placed in a controlled environment where psychological pressure was applied to "encourage" them into believing a set of political dogma. In short, "promotion of total dependency upon the group and fear of leaving it" does not apply.
First, cults lie to and manipulate people -- their own members and outsiders -- in order to further their own ends, which are rarely the same as their publicly-stated reasons for existing. A cult will almost always lie about what they believe when they think you will react negatively to the information. In a non-cult group/movement, finding out what the group believes is not difficult -- you ask them and they tell you.
You ask Ron Paul what he believes, he tells you. I repeat, cult leaders do not do this, believe me, I've know quite a few. A cult will try to hide what they believe until they feel you are "ready to hear it." Potential recruits are led through a scripted, spin-doctored process that presents information about the group only when the group feels that the person will not walk out when they realize what is going on.
A cult will frequently also lie about or avoid discussing how they are organized, who is in control, and where the money goes. Psychologically abusive groups rarely keep their members informed about the group's finances, or problems within the group, let alone making this information public. Members who leave either become non-persons or are demonized. ("Harry had a bad heart and it finally caught up with him." etc) This goes beyond any normal organization's hesitation to wash dirty laundry in public -- supposedly trusted members often find out, on leaving, that they knew less about their own group than their family members and friends did.
Although most outsiders clearly see that a cult members behavior is dishonest, most people in a cult don't see what they're doing as deceitful. Like most abusive cults, the Christian-cult I was in viewed its own ends as the ultimate good, so most so they justified to themselves lying, manipulation and breaking the law because they believe they are trying to save people from hell. Again, in a cult the stakes are high (that is why you see such radical devotion to an idea or dogma) and in the 2008 the stakes are high (that's why you see devotion to Ron Paul). That is where the similarities to a cult end.
reclaim.org - DataSage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0That's because Yahoo, much like other mainstream websites, are in the pockets of bankers that make up the Federal Reserve, and will do anything to not give Paul airtime. Once you understand the structure of the global corporate, it's so easy to see through their deception--and when money is at stake, they'll do just about anything to protect their assets..
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -8/+6Traits of Cults:
The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group
The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.
The group is preoccupied with making money.
This checklist taken from the book, Take Back Your Life: Recovering from Cults and Abusive Relationships by Janja Lalich and Madeleine Tobias (Berkeley: Bay Tree Publishing, 2006). - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1liberty:
>The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.
>(This doesn't apply to me, I don't agree on every issue with Dr. Ron Paul. However he in his entirety I agree with the most of any of the candidates currently running.
You agree 100% with the premise that he and he alone is the final arbiter of the constitutionality of laws, and that anyone who disagrees does so with the very constitution itself. Pretty absolute.
>The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.
>I think people who believe in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are the wider society.
Congratulations, you've hit both bandwagon and Transfer. If you're not sure what those are, Google "propaganda techniques." So you guys hit the best of both worlds: cults and propagandists.
>Those who still hold that dear are just the poorer society so our message is ignored and suppressed by those who have money to buy media favor. I guess in your world the wider society is the one with the most money.)
You JUST did this after "The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality"
>The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members' participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group.
>(What unethical behavior are you referring to?
Spamming. Digg stacking. Astroturfing.
>but where is the actual evidence so far it has only been accusations.
Not at all, I even wrote a little article about it -- with quotes from the very Libertarians from their private message board. They closed it soon after and prevented anyone from seeing the posts -- apparently they weren't proud of the fact that they organized spamming. - wild, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4Who are these people who submt (SPAM) all these Ron Paul storeis on Digg? Are they bought and paid for by the Ron Paul election campaign to try and pretend Ron Paul is actually going to have successful campaign? Could be...
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1guy:
>Ron Paul's ideology that we should uphold the Constitution *is* law.
No, he doesn't particularly pay attention to the constitution. It has a section in it about the Supreme Court, which he entirely ignores. It has a section about "the common good" which he entirely ignores. Additionally, he's not the final arbiter of what is constitutional, and what is not constitutional. He pretends he is, and uses that as an excuse to pretend that he doesn't have to play with the bounds of the rules of the game.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is