What is Digg?9 Comments
- theuniversal, on 04/02/2008, -2/+5Obama's site allows anyone to sign up and start a blog. That means there will be thousands of different opinions. The idea that Obama is personally responsible for all of them is ridiculous. Apparently the bloggers at grizzlygroundswell don't understand what it means for a website to allow people to write blogs. It's impossible for the Obama campaign staff to comb through every post to ensure every idea and phrase fits Obama's views. If they had to do that, they'd just get rid of the blogs.
- Krisgi, on 04/02/2008, -2/+4With the thousands of posts that Obama's website receives, there is no way that all can be moderated. These are personal opinions and do not reflect the candidates view. And, as it seems like my.barackobama.com fascinates you soooooo much, why don't you READ HIS policy on Israel and Palestine. It's there, too. Or do you just read things that further your own stance, like all ignorant people?
- theuniversal, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1You have mischaracterized what the post you linked to says. It concludes: "Israelis and Palestinians must agree to live together as equal citizens in a democratic state - whether they like it or not."
You find this suggestion offensive? Equal citizens? - BillLevinson, on 04/03/2008, -0/+1It's code for having the Palestinians overwhelm Israel demographically, and then elect something like Hamas (which they elected to run Gaza). This is what the so-called Right of Return is all about.
Would you like to have "Americans and Mexicans" live together in a democratic state, i.e. in a union of the United States and Mexico? I sure wouldn't. - BillLevinson, on 04/02/2008, -0/+1Re: "You may find criticism of what Israel is doing in the occupied territories patently offensive." Calling it "worse than apartheid" while calling for the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state goes beyond mere criticism of Israeli policies. Saying that terrorism is justified also goes beyond mere criticism of Israeli (and U.S.) policies. It is in the same class as Jeremiah Wright's "&E!()&#@!! America."
Re: "And the only thing you prove by going on and on about what is written by supporters on the blogs on Obama's site is that some of his supporters have those views and not many people have reported those comments as offensive. That's it. So what?" Many of these bloggers, including the New Black Panther Party that was only recently removed from the site, have amassed a large number of points for their work with the Obama campaign. In Mr. Wicher's case, another individual did imply that he had told the site administrator about the material. Furthermore, this sort of thing is indeed consistent with Obama's other connections (Wright, Sharpton, MoveOn.org). - theuniversal, on 04/02/2008, -2/+3I'm not saying they don't have editorial control. And it's a site meant to promote Obama, so of course they'll delete things that are patently anti-Obama or patently offensive. You may find criticism of what Israel is doing in the occupied territories patently offensive, but most of the world does not. Nor do most people think it is inherently racist or anti-Semitic to criticize the policies of the Israeli government. If it were, about 40% of the Jews in Israel would themselves be, bizarrely, anti-Semitic. You're not going to give me the "self-hating Jew" nonsense, are you? Personally, I think it's abhorrent for a government to use military force to kick people off the land where they live and farm and bulldoze their homes and I'm not sure how people can defend it. But hey, maybe that's just the liberal in me. All of this is beside the point anyway.
Regardless of where you stand on the issue, you don't even know how many people read those posts. And the only thing you prove by going on and on about what is written by supporters on the blogs on Obama's site is that some of his supporters have those views and not many people have reported those comments as offensive. That's it. So what? - BillLevinson, on 04/02/2008, -3/+4Re: "With the thousands of posts that Obama's website receives, there is no way that all can be moderated." There is a link for reporting objectionable material. Either (1) no one else who read Mr. Wicher's material found it objectionable, and I see that the commentary under it agreed with it, or (2) someone did report it but Obama's moderators do not consider it objectionable or out of line with Obama's own policies. Neither of these possibilities is very complimentary to Obama, and it is exactly this kind of thing that almost finished MoveOn.org as a viable political organization in 2006.
Re: "why don't you READ HIS policy on Israel and Palestine. It's there, too. " I know what Obama says, but his actions (belonging to a church whose pastor calls upon God to curse America, praising and endorsing Al Sharpton and his National Action Network--both of which have a documented history of inciting hatred of white people and especially Jews, soliciting and accepting the support of MoveOn.org, and refusing to "reject" the support of Louis Farrakhan until forced to do so) speak a lot louder than any words he might say. - inactive, on 04/02/2008, -4/+4All of the sputum that comes from the Obamabots mouths sounds just like what the terrorists and Islamic extremists are saying. Its like they want the terror sits to win. http://sfcmac.wordpress.com/2008/03/15/traitorous- ...
- BillLevinson, on 04/02/2008, -3/+3Re: "It's impossible for the Obama campaign staff to comb through every post to ensure every idea and phrase fits Obama's views. If they had to do that, they'd just get rid of the blogs." (1) Here is a question: suppose someone started a blog at my.barackobama.com and posted material from Hillary Clinton's Web site. How long do you think that blog would remain online at my.barackobama.com? (2) Each page at my.barackobama.com has a link for reporting objectionable material. Either no one else who reads these posts (in this case, one that implies that terrorism is "justified") finds them objectionable or, if they do report them, Obama's moderators consider them acceptable. Neither of these possibilities is very complimentary to Obama. (3) It didn't take me all that long to find the objectionable material, and I don't even get paid to moderate Obama's Web site.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is