What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Windows 7 Needs An Extra Layer of Security view!
free.avg.com - AVG Anti-Virus Free 9.0 works with Windows 7, to provide the best protection against web threats.
11 Comments
- jhutson, on 03/12/2008, -0/+3Obama delivered a nice hard shot at Clinton with these across-the-bow comments:
"After years of a divisive politics that uses national security as a wedge to drive us apart, how much longer do we have to wait to bring this country together to confront our common enemies?
After years of being told that Democrats have to talk, act and vote like John McCain to pass some Commander-in-Chief test, how many times do we have to learn that tough talk is not a substitute for sound judgment?
After years of a war in Iraq that should’ve never been authorized, how many more politicians will appeal to the American peoples’ fears instead of their hopes?" - DanThePainter, on 03/14/2008, -0/+2From IBD Editorials:
>.....Soldiers are trained to fight and win wars. It's not part of their job description to decide which wars to fight, which adversaries to oppose, which threats to respond to.
That's why the Founders decided that the commander in chief should be an elected civilian. Perhaps the first military officer to think a war was dumb, and that he knew more than his commander in chief, was named Benedict Arnold.
The question is not whether Obama is qualified to lead, but where he would lead us. Military leadership does not necessarily impart wisdom. For every George Patton, there is a George McClellan. McClellan, who badly led Union forces until Abraham Lincoln turned things over to Grant and Sherman, thought the Civil War was a dumb war and ran against the president.
Lincoln, in Obama's parlance, could also have been accused of having an "arrogant bunker mentality."
We can debate whether a war is dumb. But once our commander in chief commits our force, there are two types of war — those you win and those you lose. President Reagan's strategy in the Cold War was, "we win, they lose." Obama and his hallelujah chorus may not have noticed, but in Iraq we're winning. How dumb is that?
Obama, whose foreign policy includes talking to our enemies while invading our allies, told the assembled veterans at the VFW Convention in Kansas City, Mo., "All our top military commanders recognize that there is no military solution in Iraq."
Except, of course, for Gen. David Petraeus. McClellan probably would have been willing to endorse Obama......>> more >>
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=2 ... - saska, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2Look, I'm not burying these articles. I'm telling you that when you link them from the HQ blog, they get buried. Other articles with the same content don't. Sigh.
I watched the real-time bury stats yesterday on the submission linked from the Obama blog about the foreign policy memo and the article posted to Daily KOS with the same content, both posted to Digg at around the same time. The article linked from the HQ blog was the full text of the memo on Time.com.
The article linked from the HQ blog got buried within an hour of the link. Reasons reported included "spam" and "lame."
The Daily KOS article that was "just" on Digg (not linked from HQ blog) was promoted to the front page.
When you provide a link telling people to digg from the HQ blog, you are providing a way for people who don't normally read Digg and who are not on the side of Obama to follow the link, mindlessly click the bury button, and then go back to trolling the blog.
They obviously don't have the time or energy to do it the old fashioned way. But by linking from the blog, you're making it easy for them.
Also, no matter how many times you digg this story now, it will never see the light of day. It does not appear in upcoming stories. It's gone. - pckbeta, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2>Instead of a serious, substantive debate, we’ve heard vague allusions to a “Commander-in-Chief threshold”
>that seems to be about nothing more than the number of years you’ve spent in Washington.
>This is exactly what’s wrong with the national security debate.
Amen - orelses, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2anyone have video of this?
- JasonHears, on 03/13/2008, -0/+2You know what sucks is that this has been largely ignored by the MSM. It has been eclipsed by Spitzer and Ferraro -- sensationalized media reporting. Obama has shown that he needs someone who knows how to bullhorn the media for these events. Clinton does it easily.
- orelses, on 03/12/2008, -0/+2Video has now been posted: http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samg ...
- orelses, on 03/13/2008, -0/+1Digg stories which I feel are most likely to be dugg. No matter the source.
- angeldecaracena, on 03/12/2008, -0/+0check on dailykos.com there's a diary and in the comments thread there are video links
- MountainX, on 03/13/2008, -0/+0Thanks!
- saska, on 03/12/2008, -2/+1So... who linked this from the Obama HQ blog? It's buried.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is