What is Digg?163 Comments
- duggtodeath, on 10/10/2007, -5/+36So the Ministry of Truth is stepping up efforts, eh?
- hawkeye17, on 10/10/2007, -7/+32These ***** have no shame.
- jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17My favorite part: “They attacked us and they will again. They won’t stop in Iraq,”
Who the ***** is "They"? They won't stop in Iraq? We ***** invaded Iraq, it's not like we were chilling out in dunes and a thousand screaming Muslims came over and kicked sand in our picnic basket. Who invaded who here? Talking about rewriting history. - the6thReplicant, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16"$15 million television, radio and grass-roots campaign"
ummm....isn't this the definition of astro-turfing?
my biggest fear is how people can do this knowing it's going to hurt and splinter the country but they still go to sleep at night?
i really need to understand "why". what drives them? I'm sure they *think* they're protecting their country (people who think they smile to the people and press and then go back into their offices to wring their hands and laugh manically are wrong..with a few exceptions) but what are they protecting? - tdominey, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15Ari was on MSNBC's Hardball last night, and there was a rather telling moment. After airing one of the four videos, which profiled a soldier with his legs blown off intercut with images of a 9/11, the host asked Ari what the name of the soldier was. Ari: "You know, I don't have his name here in front of me, but..."
They've spent $15 million dollars, plus God knows how much to fly Ari around to all these media interviews, and Ari CAN'T REMEMBER the name of a soldier they're profiling? It's not like we're talking about a bunch of different ads with lots of people in them. There are FOUR ads. And the one they showed featured ONE soldier.
Absolutely shameful. They're using soldiers -- DISABLED soldiers -- to promote a political movement and solidify their base. - toddcat, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14What is old is new again.....
- shug7272, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14Good lord. Why.. Why WHY do we the people not stop this? Can we?
- gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9You can support the troops by supporting military and veteran's benefits and by bringing these hardworking men and women home to their families.
- orelses, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9He can't remember the soilders name he used in a recent pro-war ad..
http://digg.com/politics/Video_Ari_Fleischer_Can_t_Name_Soldier_Used_In_His_Own_TV_Ad - MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10I've got to hand it to you, you have the most consistently ironic username on digg.
- strafefire, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Well, playing the full video of something is obviously lying, isn't it?
- Biskino, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I've only got one question for you Rich. WTF are you doing on Digg when you could be in Iraq helping get the job done? Seriously, it's time for war supporters to put up or STFU. Can't fight? No problem, open up your wallet and give 'till it hurts. Sell that car, sell that house, sell that PC your using to surf Digg and get that money to the defense department pronto - it's a small price to pay compared to the sacrifices you're asking others to make on your behalf...
- IiberalPlacebo, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Prepare for an intense bipartisan propaganda push approaching the 11th of Sept*mber
- Sairynn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8"Freedom's Watch"? Seriously?
- gingerbreadcat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I'd pay a dollar to watch a video of anyone walking up to a group of Marines and tell them to "get serious about winning".
- LordSlashstab55, on 10/10/2007, -8/+14war = more profits for hailiburton, big oil, and bankers
and how does this affect the profits of the mass public??
when a draft comes, I hope they pick every war supporter out there. I'm not dying for these bastards. Free energy has long been suppressed from the old days of Tesla, by JP Morgan. GTFO bushies and sign up for your ***** WAR! - MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Mo-
Please check YOUR facts better. The OP was talking about Republicans (or in his words, "REPUKE"), while you listed two Democrats. - dawurz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7You're misreading history. Badly. Lets just take the subject of allies, our partners in war. In WW2, the US counted Britain, France, USSR, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark, Greece, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, South Africa, and Yugoslavia as our allies. I'm hoping that when you say "WE won that war" you're including all the allies that participated because we, the US, did not win WW2 all by ourselves.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8Jim Webb has a son in Iraq. (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20070125/ai_n17152201)
Joe Biden's son is going to Iraq. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-6855197,00.html)
As of 2006, a Senator has an annual pay of $165,200...I doubt their children need the Army's college money. I'd hazard a guess that their motivation is NOT to bet their very lives on lies and special interests.
Please check your facts better.
-Mo - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Google much? She said it on Aug 20th, apparently.
(http://www.nypost.com/seven/08212007/news/nationalnews/surge_working__but_too_late__h.htm)
-Mo - dawurz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6"after the job is done" - what does this mean? What is "the job" as you see it?
- AJH16, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5While that would be nice, we can't very well do that as we aren't fighting governments. Atleast not in our current conflict. All that bombing entire cities would do is grow the problem exponentially as we pissed people off and drove them to join terrorist campaigns against us.
- manicallday, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Although a complete pull out would be disastrous, a continued surge in deployment would be even more devastating. Like it or not we do have interest in Iraq's resources, which need to be protected until the dust settles from the civil war. It's just smart international policy not to allow resources to fall into the hands of just anyone. However, this does not mean that we need to increase the number of troops. Such an increase maybe interpreted by the various waring factions that we have an actual interest in who wins their inevitable war. We should only care about the outcome.
- TheLoneHoot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4ABSOLUTE TRUTH!
Eisenhower, a career military man, warned us... - BrewBeau, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4They had considerable forces that were able to flee and fight the Germans again. Plus they had immeasurable intelligence to give about their terrain. So, I would say they helped. Besides, the US was in no position to fight a war in 1939. If we had bordered Germany, it would be us that would have been occupied.
- 2reflective, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Wrap it in the flag and the some people will believe anything. It's just marketing.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah, from the same source that said Iraq was full of WMD.
- oldhick, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5How is that relevant? I'm not a woman, can I not have a position on abortion? I've never personally been mugged, but I encourage my friends to take precautions. I don't personally hunt by support others who do. I understand how sensational it sounds to point out that many of our leaders don't have direct family serving, yet I fail to truly see its relevance. Either our presence in Iraq is appropriate for ideological reasons or its not. You can win the debate with out such nonsense... I hate this whole idea that whats right or wrong is based on some degree of proximity to the issue.
- ElFredo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4s/grass-roots/astroturfing/
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Sorry to reply twice. Following the link worked in Google, but apparently not a second time for me.
It was also on Digg, ironically.
(http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Hillary_on_Iraq_Surge_It_s_Working_No_she_really_said_this)
-Mo - AJH16, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3@oldhich
While I don't agree with the original poster, I also don't think your argument here will hold much weight. Yes, you as a normal caring human being may not want harm to come to others for your benefit, but the poster was trying to say that he thinks that our government is composed of such selfish, self-serving egotists that they feel they are entitiled to force other people to lay down their lives so that they can make a few bucks and stay in power. Now, I would, however, say that broadly defining the entire government in this context is a blatent over-generalization and a disservice to many who are trying to make a difference. - BarneyF, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4O come on, the Russians beat the Germans. Germany was being ruled by a half-witted madman, their government had no future.
- jamesallen74, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3It's interesting how right-wing groups always use tacky graphics of the shape of the USA with a flag in it, with a bald eagle.
freedomwatch.org - chase001, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4All tghis time I thought he resigned because his conscience got the better of him. He actually made Bush sound good before simple Scotty came onto the scene.
- Kinkistyle, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Oh you mean level the cities and kill all the Iraqi women and children that we were supposed to be "liberating" from the oppression of Saddam's torture chambers?
- BrewBeau, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I haven't been to Iraq, but I'll go out on a limb here and say that you probably haven't had to sew as many people together here at home as you have in Iraq. Correct me if I'm wrong.
- dawurz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Again, accurate much? I know fine detail is irrelevant in a discussion about war and the troops giving their lives for it, but in the interest of accuracy and thoroughness, here is what she said: "We've begun to change tactics in Iraq, and in some areas, particularly in Al Anbar Province, it's working. ... We're just years too late changing our tactics. We can't ever let that happen again." The NY Times also reported that "[a]ides to Mrs. Clinton said her remarks that military tactics in Iraq are 'working' referred specifically to reports of increased cooperation from Sunnis leading to greater success against insurgents in Al Anbar Province."
- toddcat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Shut the ***** up dickwad. I lived in Northern Ireland during the '80s and early '90s. I've disparate groups fighting. And peace was certainly not brought about there by the reckless political point-scoring that you 26%ers engage in. The only way to fix this situation is if people are all committed to peace in Iraq and if people would stop questioning the patriotism of those of us who want peace.
- Charlotte_Web, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Last I heard, the surge was working...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html?ex=1188014400&en=b04b614cdada9070&ei=5070 - synthpop, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I love the line "they attacked us", who's "they"? Iraq attacked us? "they" hate our freedom fries! "they" eat puppies! and so on
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Crappy interface.
- TheLoneHoot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"Turned a corner"... sounds familiar... hmmm.... OH YEAH! That was the catch phrase the Bush regime was bandying about back in '05, IIRC. Let's review a few more:
Mission Accomplished
Freedom's on the March
Smoking Gun/Mushroom Cloud
(you could probably recycle "Heckuva Job Brownie" again if you gave it some effort) - GabrielS, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Actually the definition of "astro-turfing" involves hiding and covering up information that would lead to the sources of funding. Freedom's Watch lists their supporters in their press releases. They tell you who has donated. They tell you who is running the group.
To astro turf requires a group to actively seek to hide it's funding, staff, and operations. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No, the New York Times credibility is in question at all times after the Jayson Blair mess, Judith Miller's lies and their support for the illegal invasion of Iraq. Just because they happened to do the right thing in exposing the criminal domestic spying doesn't make them credible or trustworthy.
- jsmith39, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No, fortunately my brain still works well enough to remember events that took place in the last 7 years so it hasn't occurred to me that anything other than a large scale revision of history is taking place. Personally I'm not a big fan of quoting books no matter how accurate but this article reminds me of the part in 1984 where the allotment of chocolate was cut in 1/2 and 2 weeks later there was a grand parade thanking big brother for doubling the chocolate allotment.
- uptown, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You make it sound like he ever knew the name.... or even thought to ask.
- TheLoneHoot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Uh, yeah, I guess... if by "badass" you mean "***** shill for war criminals".
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2""U.S. death toll in Iraq for July hit 8-month low""
And that means the escalation is working? How? - dawurz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2She was not referring to "the surge". Its only war and troops dying, why get so fussy about detail?
- toddcat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2My friend, he is a Democrat. So perhaps you should check your own facts better.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 161 discussions
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