What is Digg?16 Comments
- kooft, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18I can't speak for Hannity/Limbaugh, but Paul's take on blowback is pretty on the money. Actions have consequences and you can't run around the world planting seeds of insurgency and not expect people to get upset.
- SouthernGrey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18This totally destroys the Limbaugh and Hannity spin.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18The poor neo-cons.
Flustered by facts, shamed by truth. - skyorbit, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11That's an excellent spread. Hadn't seen that before.
Tracy - CurtHowland, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6With an attitude like that, one would expect Libertarians and Anarchists to receive more respect.
But no, people do _not_ in general hate government. They hate what governments _do_, but suggest getting rid of the cause of the abuse and they shrink away like the beaten spouse who just cannot imagine living without the abuser. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The untold part of the story is the way west dropped support for Shah when he needed it most. Right now, most of us in Iran regret what happened, regret replacing Shah with mullahs. While under Shah we didn't have enough freedom (only the political/free speech type), under this Islamic regime and Sharia law, not only we don't have political freedoms, but also we get fined/jaled for listening to western music, get 80 lashes for drinking or having sex and above all the economy is in *****.
You have no idea what a huge majority of Iranians believe the removal of Shah was in fact approved of and supported by the US and west . This was in fact a continuation to the old all-your-oil-is-belong-to-us policy that caused Mosaddeq to lose power during the 1953 coup. Shah, while a good American puppet for a long time, in the very last few years of his rule (1973-1979) openly stated his desire for reducing the foreign influence on oil industry and they very famous quote of his among Iranians that "The real price of oil should be 100$ per barrel."
It wouldn't have taken long before he actually followed this policy in OPEC and that would have stalled west's economy.
In the end, it has always been oil and it still is. - HNowak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Love it! Totally supports Dr Paul's position and makes all other arguments null.
- scudiac, on 11/12/2007, -0/+5great research! thanks for digging it up!
- EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Yes, it destroys the spin, but why post it here, where everyone knows that Paul was correct, and knew it from the moment it happened?
I submitted maybe the first "Giuliani was lying" article, just moments after the debate. I think it's safe to say that most people on digg agreed with that sentiment, right from the start. So who else are you trying to convince, here on digg? - FemaFunCamp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4change his name to
RON PWN
hahaha i had 2 - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7@ Entropyman
"why post it here, where everyone knows that Paul was correct"
Perhaps because people can use digg.com to talk about the issues amongst ourselves?
And perhaps someone will see the stuff as something new to them, and maybe join in the discussions? Just like every other topic here.
At least we are here :) - sachmanb, on 12/11/2007, -0/+3Why post it here? Because if Ron Paul wasn't the most popular candidate on Digg (and I don't know if he is, I haven't been following closely enough to say), then it would be some other candidate :).
If there's going to be discussion about political candidates, someone's going to be on top and if that person is on top by a lot, well that just reflects the political ideas of the audience. I don't think we should encourage people to stop voicing their ideas, be it in comments or participating on a website. Whatever their synthesis is, that's what's you'll see on the front page. So be it. - Cryptocracy, on 08/17/2008, -0/+1Ron Paul is not for sale to special interest groups. His motivation is protecting the rights of the citizens and preservation of the USA!!!
- brokekneck, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Yes it does destroy there spin. Hannity is a idiot when it comes to foreign policy. Not to say I think Hannity doesn't promote good morals for the most part. If you listen to him(which I do) he gets the nail on the head. On the other hand Limbaugh/Hannity go against the grain out of sheer context to upset people. Which makes them funny to listen to :P. But complete idoits when it comes to the war.
- markyannone, on 01/02/2008, -0/+1Limbaugh? Hannity? Never heard of them. However, I have heard of Charles Goyette and Ernie Hancock.
- Blogoraga, on 10/11/2007, -10/+0Politics Schmolitics, no one likes government, etc. Come on, aren't all topics about how people hate something that had to do with the government? No one cares already..
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is