digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at huffingtonpost.com —

McCain Confronted With New Iran Gaffe, Gets Facts Wrong Agai

huffingtonpost.com — Watch it!

show profanity settings
expand all
  • grlykool, on 05/20/2008, -14/+39Old man yells at cloud! Or is it Mr. Burns?
  • The_Wallbanger, on 05/20/2008, -23/+74Let's put this into terms the internet can understand.. Remember when you first saw Star Wars and thought that Darth Vader was the President of the Empire or whatever, but then Return of the Jedi came out with Emporer Darth Sidious, and you were all, "Oh Snap! Finger lightening!" Well, Ahmadinejad is Vader and Ali Khamenei is the Emporer, except the Neo-cons haven't seen Jedi yet, but they'd love going to war none-the-less because they really, really want an excuse to party it up in the Ewok village.
    • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -18/+5No, not at all. It's like Sarkozy negotiating with the Queen of England instead of the Prime Minister. Technically the Queen is the most powerful figure in the UK and has more power than the Prime Minister so why don't we negotiate with her? Do you see how ridiculous that is?
      • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -2/+11It's nothing at all like that. Technically the Queen has zero power whatsoever in the UK.
        • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -10/+1Wrong.

          "The ultimate executive authority over the government of the United Kingdom is still, by and through, the monarch's royal prerogative."

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_monarchy
        • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -2/+9"these powers (the royal prerogative) are only used according to the policies and procedures set down by laws enacted in Parliament"
        • wrathofg0d, on 05/20/2008, -5/+5Cite wikipedia more, justinxor. Idiot.
        • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -6/+1"While prerogative powers were originally exercised by the monarch acting alone, and do not require parliamentary consent, they are now always exercised on the advice of the Prime Minister or the Cabinet, who is then accountable for the decision to Parliament. There may be situations in which the monarch could choose to exercise the Royal Prerogative without the advice of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet. Such situations are extremely rare, and could only occur in emergencies."
        • OreosRgood4me, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Congrats Justin, you've just figured out that the UK has a traditional democratic system and no actual constitution whatsoever. However, because of the strong democratic tradition that is respected by all members of parliament and almost all citizens of the UK, the Queen is merely a symbolic head of government and holds no real power whatsoever.

          The Supreme Leader on the other hand, both holds and exercises plenty. Basic high school comparative politics education ftw!
        • MonexFRAUD, on 09/24/2008, -0/+0You should probably think about investing in gold and silver in these troubled times. Gold and silver can be a good hedge against economic volatility as long as you're not doing a leveraged trade. http://www.monexfraud.com/investment-strategies/bu ... You may wish to invest in the gold ETF (GLD) or the silver ETF (SLV) in a non-margin account. This is the least expensive way to invest. If you feel a need to to take delivery of your metals be extra cautious about who you buy from. Check the Better Business Bureau for complaints, ratings, and adviseries. Also check RipoffReport.com for complaints and read how or if they were handled. At http://www.monexfraud.com all the information you need about Monex Deposit Company is conveniently gathered in one place. Monex is the worst company you can buy precious metals from so do yourself a favor and don't do it. Go to http://www.monexfraud.com and you'll see what I mean!
          ---------------------------------------------
          http://www.monexfraud.com
    • meltlight, on 05/20/2008, -1/+25Apples and Oranges. England is a Constitutional Monarchy. Iran is an Islamic Republic (a theocracy). You're right, the Queen does not necessarily make policy. But the Supreme Leader of Iran is the highest ranking political and religious authority of the nation, not the President.

      Certain executive powers, such as commandment of the armed forces and declaration of war and peace, can only be decided on by the Supreme Leader.
      • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -12/+2People are acting like Khamenei takes an active part in formulating the policies of the government. This is untrue. Ahmadinejad sends his policies to the Majlis. Khamenei is the ultimate authority but that doesn't discredit McCain. He doesn't make laws or set down specific policies - Ahmadinejad does.
        • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -0/+11The Iranian constitution subordinates the entire executive branch to the Supreme Leader. Try to understand the implications of that fact. The only policy the Iranian President has direct control over is economic policy.
        • petrodollar, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5You're an idiot. The Japanese Emperor didn't exercise day to day control over General Tojo's policies either, but after we lit off a few nukes over Hiroshima and Nagasaki it was the Emperor who actually got on the horn and called off the war.
        • OreosRgood4me, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Khamenei holds plenty of power. He basically controls the Guardian Council, and can effectively DISMISS any presidential candidates, nevertheless the President himself.

          Have you not read any bit about the Ayatollah Khomeini and his influence upon the government, or ever considered the fact that the Iranian government is not a very transparent system at all, and by using the president in regards to foreign affairs, they can argue that their system is truly democratic?
        • MonexFRAUD, on 09/24/2008, -0/+0You should probably think about investing in gold and silver in these troubled times. Gold and silver can be a good hedge against economic volatility as long as you're not doing a leveraged trade. http://www.monexfraud.com/investment-strategies/bu ... You may wish to invest in the gold ETF (GLD) or the silver ETF (SLV) in a non-margin account. This is the least expensive way to invest. If you feel a need to to take delivery of your metals be extra cautious about who you buy from. Check the Better Business Bureau for complaints, ratings, and adviseries. Also check RipoffReport.com for complaints and read how or if they were handled. At http://www.monexfraud.com all the information you need about Monex Deposit Company is conveniently gathered in one place. Monex is the worst company you can buy precious metals from so do yourself a favor and don't do it. Go to http://www.monexfraud.com and you'll see what I mean!
          ---------------------------------------------
          http://www.monexfraud.com
    • Fullvinyl, on 05/20/2008, -2/+16Not quite. Vader was never "President of the Empire" in Episode 4 (god, that sounds stupid); hell, the Emperor was mentioned by Grand Moff Tarkin in that movie as having dissolved the Imperial Senate. Anyway, how could Vader be "President" or whatever when he obeyed the order from Tarkin to stop Force-choking Admiral Motti only minutes later? And from there your analogy goes to *****.
      • unreg, on 05/20/2008, -1/+10Only in Digg land would you actually have a post like this.

        Bravo
    • BaudiIROCZ, on 05/20/2008, -5/+6Clever is your star wars analogy. Intelligent you are.
    • DekarCorvus, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3that was priceless...well done mate.
    • OreosRgood4me, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6This is an excellent, if not hilarious, analogy.

      The Supreme Leader can declare War and Peace, assume command of the Armed Forces, and even dismiss the Guardian Council (the only ones with the power to dismiss the Supreme Leader). Remember Iran vs. Iraq? That was all done by the Ayatollah Khomeini.

      Hell, even when Khatami, a candidate who was, in comparison with all other candidates, liberal, and one who promised liberal reforms in terms of human and civil rights, was elected, Khamenei along with the guardian council was merely able to dismiss many of his proposed reforms.
  • IdigObama, on 05/20/2008, -17/+35He get's his fact's wrong????
    That's nothing new!
    • wacomwacoff, on 05/20/2008, -2/+11You got your apostrophes wrong???
      That's nothing new!
      • swicken, on 05/20/2008, -6/+1Is that seriously all you have? Weak.
        • wacomwacoff, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4Nope. But for apostrophe clarification? Yep.
          C'mon, folks, it's not that hard to use punctuation correctly.
  • dn11, on 05/20/2008, -10/+167"if you asked any average American who the leader of Iran is, I think they'd know".... yeah sure Johnny just like they think Obama is a Muslim and Sadam Hussein ordered 9/11.
    • alk509, on 05/20/2008, -4/+14I wonder if McCain's use of the phrase "average American" will get the same ***** reaction of fake outrage as Obama's "average white person" remark, especially since McCain is implying that "average Americans" are too stupid to know anything about the government of Iran, and even more so since he's actually not an "average American," but a Panamenian...
    • alk509, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3Sorry, that should've been '...Obama's "*typical* white person" remark...' - same sentiment. Gotta keep up with my petty political arguments!
      • grlykool, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2Rolls eyes-you do realize that Obama's mother, grandmother, cousins and other family members are "white" right?
        No one who voted for Bush/supports McCain can riff on Obama about not expressing himself in the most elegant terms all the time.

        "Is our children learning?"
        • alk509, on 05/21/2008, -0/+2Evidently our children isn't learning... You should probably read and understand the comments you're replying to before hitting the reply button.
    • ShisouKen, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Yeah the "Average American"

      But someone who is "well versed" would tell you that such is not the case McLame
    • Duryodana, on 05/20/2008, -1/+5come on...

      the "average American" thinks their own president is Martin Sheen...

      oh wait... that was years ago...

      maybe Charlie is the President now... they do keep talking about Presidential Dynasties, right?

      Anyway, ever since Blake Carrington left the White house it's been all tit's up from there...
    • ashlocke, on 05/21/2008, -1/+3I don't think the average American could name President of our Senate. (hint: the vice president)

      Why the hell would they know who the leader of Iran is? I'm also sure that 82.6% of the people who even knew his name couldn't even locate his country on a map.
    • Calcularius, on 05/21/2008, -0/+6That is exactly the problem with the NEO-CONs. They believe facts can be altered by public opinion.
      Mis-educate the public, and you've re-written history!
      The "President" of Iran has no more supreme power in Iran than the "President" of the United States has supreme power in the US. Oh, I forgot, that's something else the NEO-CONs have brainwashed their base into believing, too!
  • thezettabytes, on 05/20/2008, -9/+33A McCain gaffe? Wow! That is something new
    • TheInformer, on 05/20/2008, -10/+2Agreed! Just as odd as a Clinton gaffe.

      Now if only the Obama gaffes were reported as well and with the same frequency.
  • AtHomeBoy2000, on 05/20/2008, -9/+62"if the "average American" thinks that Ahmadinejad is the ultimate leader of Iran, it's up to the President to dissuade them of this notion - not reinforce it."

    Awesome remark!
    • rrouse, on 05/21/2008, -0/+3I want a very much an above average American to be President.
  • AtHomeBoy2000, on 05/20/2008, -9/+38This video will be used against him. That'll make a great video along with his comments about who Iran is training and where. Ya know, the video where his buddy Lieberman had to bail him out.
    • marabout40, on 05/20/2008, -3/+10Yup. You're right. And he's made several other gaffes on foreign policy issues. MoveOn.org or the Obama campaign should compile all those gaffes into a very effective ad.
      • vexingmodstwo, on 05/20/2008, -8/+4Yeah, seriously. Moveon.org has serious clout. EVERYONE listens to them.

        Wait... no they don't.
        • AtHomeBoy2000, on 05/20/2008, -1/+6they have the money and talent to put together impressive ads.
        • vexingmodstwo, on 05/20/2008, -3/+1Which only preach to the choir.
      • skrowl, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Dems blame 527s for losing last time ("OMG Swift boating!"). They should be taken seriously this cycle.
  • PolishLogic, on 05/20/2008, -27/+17Which one of the country's 57 states did this take place in?
    • ouzome, on 05/20/2008, -12/+2McCain doesn't confuse the 57 Muslim states with ours...
      • PolishLogic, on 05/20/2008, -5/+6I'll take States according to Obama for 200, Alex.
    • tidu, on 05/20/2008, -6/+9It's funny, McCain makes severe foreign policy gaffes and all you can make fun of Obama for is how he said 57 instead of 50 states.
      • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -4/+11He said 57 instead of 47, he was talking about how many states he'd campaigned in. Keep digging boys, this one has legs!
      • PolishLogic, on 05/20/2008, -8/+4Well, last I checked I was able to make fun of anything I felt like. 57 states is pretty damn funny in terms of gaffes.
        • archiesteel, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3It may be funny, but it's inconsequential. It's not a gaffe as much as a blooper.

          McCain's lack of knowledge about who really rules Iran, on the other hand, is cause for concern. That's a true gaffe.
        • PolishLogic, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2Really, not a gaffe? When he said "50" then paused and thought, then followed up with "57". Seems like a gaffe to me.

          Alas, I know it's not praise for Obama, so there are repercussions for making such a statement on Digg, but oh well.
    • LiquidIse, on 05/20/2008, -7/+3I like the new Digg/Bury comment counts. I can see how many people thought your comment was perfect, and then how many obamabots scrolled this far down
    • rdoger6424, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1West Dakota.
  • SheilaNoya, on 05/20/2008, -10/+84Just like Bush, McCain isn't even sure who we are fighting against, or what alliances they have with others in the region. He doesn't know the history of the region, or even their religious affiliations. Even when his handlers repeatedly prep him on the subject, he still gets it wrong. We can't afford to have any more of this same incompetence and ignorance in the White House.
    • blackinthmiddle, on 05/20/2008, -1/+9That's his foreign policy experience at work!

      Honestly, I'm not sure if he knows what planet he's on!
  • KLBP, on 05/20/2008, -11/+68Too bad McCain doesn't make better use of the interweb. If he had done a basic search, he would have come up with the following two links:
    1) Official Iranian description of their government structure in English: http://www.spac.ir/Portal/Home/Default.aspx?Catego ...
    2) CIA World Factbook: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world ...

    Gosh that was so hard to figure out that Ali Hoseini-Khamenei is the ultimate constitutional leader of Iran. Come on McCain, if you have so much foreign policy expertise how come you don't even understand the basic political structure of the country that is supposed to be the number one threat to our well being? You can not protect us from Iran if you don't know who actually controls things over there.
    • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -2/+15spac.ir - nice. That right there should put any questions to rest. On the other hand, the Iranians probably changed their website to make McCain look bad - after all, they are part of the Axis of Evil!
      • KLBP, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2They did not change this detail. I was curious about the Iranian political system during their last presidential election and looked it up. At that time I saw the same thing on another official Iranian government website that detailed their government structure and constitution. I could not find that website this time, but it even provided a flow chart of their political structure.

        The really stupid thing about McCain's statements is that it is so easy to learn these basic details about most other governments from their own websites. He is running on the premise that he has the most foreign policy experience and there is nothing more important in foreign policy right now than fully understanding who the major players are in the Middle East. As such McCain should fully understand the basic political structure of Iran; know the difference between Sunni and Sahih Muslim; know why Bin Landen/al Qaeda and Iran are traditional enemies; and know Iran's role in Iraq.

        See http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/McCain_s_YouTube ... for just how poorly McCain understands Iran.
    • zulfy26, on 05/21/2008, -0/+2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Ira ...

      ?

      lolz
    • SlimFastForYou, on 05/21/2008, -0/+2Isn't it admirable that both the CIA and Iran will publicly agree on something, but our good 'ol maverick will continue to hold out (presumably) until hell freezes over. If he's trying to show himself to be just as good as Bush, McCain is doing a fine job. Who cares what the words on pages say, if McCain's gut says that Ahmadinejad has the power to call a nuclear strike, shoot lightning bolts out of his fingers, or summon sand golems to send against our troops in Iraq, then by Jove it must be truthy! Bush and McCain are shining bastions of truthiness. Forget Alex Jones, they are the true "truthers"!
  • meltlight, on 05/20/2008, -20/+62Let's tally what Republicans hate: taxes + abortion + secularism + gay people + black people + poor people + the french + hollywood + hispanic immigrants + muslims + feminists + the environment + diplomacy... oh... + THE FACTS.
    • bahramks, on 05/20/2008, -8/+10well said!
    • Diderotten, on 05/20/2008, -6/+22Is it bad then that I only hate the first two? Seriously, Bush!=all republicans.
      • rdoger6424, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3What if the babies would be IRS employees later in life?
    • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -6/+10I don't hate any of those except taxes. Generalizations FTW.
    • TheInformer, on 05/20/2008, -10/+19And the Democrats tell nothing but the truth? Please tell me you aren't that deluded.
      • spongya77, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Idiot. He didn't say anything about the Democrats. He stated something about the Republicans. Should have attended to the Debate Club in high school. Or high school, for that matter.
        • TheInformer, on 05/20/2008, -4/+1"Idiot"? What does that comment say about your debating abilities?

          Saying something only about Republicans implies that the same is not true of Democrats, or else Democrats would have been included in the something said.

          It's called "implication". I'll use short sentences. Look it up. Google can be helpful. Good day to you!
        • JakobVirgil, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Republican are people.
          -Jake :)
        • spongya77, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1Informer
          I didn't debate. I made an observation. Look it up, if you don't know the difference.
        • whereslindsey, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1Some Republicans don't identify with the NeoCons and actually are voting for Obama. I personally(unfortunately in hindsight) voted Republican based on fiscally conservative issues last time. Since we've seen what has happened since then, obviously the GOP didn't follow through. Not to mention the massive deficit! Sigh, time to give someone else a chance to FIX this. I believe Obama has the most opportunity to bring our country to a better place in the world.

          Keep in mind--who likes bullies? Not many people. Right now we are bullies to the rest of the world. There is a better way to solve this.
    • ouzome, on 05/20/2008, -17/+6Let's tally what the Democrats hate: freedom + military + democracy + capitalism + individual responsibility + tax cuts + corporations + rural people + fossil fues + border enforcement + not talking to terrorists...oh....+ AMERICA!

      ...and I'll generalize, too and throw in Objectivism, Christians and Blacks, becuase they've done more harm than good for blacks but keep getting their vote.
      • Gerbil_Juice, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6Fossil fuels? You seriously think it's bad to dislike fossil fuels?
      • blinkatron, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6Let's go through this point by point:
        Dems hate:
        freedom - REALLY??? I thought the Repubs were the ones who hated freedom since they piss all over the constitution whenever they feel like it.
        military - NO. They just don't want it used irresponsibly and don't think it needs to be so big since, ya know, military should be used for defensive purposes ONLY.
        democracy - I don't even know what to say to this. If you think Dems hate democracy you should stop drinking anti-freeze.
        capitalism - WRONG. Dems are federalist capitalists who want the government to oversee the economy so it doesn't get ***** or ***** innocent people
        individual responsibility - i might ceed you this point, i am sick of Dems trying to ban my GTA IVs...
        tax cuts - guess what, the government needs money, it is ***** broke, and the only people who can bail it out is us, the people. so guess what, tax cuts don't make a lot of sense right now. but to say dems are opposed to all tax cuts is just ignorant.
        corporations - yeah, only if they ***** people over
        rural people - WHAT?!?!?! how?!?! Bush has taken a dump on farmers ever since he has been in office, the dems are the only ones willing to stand up and fight for them
        fossil fuels - .........
        border enforcement - building a fence won't stop anything. dems just want a more reasonable way to control immigration and to allow people to become citizens. we aren't even letting the smart people, college educated people move here because we are so nuts about immigration
        not talking to terrorists - WOW. name one dem who isn't Kucinich who wants to talk to terrorists. just because the Bush administration labels a country a terrorist nation doesn't mean its people are terrorists or that their government is even terrorist and that we shouldn't negotiate with them.
        AMERICA - yeah... sure...
        Christians - did you know that the majority of dems are christians?
      • JakobVirgil, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1I hate Objectivism Ayn rand is a nazi.
        I am not sure what fossil fues are but I will give you that one
        at least 2 right
        -Jake
        • ouzome, on 05/20/2008, -0/+0Any Rand is the exact opposite of a Nazi.
    • defwheezer, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3Republicans = The Party of Hate /'cept $, they love teh $
    • unreg, on 05/20/2008, -3/+2And the democrats hate whatever is fashionable at the moment.

    • orxor, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Don't you mean neocons?
      • michaeltime, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1And the millions of muppets who put them in power, the same ones who now proclaim,
        "It wasn't us...honest. We didn't know!"
        ...stolen election or not, don't delude yourself and wash your hands of what some of you "moderates" have done to this world...

        You should START to put things right by putting any other party into the Whitehouse. Pity you only have 2...
    • kleezy, on 05/21/2008, -0/+0That's a stereotype sandwich if I ever saw one.
  • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -40/+20Ahmadinejad is the face of the Iranian government. Wikipedia says "the Constitution defines the President of Iran as the highest state authority." Furthermore "[the President of Iran] is responsible to both people and the Supreme Leader, he is independent in his decisions and developing the policies of the government." And finally "the President formulates the foreign policy through the National Security Council and after seeking Supreme Leader's approval." So this is innaccurate. Seriously, it took me five minutes to research that. I'm sure that the people at the Huffington Post knew this but of course they just want to present a one sided picture, even if that means distorting the truth.
    • meltlight, on 05/20/2008, -7/+24Not exactly true "Justinx0r". The highest order in Iran, a theocracy, is not the head of state. It's the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has disagreed with Ahmadinejad and has rebuked him publicly.

      Instead of bashing the Huff Post, see for yourself: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-01-21-iran ...
      • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -9/+2How about refuting what I actually said? I never said that Khamenei wasn't the ultimate power in Iran, I just said that the President does things like formulate foreign policy, etc. You're acting as if Khamenei runs the country by himself and Ahmadinejad does nothing except parrot what he says - which is totally untrue.
        • SlimFastForYou, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1Refute what you said? Well, you said: "'the President formulates the foreign policy through the National Security Council and after seeking Supreme Leader's approval.' So this is inaccurate". I agree with the Wikipedia quote, it's your conclusion of inaccuracy that does not follow.

          As an analogy, a store manager at McDonalds can make business decisions but it works through the implied consent of the owner. If the owner feels a decision is wrong, he steps in. The store manager is serving at the pleasure of the owner, performing work the owner doesn't want to perform himself. If the store manager decides to purchase shotguns to have under the counters, and the owner doesn't like the idea, the manager has a choice of doing what he's told or being fired. If Ahmadinejad wants to obtain nuclear power plants and weapons, and Khamenei says OK to nuclear energy and NO to nuclear weapons - then Ahmadinejad has a choice between doing what he's told or losing his position.

          The article is a kicker in at least two ways. For one, calling McCain out on the fact that he keeps mentioning Obama and Ahmadinejad in the same sentence over and over again, while Obama has yet to (in public record) explicitly mention Ahmadinejad by name with regards to negotiating. And also, for McCain's statement "I think if you asked any average American who the leader of Iran is, I think they'd know. Go ahead. Or anyone who's well-versed in the issue." McCain, what part of "Supreme Leader" do you not understand?
        • MonexFRAUD, on 09/24/2008, -0/+0You should probably think about investing in gold and silver in these troubled times. Gold and silver can be a good hedge against economic volatility as long as you're not doing a leveraged trade. http://www.monexfraud.com/investment-strategies/bu ... You may wish to invest in the gold ETF (GLD) or the silver ETF (SLV) in a non-margin account. This is the least expensive way to invest. If you feel a need to to take delivery of your metals be extra cautious about who you buy from. Check the Better Business Bureau for complaints, ratings, and adviseries. Also check RipoffReport.com for complaints and read how or if they were handled. At http://www.monexfraud.com all the information you need about Monex Deposit Company is conveniently gathered in one place. Monex is the worst company you can buy precious metals from so do yourself a favor and don't do it. Go to http://www.monexfraud.com and you'll see what I mean!
          ---------------------------------------------
          http://www.monexfraud.com
      • nosecohn, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6I think the point is that Ahmadinejad can't make major policy moves that are against the will of the Supreme Leader. If, for instance, the president wanted to engage in a military campaign, or build a nuclear weapon, or even, as meltlight, pointed out, curtail the supply of natural gas to remote villages, he can't do so if the Ayatollah disagrees. And when that conflict arises, Ahmadinejad has no recourse. The Supreme Leader's word is final.
    • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -5/+25The article sources the CIA World Factbook, justinx0r sources his exhaustive five minutes of research on Wikipedia. Which one sounds more credible?
      • unreg, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Depends. Who copied from whom?
        • KLBP, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3 -- Begin sarcasm --
          Oh I'm so sure that the CIA would use Wikipedia as their primary source
          -- End sarcasm --

    • wrathofg0d, on 05/20/2008, -3/+3You're retarded. Swrostmore's point is the same I would make.
    • Moetownslick, on 05/20/2008, -3/+12You're citing Wikipedia as your more credible source?

      LMAO.
      • justinx0r, on 05/20/2008, -3/+2Ok, fine.

        http://www.ivansahar.com/iran-executive-power.htm

        "The president of Islamic Republic of Iran, the head of Iran executive power, is the second highest authority after the supreme leader. The head of Iran executive power is also the coordinator of the three branches of the state, legislative, judicial and executive powers in Iran government.

        [the Iranian President] Signs and supervises the implementation of laws passed by the Majlis,

        Signs treaties and other international agreements ratified by the Majlis,

        Receives the credentials of foreign ambassadors,

        Endorses those of Iranian ambassadors sent abroad,

        Presides over the National Security Council.

        His responsibilities also include the administration of the country's budget and development plans ratified by the Majlis."
        • gkskillz, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6http://www.spac.ir/Portal/Home/Default.aspx?Catego ...

          Supreme Leader
          "According to Iran's Constitution, the Supreme Leader is responsible for the delineation and supervision of "the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran," which means that he sets the tone and direction of Iran's domestic and foreign policies. The Supreme Leader also is commander-in-chief of the armed forces and controls the Islamic Republic's intelligence and security operations; he alone can declare war or peace."

          President
          "The president is the second highest ranking official in Iran. While the president has a high public profile, however, his power is in many ways trimmed back by the constitution, which subordinates the entire executive branch to the Supreme Leader. In fact, Iran is the only state in which the executive branch does not control the armed forces.

          The president is responsible for setting the country's economic policies. Though he has nominal rule over the Supreme National Security Council and the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, in practice the Supreme Leader dictates all matters of foreign and domestic security."
        • Wartyboskfapped, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4Christ, give up. You are not up to this.
        • nosecohn, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5That makes him roughly equivalent to our Secretary of State.
    • storyFX, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1You are wrong.

      IRAN:
      Branches: Executive--Supreme Leader (head of state), president (head of government)

      Source: US Department of State
    • dpazar2, on 05/20/2008, -4/+2The bigger picture to look at is not who the head of Iran is...I am well aware that the ultimate say comes down to the supreme leader and not the president. My problem is that the person representing Iran comes to the UN makes exterminating remarks, and is STILL representing Iran. Nothing has been done about the remarks he (Ahmadinejad) made, so what he thinks versus what the supreme leader thinks may not be far off. If it was a total mishap that was non representative of Irans views, the president wouldnt be around anymore. Ayatollah is not the nicest man around, he would have taken care of the actions of Ahmadinejad and covered his own ass, and he hasnt.
      • archiesteel, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5"My problem is that the person representing Iran comes to the UN makes exterminating remarks"

        Yeah, except he didn't. That myth has been debunked many times (though if a lie has been repeated many times, some people take it for truth).
    • jabberwolf, on 05/20/2008, -7/+2Ahmadinejad is the president of IRAN!
      He is the figure head that speaks FOR THE SUPREME LEADER in IRAN.
      What part dont you guys want to understand about this?

      It's like saying our president really isnt the leader but the SENATE,CONGRESS and are the REAL leaders.
      The president can't do much without getting the CONGRESS AND SENATE'S approval !
      Does that mean that the president of the USA can't represent the USA ?

      WHAT ***** RETARDS!!!!
      • StarlessKnight, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3President of the USA = Executive
        Congress = Legislative

        Supreme Leader = Executive
        President of Iran = Executive

        Your analogy is flawed. A better one would be: "It's like saying our Vice President really isn't the leader but the President is the REAL leader." And, yes, that makes no sense either.
      • rdoger6424, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Right, what do the IRANIANS know about their OWN ***** GOVERNMENT
        http://www.spac.ir/Portal/Home/Default.aspx?Catego ...
    • KLBP, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6justinx0r here are two links I provided two posts above yours:

      http://www.spac.ir/Portal/Home/Default.aspx?Catego ...
      https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world ...

      If you don't like the first link from an official Iranian government website detailing their political structure, you can use the U.S. CIA website detailing the same thing. As was pointed out the Huffington Post article referenced the CIA World Factbook link I provided.

      Who do you think would be more accurate on this topic? The CIA and Iranian government websites or Wikipedia?
  • Verchiel77, on 05/20/2008, -7/+50Mr. Experience strikes again.

    What an embarrassment.
  • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -4/+53SUPREME LEADER
    According to Iran's Constitution, the Supreme Leader is responsible for the delineation and supervision of "the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran," which means that he sets the tone and direction of Iran's domestic and foreign policies.

    PRESIDENT
    The president is the second highest ranking official in Iran. While the president has a high public profile, however, his power is in many ways trimmed back by the constitution, which subordinates the entire executive branch to the Supreme Leader. In fact, Iran is the only state in which the executive branch does not control the armed forces.
    • pintomp3, on 05/20/2008, -3/+7i'm sure mccain knows this. he is just playing to his chickenhawk, war-mongering base.
      • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5I agree, but I'm not sure digg's con bloc knows the facts.
  • bahramks, on 05/20/2008, -6/+21Oh boy, oh boy.... this is not just a simple slip of the tongue or something of that sort, this guy in fact DOES NOT know much about Iran. And the other quote "extermination / wipe off the map" story, its has been explained many times that Ahmidinjead (the idiot) was quoting from Khomeyni (the dead leader) and also it was not a in a subjective sense... but too bad that the ppl who will vote for him, dont even care about such matters.
    • nosecohn, on 05/20/2008, -0/+7Yes, the NY Times had a long piece on the probable mistranslation of that phrase, since the expression "wipe off the map" doesn't exist in Farsi.
  • CaptainRant, on 05/20/2008, -37/+8McCain is horrible.

    Obama is worse.

    We're *****.
    • Diderotten, on 05/20/2008, -8/+4I disagree. Obama'a horrible, McCain's worse.
      • unreg, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Hillary makes them both look like cherubs.
  • newyorkpaulo, on 05/20/2008, -7/+20Damn,
    His staff are all quitting because of shady relationships and he puts his foot in mouth over and over...can you say "President Obama"!
    • badqat, on 05/20/2008, -7/+3Yes, because Obama has the electoral college all wrapped up, doesn't he?
    • ouzome, on 05/20/2008, -4/+1He asked them to resign dumbass
  • GrodyChamp, on 05/20/2008, -26/+7Burried for huffingtonpost.
    • chantron, on 05/20/2008, -3/+6I think you've got a typo in your name. Should be GrodyChump. :)
    • altgeeky1, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3dugg for huffingtonpost
      one must be Fair and Balanced :)
    • wendelgee2, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2How sad.
      Can't bear the truth, huh?
      It's a video...who cares where it's posted?
      • blackinthmiddle, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2I think he's jealous because huff is getting advertising dollars.
  • Connormac44, on 05/20/2008, -4/+34Looks like the submitter screwed up the title agai
    • BrokenVisage, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Maybe he's just a Texas A&M grad and left it like that subconsciously. (Agai = Aggie?)
    • wassim2k, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1Just another douche trying to be first to submit. quick quick quick
  • rconrad, on 05/20/2008, -6/+9Old Man yells at cloud
  • Mr.Gone, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1I'm not sure what the Army General Administrative Instruction has to do with it but I'm sure it has nothing to do with being too lazy to reword a headline so it fits.
  • TheInformer, on 05/20/2008, -6/+8Hmmm, a Digg front page with 4 political articles on it. Two of them praise Obama, and the other two are negative stories about his political opposition.

    I wonder what the Digg front page would look like if it were Ron Paul vs Barack Obama for POTUS?
    • Xanrez, on 05/20/2008, -2/+6Forget the vs... I want to see Obama/Paul - 08!
      Heads would explode here on Digg.
    • unreg, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4***** Diggers would be posting negative responses to their own posts, alternatively Digging the up and back down.

      It would be awesome.
    • KLBP, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2It would put an end to Mac vs. Windows articles. :-p
  • Proctor, on 05/20/2008, -4/+9Straight talk guyz....straight talk.
  • techweenie, on 05/20/2008, -3/+18Anyone who is paying attention knows Amadinejad is the leader of Iraq only on Faux News and in Republican speeches.
  • wrathofg0d, on 05/20/2008, -8/+43No more uneducated idiots for president, please.
    • badqat, on 05/20/2008, -7/+5So no one who claims they've visited 57 states with another to come tomorrow, for a total of 58, right?
      • moolaismyfriend, on 05/20/2008, -7/+4Why do you hate our troops badqat?
      • DreadPirate, on 05/20/2008, -6/+5Why do you hate logic and reason so much, Moola? Are you scared by them?
  • chantron, on 05/20/2008, -3/+25"but I think if you asked any average American who the leader of Iran is, I think they'd know."

    The average American? I think Mr. McCain needs a new Foreign Policy advisor.
    • wrathofg0d, on 05/20/2008, -0/+11Obviously our nation's foreign policy should be based off what the "average American" thinks.
  • thatguy11, on 05/20/2008, -14/+2Wow, but did you hear? Obama and his wife hate America. LETS VOTE HIM IN!!!
    • soot, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3Can you link me to the article where Barack Obama and/or his wife said they hate America? Just fact-checking, thanks.
      • Julik, on 05/20/2008, -3/+2While I don't think she "hates" America, she was never proud of the country before now apparently...

        From a campaign rally in February.
        "Let me tell you something. For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country," she said.
        • soot, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6Did you hear what she said right after that, and how she clarified her comment? She was talking about the level of involvement she was seeing in our political process, which is unprecedented to her.
    • Jeffool, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4I'm officially getting old. I can't tell if thatguy11's making a sarcastic comment on the American populace, if diggers are missing the joke, or if they get the joke and are anti-joke/plain-faced-civilized-discourse and don't realize it's too late for Digg. All I do know, is that no one'll bother to read this post until it gets a "best has 10 diggs" note beside the reply line.

      "Are you being sarcastic?"
      "I don't even know any more."
      • JakobVirgil, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1look at his profile he really is stupid.
        -Jake
  • bcamp1973, on 05/20/2008, -5/+15Senile Old ***** for president! Yay.
    • torressr3, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2No problem. The guy who was ***** up Americas economy and attacking a country in order to steal their oil under the pretext that they where harboring terrorist and having WMD was voted for office, not one but TWICE.

      After that nothing can surprise me...
      • texasag03, on 05/20/2008, -1/+0Could you explain why, if this war is for oil, we are leaving it all for the Iraqis?
  • soot, on 05/20/2008, -4/+12Old grandpa walnuts is off his meds again.
  • svendm, on 05/20/2008, -7/+11Typical, isn't it.. For years, the USA complains about Iran being undemocratic. How the elected presidents have very little power, and how all the real power sits with the Ayatollas.

    THEN they elect a nutball like Ahmadinejad, who's got a penchant for making inflammatory statements. And now, since it serves the anti-Iran agenda, we're supposed to pretend that he actually IS the guy with all the power?!?!

    It's *****. And just proves that the Republicans will continue to exploit Americans ignorance and forgetfulness about foreign matters to pursue their own agenda.
    • brandozilla, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1You yourself are ignorant. Ahmadinijad and all people who ran for President in Iran must be approved by Iran's council of guardians which is half appointed by the supreme leader.

      In 2004, thousands of people were excluded from the race including prominent reformers. The council even excluded an entire party from running for reelection in the parliament.

      It is an undemocratic fixed system. It is a theocratic pseudo-democracy.

      Simply having an election does not a democracy make.

      Ahmadinijad might not be the last man in charge, but as the virtually hand picked spokesmen who performs many head of state activies and plays a key role in developing foreign policy, he will bear the majority of the criticisms.
      • DekarCorvus, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2your missing the guys point all together....

        the fact is...

        ahmadinijad is not in charge....he is the puppet of the council.
        and since most americans hate him....they are using a blame game to associate obama with someone "america hates"

        the point is...much like McCain himself...most americans are unaware of the facts, and simply go on what they are told.

      • kreneskyp, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1he is as much the leader of iran as the queen is the leader of britain. He is a figurehead and spokesman only.

        Mccains argument was like saying Bolton is the leader of America just because he speaks at the U.N. on our behalf.
  • Sogui, on 05/20/2008, -15/+10It's funny because Huffington Post has taken so many of McCain's quotes out of context and ran with them as stories, I'm sure if McCain had said the same thing that Obama did, Huffington Post would have a story up hours later claiming "McCain to meet with Ahmadinejad".

    Then they would do an about-face and claim that Ahmadinejad is the real holder of power in Iran and that the Grand Ayatollah is simply a figurehead who only takes actions when he feels the President has stepped out of line. Otherwise, the President is the only who executes foreign policy, visits other countries, attends negotiations, etc...

    Frankly this it sounds like an apologist piece, frankly I have no problem with Obama meeting Ahmadinejah, but when you say "I will meet the leaders of Iran" and the only man who have been known for meeting foreign heads of state is Ahmadinejad, not to mention leaders is plural, so it would seem silly to meet with the Ayatollah and ignore the president and then meet with who? The vice president?


    This is similar to if someone said "I will meet with the leaders of Great Britain on important policy issues" and then go ahead and say "Oh I only intend to meet Queen Elizabeth II, I never said I would meet Gordon Brown. Same deal heal, except the Ayatollah does have slightly more political relevance.
    • swrostmore, on 05/20/2008, -3/+7"Huffington Post has taken so many of McCain's quotes out of context"
      Source or it didn't happen.
    • Sogui, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2I'm not even going to check the site, but I'll venture a guess and say "100 years in Iraq".
    • petrodollar, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3"the only man who have been known for meeting foreign heads of state is Ahmadinejad"

      What are talking about, fool?

      http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3460735, ...

      http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/17/africa/M ...

      http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20080227a ...

    • dpazar2, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2"In diplomacy, Khamenei tends to operate in a clever but recognizable fashion. He sends different diplomats into negotiations with contradictory instructions. Each claims to be acting with the supreme leader's full authority, but ultimately are unable to make commitments because they have little idea of what Khamenei wants to do. After a time, they are removed, and a new set of representatives is dispatched."

      FOOL, why dont you read what you cite to prove others wrong. Its in your third link written by the Japan Times. This doesnt sound like a leader willing to meet with anyone in the Western Hemisphere. Your other two articles are meetings with Vladdy Putin...come on!!!! Show him meeting with someone a little more respected than Putin or put something down that doesn't show this guy to be a slithering shady puppeteer.
      • petrodollar, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4What the ***** are you babbling about?

        1) ***** above said Khameni doesn't meet with foreign heads of state. I proved him wrong and now you whine like a little bitch that Putin doesn't count because he's "respected" enough. Riiiight... Pool little Vladimir Putin. No one takes him seriously.

        2) You just explained why Khameni is PRECISELY the person a US president would want to meet with, because meeting with any lower official would be a waste of time.

        Either you are completely full of ***** or you are an immense idiot. Which is it?
      • dpazar2, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1The initial argument you made had nothing to do with who and who we would not WANT to meet with, I agree with you that he is the one we should meet with. You entered an argument about if he would even considering meeting with us. Your position based off of 3 articles is that he would meet with us. Two of the three articles are about meetings with the same person...great, he actually has a friend. The third article you cited specifically explains how he gets around these meetings...because he sends wastes of time do it for him, as the quote above (from your article) describes. On that note, who else besides Putin has he met with??? And chill out with the language, you come off as a real prick.
      • petrodollar, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Go back and read my post. I was responding to this comment:

        "the only man who have been known for meeting foreign heads of state is Ahmadinejad"

        That's clearly false, no matter how desperately you try to spin it.

        And you seem to think and an article titled "Khamenei key to solving Iran problem" says precisely the opposite. The article plainly states that Khamenei is open to meeting with foreign leaders, that he has done so in the past, and that he is in the best position to resolve outstanding issues between Iran and the west.

        "third article you cited specifically explains how he gets around these meetings...because he sends wastes of time do it for him"

        No, it specifically explains why it is wise to insist on meeting directly with him, so that he can't play his games. I'm sorry if you find this logic confusing. You might want to consider re-taking grade school.
      • dpazar2, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Actually if you read the article, nowhere does it state that he is open for invitation or has been in the past. Once again he has done it once, over attaining nuclear material. It says that he would be reluctant to meet with a non muslim from the Western Hemisphere and that he would be stupid to turn down an invitation to the states. This is being written from an alternate POV giving advice on what SHOULD be done and what may happen if an invitation is extended. Yes we are reaching out to Ahmadinjehad and we shouldnt be, but until Khamenei is in the same room with a US president, you cant disprove anything saying that he is not open to meet with top leaders. Meeting with one foreign leader doesnt prove anything. And stop discussing his mind games and that we should really meet with him, because i already agree with you on these topics and they are pointless to argue about anymore.
      • Sogui, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1I said KNOWN not actually "meeting" heads of state. Ahmadinjehad is the one who is known for making all the big foreign policy visits, not the Ayatollah. I'm sure he's met with other heads of state, but it's rarely a significant event, or a signal for a policy shift by Iran. Ahmadinjehad is the one who goes globe trotting and makes headlines, for good reason.

        Who is/isn't willing to talk with him aside, when someone says "I will negotiate with Iran's leaderS", it only seems intuitive to include someone like Ahmadinjehad on the short list.
    • kreneskyp, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1this isn't about being anti-mccain or pro-obama. Diplomacy is the best course of action. A strong country can negotiate on their terms. You get a good situation without having to fire a shot, or spend billions
  • pintomp3, on 05/20/2008, -3/+40in other words "i am just as misinformed as the average american, so elect me to lead them".
    • e3boy, on 05/20/2008, -1/+7"If you ask any average American who the leader of Iran is, i think they'll know"
      - if you ask they average American to find Iran on a map... do you think they would know?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp4iI59BfpQ

      • pintomp3, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6knowing things is clearly elitist.
      • StarlessKnight, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Nothing like the ol' survey where Americans couldn't find the United States on a map of the world.
  • monkeyangst, on 05/20/2008, -2/+6For some reason in my haste, I read the headline as "McCain confronted with new irate giraffe," which led me to expect a much, much more interesting article.
    • Wartyboskfapped, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4I wish I lived in that universe.
    • spongya77, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1We can only hope for that article to come.
  • xxgigavirusxx, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3Agai?
  • Picer, on 05/20/2008, -3/+13Khamenei, is the one who calls the shots
    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/07/africa/tehr ...
    Khamenei, is not a ceremonial figure like the Queen in England and while he is does not actively participate if something is not too his liking he has the power to correct it and has and can silence political opponents.
    • stix213, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1While true, Khamenei delegates nearly all his power to the President. So is the "leader of Iran" the person wielding all the power, or the person who hides in the background with a veto pen?
      • JakobVirgil, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2notice Picer has a citation and stix213 does not.
        -Jake
        • stix213, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Like linking to any random Internet news article has meant anything for the last 10 years.

          So, if I say that Obama is a Muslim.... then you would rightfully say I'm a moron for suggesting that.... But then it makes it true when I do this???:

          http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/12/ba ...

          Stop being such a dumbass
  • CrackyJSquirrel, on 05/20/2008, -2/+10It doesn't matter what the average American may or may not know. McCain is running for president and is a senator, this is supposed to be his subject matter. He should know.
  • pishposh, on 05/20/2008, -4/+16mccain: i'm oblivious! elect me!
    america: so am i! ok!
  • TommyBoy919, on 05/20/2008, -6/+11McBush = confused old man
  • stix213, on 05/20/2008, -14/+5This is stupid. Everyone who knows how Iran works knows that Khamenei does NOT negotiate with foreign leaders himself. That job is delegated to the job of the President of Iran.... Which in fact makes McCain correct.

    Buried for Inaccurate.
  • Zoshchenko, on 05/20/2008, -4/+6The leadership of the Republican Party continues to sigh a relief that they didn't put someone credible up for election. Since their candidate - no matter who it is - stands no chance of winning, they must be happy their sacrificial lamb is doing his best to ensure his trip into obscurity.
    • stix213, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Not if Clinton has anything to say about it. If she doesn't finish destroying Obama's campaign then she can't run again until 2016
  • BryanG412, on 05/20/2008, -5/+9Oh what a shock, Republicans disagreeing with facts...
  • sizzzzlerz, on 05/20/2008, -5/+12Reality has a liberal bias
    • SpykerSpeed, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1Except on the matter of economics.
      • michaeltime, on 05/21/2008, -1/+1Yes, those Scandinavian liberals sure run poor countries...
  • skoles, on 05/20/2008, -1/+5Finkle IS Eienhorn!
  • perry911, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2It is nothing new for McSame to go down in a ball of flames, they will only issue him another jet to bail from, keep your arms tucked to your side next time. You look silly flailing about on bailout.
  • chrissku, on 05/20/2008, -2/+6John McCain reminds me of Ronald Reagan (post white house years) :(
    • xenuxenuts, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5Maybe he'll sell arms to iran too.
    • cjshamrock, on 05/21/2008, -1/+1and play friends with Osama Bin Laden, and help him destroy the US
  • kidd3ckz, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2What the ***** is an internet giraffe?
  • PowerPaulPayOff, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2If he is right or wrong it doesn't matter, if you review the video its his true intent that you must understand. If you listen... you will see or learn why he feels and acts like he does. He tells us why he does not like Ahmadinejad or the whole lot for that fact, he does not care who is who. He is told to hate them by his puppet masters and buddy JL, for the welfare of others! Do you know who? You decide.
  • papipablo, on 05/20/2008, -0/+10Somebody wake up grandpa and update his talking points.
  • MrPotato, on 05/20/2008, -1/+6Dear GOP Leadership,

    Deep in my heart I know that there are vast numbers of people out there who are struggling with the fat, smelly train wreck that the GOP has become and who, like me, want desperately to support anyone other than that vacuous waste of human flesh McInsane.

    Therefore, I will be voting my conscience and writing-in Ron Paul on the ballot this time. You cannot slap lipstick on a pig (McInsane) and expect us to "march in lock step" with you any longer.

    So, here's to all of you GOP leaders who have worked so diligently to destroy the party - you have succeeded.

    Good riddance to bad rubbish,
    An American
  • banderwocky, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Yay, more double-straight talk from John Sidney McCain III. It would seem his knowledge on foreign diplomacy is as adequate as his economic knowledge.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.