I'm in a rush, so I don't have time to dissect this the way I want to. I will say, however that:
Please provide ... the name of a good civil defense attorney. Public accusations of the criminality of the unconvicted are legally actionable.
... is ill-informed, melodramatic, and weakens what's otherwise a strong post, albeit one whose sentiment I disagree with.
Sarah Palin's a public figure and, unless the person you're responding to is an officer of the court or a news agency of some kind, I don't think he's going to need a "civil defense" attorney for stating his opinion.
Yes, in the cold light of day, it perhaps was a bit over-the-top. Give me this though: she's been smeared as no other candidate in my lifetime has been (I'm 53). This link (from a site backed by a group that once gave Obama a bunch of money, ironically) clears up some of the worst smears.
A perfect example of the smears I was talking about.
Wasilla has this for its money:
"It could seat up to 5,000 people and would include an ice rink and a cushioned hard-surface court where people could play basketball, volleyball and soccer, said Jim Blair, with GDM Inc., an Anchorage firm hired by the city to create a conceptual design for the center.
In addition to sports, the center could be set up to host conventions, trade fairs, theater productions, graduations and even motorcoss competitions.."
Evidently no other mayors in America have ever purchased city buildings using debt instruments. </sarcasm>
Meanwhile, Obama was chairman of the board of an organization that spent $109,200,000. Want to know what they have to show for it?
"The project appears to have failed to achieve any of its stated, measurable educational goals. For example, a comprehensive study by the Consortium on Chicago School Research concludes:
"Results suggest that among the schools it supported, the Challenge had little impact on school improvement and student outcomes, with no statistically significant differences between Annenberg and non-Annenberg schools in rates of achievement gain, classroom behavior, student self-efficacy, and social competence."
Obviously you have a definition of smeared that does not include the "Swift Boat (not actually)Veterans for (not anything like)Truth".
You make hyperbolic claims as though Mrs. Palin were some sort of sanctified Joan of Arc riding out to defeat the heretics; when in fact she's nothing more than another corrupt local politician who's gotten lucky in her choice of alignments and is being pushed forward by the fact that she will make a tractable puppet if elected.
This election does not matter, the American people are Fucked no matter which party takes office. And people like you deserve to have their homes taken away, their jobs automated or outsourced, their communications monitored, and to be subject to intrusive social controls.
>> ... and to be subject to intrusive social controls.
Such as having our email accounts broken into and displayed to the whole world, along with the email addresses and personal photos of friends and family.
I would encourage you to explore alternative media (such as the above) rather than just following the conventional "wisdom" of the mainstream media. Just because one group owns all the microphones doesn't mean everything they say is the truth.
The feeling is mutual. I don't agree, however, that Palin's been smeared worse than, say, Barack Obama. From using the dog-whistle politics of racial and religious innuendo to smearing Obama by lying about the nature of his anti-predator legislation in Illinois to connecting him to terror attacks that happened in the 60's, the same good ol' boys club that smeared McCain in 2000 is running his campaign now, using every dirty trick in the book, and acting shocked, shocked that people have the audacity to scrutinize Sarah Palin's record.
The fact is, they're using the sort of up-is-down doublespeak I haven't seen in a First World country outside of 1984. The GOP represents change, but they've been running the country for 8 years. The governor who requested and received more earmarks per capita than any other governor is now an anti-pork reformer. The Obama tax plan will hurt middle class pocketbooks, but his plan cuts taxes more than McCain's does.
This isn't to say that Obama's campaign is perfect, not by a long shot. But even if you prefer McCain's policy positions to Obama's, I don't see how you can deny McCain's running a dirtier campaign. It's not just lying; it's divisive, petty politics. If you disagree with their agenda, you're anti-American. If you criticize Sarah Palin's record, you're a sexist. Never mind that she is on record criticizing Hillary Clinton's accusations of sexism as whining. It's the highest -- or, better, lowest -- form of political cynicism.
The fact is, Sarah Palin deserves scrutiny, just like any other relative unknown selected to be on the presidential ticket of a major national political party. I mean, before a few months ago she didn't know what the VP even did. That's not a smear, that's directly from this interview with her: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4gkPXSDtGQ Watch it, it's scary.
Sure, you can argue that the average American doesn't know what the VP does. Sure, just like Sarah Palin, the average American hasn't been out of the country much. The problem is, I don't want the average American to be the VP. I want someone who's solidly grounded in the issues that the president will deal with, someone who can be trusted to represent the best of our country, not the mediocre. If she's a serious candidate, her ticket ought to let her get vetted like one.
That's all I'm going to say in the thread. I'm trying not to fully engage in this discussion much because once I start, it'll be difficult to stop. It's off-topic for Hacker News anyway. :)
Please provide ... the name of a good civil defense attorney. Public accusations of the criminality of the unconvicted are legally actionable.
... is ill-informed, melodramatic, and weakens what's otherwise a strong post, albeit one whose sentiment I disagree with.
Sarah Palin's a public figure and, unless the person you're responding to is an officer of the court or a news agency of some kind, I don't think he's going to need a "civil defense" attorney for stating his opinion.