Slashdot Mirror


Sarah Palin's Stance On Technology Issues

Revolution Radio writes "BetaNews has a short description of what we might expect from Governor Palin regarding technology issues. She demonstrated her familiarity with the internet by initiating an online education program for state workers, using the web for government transparency, and a supporting the general concept of 'long-distance distribution of services' (similar to net neutrality?)." We've previously discussed Senator Joe Biden's tech voting record and compared the technology platforms of Obama and McCain. In addition to the above story about Palin, Betanews also has analyses of Obama, McCain, and Biden regarding tech policy.

28 of 1,115 comments (clear)

  1. Internet in Alaska by Davemania · · Score: 5, Funny

    They sure can do alot with tubes in Alaska

    1. Re:Internet in Alaska by adisakp · · Score: 5, Informative

      They sure can do alot with tubes in Alaska

      Hey... she knows how to use EBay***

      *** Sarah Palin remarked on her ability to reduce graft by putting a state-owned luxury jet worth $2.7 million dollars on EBay.

      Technically, she told the truth -- her exact quote in her speech was "That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay."

      The whole truth is that the jet never sold on EBay. Sure she "put it on EBay", but if failed to actually ** SELL **. The jet only received one bid and that fell through -- apparently the buyer wasn't "vetted" thoroughly.

      Instead, the plane was sold for $2.1M to Republican entrepeneur Valdez in a no-bid transaction that basically had no oversight at a $600K loss from the original purchase price.

      The same plane sells on the open market through airplane brokers for about $2.4M. Still the $2.1M sale price was $300K below the price she should have expected on the open market if she went through a broker than doing it herself on EBay -- which contrary to Republican opinion, EBay is not the best marketplace to sell a luxury commercial quality jet.

      But selling off a gov't resource to a rich friend of a fellow republican at $300K below market value in a no-bid transaction doesn't sound nearly as down to earth as, "she sold a luxury jet on E-Bay because she likes to drive to work".

      Wanna know how McCain is telling this story now : "You know what i enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold* it on eBay â" made a profit*," McCain said, introducing Palin. (*Technically not true statements)

      . . . Nope, it didn't *SELL* on EBay and it certainly didn't make a profit . . .

    2. Re:Internet in Alaska by Oligonicella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, FUD to you too. The jet was draining the budget, jets require on-going maintenance, even if parked. Getting rid of it saved money. It depreciated, hence the 600K drop from purchase. Where did you find the market value and did you consider transportation? Good spin, though.

    3. Re:Internet in Alaska by adisakp · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry, I should quote my sources. The $300K below market came from the Chicago Tribune. I'm sure you will continue to say that number is just "spin" though because all the press is "liberal media" trying to smear Palin rather than an actual attempt to get news out about an unknown candidate who's suddenly a possible VP for our nation.

      Instead, the 23-year-old 10-seat Westwind II was sold in August 2007 for $2.1 million to a Valdez, Alaska, entrepreneur; that's about $300,000 less than a broker's asking price, according to news accounts. -- Chicago Tribune

      Sarah Palin did not need the jet because she could drive to work. However, there are areas of Alaska where there are only two forms of transportation: airplanes and boat. Any Alaskan can tell you that air transportation would be a necessity for a governor who lived in one of those areas since boat is too slow for state business. However, there is no reason such a governor could not use public air flights instead of a private jet.

      BTW, there is one small mistake in my post, the entrepeneur is not named Valdez but from Valdez. His name is Larry Reynolds and he is a good friend of Republican speaker of the Alaska House, John L. Harris, who brokered the no-bid deal. Reynolds made campaign contributions to both Palin and Harris in 2006 and 2007.

    4. Re:Internet in Alaska by mr_matticus · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry, I should quote my sources. The $300K below market came from the Chicago Tribune.

      It's not $300K below market, but $300K below the offer price. Given the aviation slump, this is not unusual. How about some sources from the time, free of the election spin and the Chicago-spin:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/us/25jet.html?pagewanted=all

      http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=6422443

      Republican speaker of the Alaska House, John L. Harris, who brokered the no-bid deal.

      Not true. The plane was sold through a private aircraft broker named Heckmann, who is anything but a state lackey, having had prior legal encounters with state contracts.

      The final price did indeed end up saving money, given the costs of insurance, storage, maintenance. The bid fell through because the buyer backed out.

      As a lifelong liberal, even I am disgusted at this smear campaign. It's okay for Obama to be selective about stories from the past, but not for Palin? Let's not lose sight of the fact that she pledged to get rid of the plane and did so, responsibly and through a private broker who signed off on the deal.

  2. Hello... Evolution? by Ecuador · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't the fact that if it was up to her our schools would be teaching creationism enough for a Slashdot reader? You can call me a troll/off topic, but I think if we have a FAIL in basic science, technology issues are unimportant.

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:Hello... Evolution? by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Informative

      Isn't the fact that if it was up to her our schools would be teaching creationism enough for a Slashdot reader? You can call me a troll/off topic, but I think if we have a FAIL in basic science, technology issues are unimportant.

      Did you read the article you referenced?

      "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor"
      "As a candidate for governor, Sarah Palin called for teaching creationism alongside evolution in public schools. But after Alaska voters elected her, Palin, now Republican John McCain's presidential running mate, kept her campaign pledge to not push the idea in the schools."
      "When asked during a televised debate in 2006 about evolution and creationism, Palin said, according to the Anchorage Daily News: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.""
      "In a subsequent interview with the Daily News, Palin said discussion of alternative views on the origins of life should be allowed in Alaska classrooms. "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum," she said."
      "Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that if she were elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members."
      "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them."
      "Neither have Palin's socially conservative personal views on issues like abortion and gay marriage been translated into policies during her 20 months as Alaska's chief executive. It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans."

      Sounds like she understands basic science and theory just fine. Also she seems to have a grasp on that "separation of church and state" thing.

    2. Re:Hello... Evolution? by ral8158 · · Score: 5, Informative

      um, Palin's current stance is that doesn't believe that creationism should be taught in school in addition to evolution, but that it should not be a prohibited topic. If you're going to diss a candidate, at least don't act like a raving fool and use actual arguments and assessments.

    3. Re:Hello... Evolution? by zoogies · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Palin sounds so very reasonable when she says those things. Fact is, she believes creationism is an alternative theory on equal grounding with evolution. Psh. "Healthy debate is so important." Hah.

      There's no debate here: evolution is biology, creationism is not.

    4. Re:Hello... Evolution? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Insightful

      yet she does not believe in evolution

      I think she may be confusing evolution with abiogenesis. Most people do.

    5. Re:Hello... Evolution? by kanweg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, I'm one of those people living outside the US borders not worth counting if we get shot because the US must be defended 8000 miles away, and WE are concerned when a (vice) president chooses to ignore facts just because there is something else he/she'd like to believe. Powerful people starting wars because they think their supreme being would like that or just because they have created an environment in which scare mongering over WMD can flourish scares the shit out of us. Your last regime caused tens of thousands of deaths among inhumans, and over 3000 patriots because of that.

      A tendency not to want to hear facts is NOT something we'd like to see. Thank you.

      Bert

    6. Re:Hello... Evolution? by IllForgetMyNickSoonA · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course it does affect the country! Teaching superstitious beliefs in schools (be it the creationism or the Van Daeniken blithering) makes the country (resp. it's residents) dumber and even more ignorant of science.

      Want to teach your kids religion? Fine, send them to church. But leave it out of schools!

    7. Re:Hello... Evolution? by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Although it may garner some lolz from those who agree with you, associating your opponent's stance with straw men does not make your argument any stronger.

      I did nothing of the sort. Flat Earth nutbars and Creationist nutbars have equal weight in the realm of science. Flat Earth Theory and Crationism are nearly identical in their lack of evidence in support of these "theories" and their opposition theories have veritable mountains of evidence on their side, cross-referenced across a multitude of scientific disciplines.

      The only difference between Creationism and Flat Earth is that the most proponents of Flat Earth simply died out, cluctching to their "Truth" until their last breath, leaving a pitiful band of lunatics to carry their mantle. Creationists are still abundant and their bone-headed fight with the rock of the obvious still goes on. But, as such things go, it will be their skulls which crack before the rock gives out, just as it was for the Flat Earthers ...

      The reason I did such a substitution is because Creationists abhor when they are being exposed for what they are, and will do everything in their power to cloak themselves in pretense of "respectability", as if such posturing somehow gave weight to their abject lunacy.

    8. Re:Hello... Evolution? by Digital+End · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Moreover, given the increasing diversity of America's population, the dangers of sectarianism have never been greater. Whatever we once were, we are no longer just a Christian nation; we are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, a Buddhist nation, a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers.
      --Obama

      This is the viewpoint on religion that earned my vote.

      The internet today is an open platform where the demand for websites and services dictates success. You've got barriers to entry that are low and equal for all comers. And it's because the internet is a neutral platform that I can put on this podcast and transmit it over the internet without having to go through some corporate media middleman. I can say what I want without censorship. I don't have to pay a special charge. But the big telephone and cable companies want to change the internet as we know it. They say they want to create high-speed lanes on the internet and strike exclusive contractual arrangements with internet content-providers for access to those high-speed lanes. Those of us who can't pony up the cash for these high-speed connections will be relegated to the slow lanes.

      Allowing the Bells and cable companies to act as gatekeepers with control over internet access would make the internet like cable. A producer-driven market with barriers to entry for website creators and preferential treatment for specific sites based not on merit, the number of hits, but on relationships with the corporate gatekeeper. If there were four or more competitive providers of broadband service to every home, then cable and telephone companies would not be able to create a bidding war for access to the high-speed lanes. But here's the problem. More than 99 percent of households get their broadband services from either cable or a telephone company.

      So here's my view. We can't have a situation in which the corporate duopoly dictates the future of the internet and that's why I'm supporting what is called net neutrality.

      --Obama

      This is why he earned my vote on technology. It was recorded 2 years ago, so he isn't just acting nice for the election.

      He was fighting against the war since not long after it started (I can forgive being blinded by the situation, everyone was.)

      I'm not going to say I agree with all of his views... immigration and gay marrige for example (though to be fair, he's been good with his views on homosexual couples except for being pro-civil union). However, he's 100x better then McCain and his puppet woman.

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master.
  3. Re:Does it matter? by martinw89 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    McCain is 72 and has had cancerous growths. Obama is 47 with a good health record.

  4. Re:Having books removed from libraries... by fremsley471 · · Score: 5, Informative
    That allegation is simply a *fabrication*. It started on Daily Kos - and it's utter nonsense.

    Sorry to disappoint:

    Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." That woman, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor.

    Source http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html

  5. NO by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A vote for a creationist or someone who thinks both is okay is a vote for the U.S. as a backwater religious theocracy. The fact that you seem to think that teaching both in the classroom is "okay" means YOU don't understand the difference between the separation between church and state, or that you don't understand that creationism or intelligent design is NOT science, it it religious dogma masquerading as science. It has no testable hypotheses, it does not teach critical thinking, and it has no place in the science classroom! It does not deserve to be taught both as Palin states and the fact that you think she is "being reasonable" means you fell for the religious propaganda.

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
  6. Re:Creationism == dumb God by arthurpaliden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually Creationism is an affront to God as it teaches us that God, who is supposedly all powerful and all knowing, was not smart enough to develop a dynamic system but had to settle for a static one.

  7. No you don't. by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We learn as much from mistakes as correct actions. (More in some cases)

    Really? So how does a student see a "mistake" after learning Creationism? What does said student "learn" from that "mistake"?

    Seriously, you can teach the difference without saying "Your wrong and have no business being here."

    No, you cannot. Not in a high school science class.

    If you want to teach Creationism, then you do it a class on comparative religions.

    NOT in a science class.

    Do you know how few people can tell the difference between a theory and faith?

    And when you want to teach BOTH in a science class you will only confuse the issue MORE.

    SCIENCE is taught in a science class. Not religion.

    Why do you have a problem with that?

  8. Re:Hello - Libertarian? by Lurker2288 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Thing is, though, she's not even for less government spending. She took plenty of handouts from Ted Stevens until his fortune started to sour, at which point she jumped on the bandwagon in labeling him a pork peddler. She was for the bridge to nowhere, until that became politically sensitive. And from what I've read of her time as mayor, she took a town that had a budget surplus when she came into office and squandered it, taking out loans to cover unnecessary civic works projects and leaving the city with massive debt. Hardly in line with even the most basic libertarian viewpoint.

  9. USA Today Bullshit-o-meter offscale by pallmall1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't usually reply to my own posts, but while looking around further, I found this chart showing the actual federal dollars spent among the states. It also includes spending for the District of Columbia (58.6 BILLION DOLLARS). Alaska received such a small amount that there isn't enough room on the graphic to even write the state's name. The USA Today article referenced in the grandparent post doesn't mention total federal spending per state.

    This kind of bullshit -- trying to show that Alaska is a boondoggle dollar sponge by listing per capita breakdown of a portion of federal spending per state instead of actual totals -- is why people think that the mainstream media is in the tank for Obama.

    --
    3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
    1. Re:USA Today Bullshit-o-meter offscale by RicoX9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your numbers are generic. There is no split of Federal funding on a per-capita basis from what is spent ON the Federal facilities and historic landmarks, defense, etc in the District of Columbia. It isn't a fair comparison when your source number is just a "X$ spent" globule.

      As other posters have noted, the fact that they get more per capita than any other STATE (DC not being a state), and are rolling in so much cash that they send citizens a check every year, is a criminal waste of our money.

  10. Re:Not equal at all by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 5, Informative

    How so - you can observe the earth is not flat, you cannot "observe" a negative like "There is no god" or "God is not directing evolution".

    We can, and did, observe the process of evolution. Note that "God" has nothing whatsoever to do with this physical, replicable in the lab, observable process with mountains of evidence to support it. Just as it is with the shape of the Earth. Creationism on the other hand has exactly zero scientific evidence to support it, very much like the existence of "god".

    Truly a dark day for Slashdot when supposedly scientific people are confusing basics of science like this.

    This statement indicates that it is you who does not grasp even the most fundamental principles of science and wish to confuse your audience with your fained "outrage" as to our supposed scientific "heresy".

  11. Re:Iraq war 'a task that is from God' - Palin by shmlco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If someone thinks that "god" is talking directly to them, then we need to find them a nice little padded room so they can do no harm to themselves nor to others.

    And if "god" wants a pipeline then He can damn well snap His fingers and whip it up Himself. Should be no problem whatsoever for someone who can create an entire universe in a mere six days...

    --
    Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
  12. Re:feels silly by dcroxton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You should feel silly, for making such a joke of a comment. You pre-emptively call anyone who disagrees with you a troll, yet your post is full of completely unsupported assertions about Palin's supposed inability to make independent decisions. If her background says anything, it is that she does not just do what she is told.

    --
    Sincerely, Derek

    A curious little blog
  13. Re:Iraq war 'a task that is from God' - Palin by jensen404 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The AP article you linked:
    "Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God," she said. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan."

    The full quote:
    "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending them out on a task that is from God," she said. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God's plan."

    The AP totally changes the meaning of the quote by starting it in the middle of a sentence.

  14. Re:feels silly by mrseth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's one measure of "readiness" to be president: The ability to face the press. Where is Palin on the Sunday talk shows? She is missing (we do not see Obama hiding from the press). This is highly unusual for a VP candidate. If that Kilkenny letter has any truth in it (and it appears to be legit at first blush), she has a lot to answer for on her record, and our country is in great danger if this person ever gets put into power. I think we have had enough of authoritarians already. I get the impression that she is a female Cheney or Nixon.

  15. Re:feels silly by Rei · · Score: 5, Informative

    What insight. Why didn't I realize that? Palin is more qualified than Obama! Let's just run down the timeline here:

    When Obama was graduating from Columbia University (Ivy League) with a degree in Political Science with a focus in International Relations, Palin was graduating high school and competing in beauty contests.
    When Obama was President of Harvard Law Review, then organizing Chicago's largest voter drive in history and teaching Constitutional Law, Palin was switching between six low-key colleges before finally getting a degree in journalism (polisci minor)
    When Obama was in the state senate drafting over 800 bills (so many that he created a backlog; there's still some working their way through today), Palin was being elected of a tiny town of 5,000 (at the time) with 53 employees that she didn't even control (a city administrator did that) with just over 600 votes. Pushed for policies that drove the town into $22 million dollars of debt -- and that *with* the massive sales tax increase (spending increased ~34% during her tenure) and over $20 million in federal earmarks. $1.5 million of the debt due to bungling an attempt at eminent domain to build a sports complex.
    Obama was elected to the senate from one of the US's largest states with 3.5 million votes, where he has served for twice as long as Palin has been governor (elected with 114,000 votes, to run a state with about as many people as Fort Worth, Texas). Obama served on 13 committees, including the prestigious Foreign Relations Committee, and has met world leaders in dozens of countries across Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Palin got her first passport in 2007, and her campaign claims the following foreign policy experience: Canada, Kuwait, Germany, Ireland, and Russia. Canada because she's crossed the border before. Kuwait because she flew there to visit the Alaska National Guard (never left the base). Germany because she stopped at a base there on the way back (never left the base). Ireland because her plane stopped there to refuel (never left the airport). Russia because "Alaska is close to Russia".
    Hmm... since Obama's senate term (involving sponsoring over 500 bills and drafting over 100, including the most sweeping piece of ethics reform since Watergate) is twice as long, that's probably not a fair comparison. I guess we should merely compare his *presidential campaign*, which is about as long as her governorship. 1.5 million donors versus ~680,000 taxpayers. ~80,000 campaign volunteers versus ~50,000 state employees.

    You're right -- Palin is clearly more experienced!

    --
    Do you work at Taco Bell? The guy at the drive-through said that to me last night.