Slashdot Mirror
Sarah Palin 'Target WikiLeaks Like Taliban'
DMandPenfold writes "Sarah Palin, who is widely tipped as a possible Republican candidate for president in 2012, has said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange should be hunted down in the way armed forces are targeting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda." So that means we should spend billions of dollars and not catch him? Good plan.
Thanks for your cutting edge, witty commentary.
Right or wrong, if you kill him becomes a martyr. What a surprise that Sarah Palin didn't think before she spoke.
You know who we have to blame for her, right?
John McCain. What the heck was the man thinking? If he'd picked his VP candidate with an eye to win, instead of just throwing a dart then we'd be far better off. Even though I wouldn't have wanted his hypocritical, principal betraying, lying ass in the Oval Office, at least with a decent VP we'd not have had the horror that is Sarah Palin inflicted on the nation at large. She'd just be some obscure Alaska Governor waiting for the snows to come in and counting all the oil money.
Curse you!
Who cares what Sarah Palin thinks? This isn't news, for anybody.
Gone!
She is unelectable, why the hell does the media pay so much attention to her? She has to be the most hated political figure in the US for the left/left leaning middle. The dumbest thing the republicans could possibly do is run her in 2012.
What she and her supporters have not figured out is that they get so much attention because it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion. It's entertainment not politics.
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
The Taliban is responsible, directly and demonstrably, for a great many deaths, both in the US and abroad.
The number of deaths that can be traced to Assange is... how many? How indirectly?
If he is in fact guilty of the actual physical crimes of which he's accused, he should be pursued and prosecuted proportionally to them. But when you equate "taking America down a peg" with mass murder... it makes you realize why Assange is doing what he's doing.
It feels as if America has lost its glory, pursuing its reputation like a bully. I think we're still better than that. But the last election didn't tell me so as clearly as I'd like, and the next election may explicitly contradict me.
Nothing says "land of the free, home of the brave" than a quitter comparing a journalistic outfit that leaks embarassing data that the US and others don't want to be revealed to a theocratic government that opposes most fundamental freedoms. And yet, her base will eat this up.
My Sysadmin Blog
I think people keep talking about her as proof that they aren't lying when they tell their kids they be anything when the grow up.
The problem with both parties is that we can't keep the dumbest 2% of us off the television.
"Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
I haven't figured out all the blame is trying to focus on Wikileaks/Assange. To the point where people are being polled on if Assange should be charged with treason. I'm almost certain you need to be a US citizen before you can be charged with treason against the US.... Further, Assange didn't sign any agreements with the US gov't that he wouldn't release their information, that was the original informant. The information isn't (or shouldn't be) copyrighted, so the only thing to prevent anyone from distributing it is signing what is essentially an NDA.
Palin just lost my vote.
Seriously? *This* is what did it for you?
"He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
Remember? And the Tea Party dipshits hadn't even gotten started then. If you don't think this clown is electable, you haven't spent enough time in the flyover states.
Sent from the iPad I found in your car.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I just saw a headline teaser on the TV that suggested that the Interpol alert on Assange has been lifted. Perhaps someone at Interpol was finally clued in that Assange was not the sort of person they are supposed to be looking for?
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Ron Paul is worthless?
In the sense that what he wants has roughly zero bearing on what Congress actually does, yeah.
Does anyone -seriously- think that if Assange were locked up / killed / whatever, that this sort of thing would stop?
While he's more than "just a public face" in this issue, it isn't like Wikileaks would die with him, or that some successor wouldn't be spawned.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
What she and her supporters have not figured out is that they get so much attention because it's like watching a train wreck in slow motion. It's entertainment not politics.
Well, to her credit, she has a lot of followers. Despite many faux pas she's made that would have left anyone else gelded, she somehow keeps drumming up support. I'm not too educated on the numbers now for tea partiers versus non-tea partying Republicans but I think it would be a deathly schism for the Republican party. The two large parties can't afford to break off into chunks and therefore it's going to be the most supported candidate that gets the nod. Right now, who else is there?
There have been countless stupid quotes and moves by Sarah Palin where I've thought "Wow, well, at least she's finally done for." And yet she comes out of it. She starts working for Fox News and injects her own little two cents into everything and I'm thinking, "Look at all this material for a potential opponent to use against her." Yet she grows in popularity! She gets a reality show on some cable TV show called "Sarah Palin's Alaska" (like she owns the state) and I think "Well, finally, she's jumping the shark." Yet people are watching it in respectable TV viewing numbers! She releases a book that rips apart JFK and yet somehow she comes out still being followed. What gives?
In my humble opinion, as someone coming from the rural mid-west and now living in the urban east coast, you are talking about a populace you don't understand. People are watching her, reading her books and identifying with her at an alarming rate. To claim that everyone one of her supporters is driving from Ohio and other states to see her and Glenn Beck on the mall just to 'observe a train wreck' only exacerbates the problem and further removes you from what's really going on. America is just as polarized as they were during the elections and the Republican party -- though strong -- is encountering a weird kind of fragmentation for better or for worse.
Politics is entertainment just like sports are entertainment. But most spectators are cheering for someone.
It's easy for us to dismiss them but that only adds to their persecution complex. I don't know what the answer is but I prefer to listen to them and then try to reason with them instead of writing them off. There's bigger numbers in different parts of the country and I'm not a fan of watching Glenn Beck prey on people who are suffering right now. It downright sickens me.
My work here is dung.
I once thought some guy from Texas born with a silver foot in his mouth, who had basically relied on daddy's friends and connections his entire adult life, would have been equally unelectable. I was disastrously wrong.
I am officially gone from
You know, it's things like that that tend to set me off. Open information is essential to freedom, and the US found it quite delightful when WL exposed other countries. But now that it's coming to light that our own country has a lot to hide, it must be stopped? I don't think so. Get the information out there, shame the ones knowingly acting dishonestly and work to let them know it is not acceptable. People in power are always willing to bend the rules for what they feel is 'good reason'. Problem is, that so called good reason tends to expand quickly. I don't know what the fix is for the situation, but I do know that it will involve a lot more sites like WL. If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear. Or so the government tells us. Interesting how that doesn't seem to go both ways, that needs to change, in a big way.
Question reality.
Entertainment is fun but you go home afterwards. Politics wrecks lives, like a show where you are forced to live with the bad outcome
I just wish "small government" weren't such a huge lie. All of these "small government" republicans are saying is that they want to spend more money on their things and less on everyone else's.
After 9 years of hunting Bin Laden.. Assange is safe from the US for a while!
But I don't now about US Army's external sub-contractors illegally arresting, detaining and torturing half of the Swedish population.
Nor the US Army overthrowing the government of Norway, on the grounds that they might have had supported Sweden and might also have servers for mass-hosting of leaks in possession (although independent reports from the UN deny both of these fears).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
What do you think she'd be doing with her life? Truck stop waitress?
No, truck stop waitresses have to have personality and organizational skills and some sense of reality.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
And then I voted for him in 2008.....things change. Still, I agree, she's pretty much unelectable in my mind.
Obama's only real problem was overcoming racism. He was a barely left of center (for the US at least) charasmatic politician running against that party that America was fed up with. In the 2008 election, his race and his name were really the only things that anyone focused on when attacking him.
Palin's problem was, and still remains overcoming the bad press she generates by being a mouth breathing half-wit (although the coaching she received while sequestered for a month after completely whiffing all the softballs Katie Couric was lobbing at her helped a bit). She really only appeals to people who are just as backwards, authoritarian and unintelligent as she is. Unfortunately, that demographic seems to be taking over this country.
Speaking as a non-american, I'd call it a win-win. Either she loses the race for the GOP or the rest of the world has incontrovertible proof that the US has become a nation that worships morons. Besides, can you imagine what John Stewart could do with 4 years of Palin? :)
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
I wonder if any of the original Founders would be electable.
George Washington was a war hero, so yeah probably, but I doubt we'd see John Adams or Thomas Jefferson get into the modern presidency..... which is rather sad when you think about it. Adams would be labeled a "nerd" and "too ill to serve" while Jefferson would be labeled an anti-government anarchist (like Ron Paul gets labeled) and crushed by the modern media.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Never insult someone when they've publicly stated they agree with you. It makes you look petty and discourages others from changing their opinions in favor of yours in the future.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
She couldn't even handle serving out her term as governor of Alaska. How does anything think she's qualified to be President?
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
Sarah Palin is going to target Julian Assange? With what sweetheart? Your caribou hunting rifle? Somehow I don't think it has the range to reach the UK, or wherever he is sitting these days.
No, honestly Sarah, what in the hell does your statement mean? Are you going to commit troops and military resources to "get him?" How are you going to do that since you are not in charge of any executive branch of any government in the entire world? Or does your current employer (isn't it Fox News nowadays?) have it's own private army that you can summon up just as easily as dipping into the petty cash?
Here's an idea, Sweetheart, instead of all the political grandstanding about what you are going to do to some dude on the other side of the world, why don't you put your money where your mouth is and actually try to go after him yourself? You don't want to break a nail? You don't want to put in the money or effort of conducting a manhunt? Well neither do the rest of us, nor do the citizens of the rest of the world, nor do most members of the U.S. military from what I can gather. We are tired of you politico retards, whom seem so adept at living with your heads on a completely different plain of reality, committing our resources, time, and efforts to some wild goose-chases that don't seem to produce any results anyways (Where is that last guy we went on a manhunt for? What was his name again? Osama Bin Something?). Nah, if you're really so outraged at Assange, go do your dirty work yourself. The rest of us are sick and tired of shoveling the shit for you student-body president, prom queen, princes and princesses that seem to think world politics is a popularity contest and a game.
For the tl:dr crowd, "Sarah, you're a stuck up, dolled up, dumb shit that isn't fit to find the path for getting your head out of your ass, much less hunting down a man on the other side of the world."
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
I had never been ashamed of the American people (not to be confused with the American government) until the day Bush was re-elected.
Loading...
I'm no Palin fan, but sometimes I wonder if you guys read the article before posting....
'Palin continued: “His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders?"'
Her point is that he went beyond whistleblowing. I don't see how that's any dumber that what some of you are posting here.
Speaking as a mostly leftist, I would rather see Obama on the republican nomination, so that maybe we can get a real left candidate.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
What do you think she'd be doing with her life? Truck stop waitress?
No, truck stop waitresses have to have personality and organizational skills and some sense of reality.
And they generally finish their shifts.
Drill baby drill - on Mars
Palin's goals are summed up by my favorite demotivator.
"Consulting: Because if you're not part of the solution, there's good money in prolonging the problem."
She very quickly / shrewdly realized that sitting on the sidelines jabbering away about "what's wrong with America" is an *insanely* profitable career. A career where your decisions can never be proven wrong. (Obama can make the wrong decisions, but Palin, Moore, Limbaugh, et al. never have that problem because they just offer *opinions* about decisions someone else makes.)
In short, she's exactly where she belongs and I wonder if she's smart enough to know it. Armchair Quarterbacks never, ever, ever get sacked. The only truly stupid thing could do would be to actually run for office again.
There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell 'em.
She fucking well quit halfway through her first term, for no good reason. She is a joke. I'd rather be a nameless nobody than a proven joke.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
It's not the size of government that matters so much as the quality of government.
To me the emphasis on quantity and not quality shows how stupid people are.
Making all that effort to solve the wrong problem. What good is it if you have achieved a government of size X, but it's still bad?
Sad really that so many supposedly smart people are that stupid.
I voted for Al Gore in 2000 (I had just turned 18). I didn't vote in 2004, as there were no good candidates, and I voted for Obama in 2008 (and will vote for him again in 2012). I'm not happy with GM being bailed out (I own a huge amount of Toyota stock, and now Tesla Motors stock), but understand it was necessary to prevent the loss of millions of auto supply chain jobs. I like universal healthcare (you live in a society you twit, the wealth you have is only available to you because of the structure of society, and society has a cost) vs people going bankrupt and for-profit companies reaping hundreds of millions of dollars.
It appears though that we both agree that Palin would be a destructive force if put into office. Shall we roll up our sleeves and work together on this? I'm for fiscal responsibility and smaller government, but am also pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, and pro-universal healthcare.
Regular people like us can try to compromise, or we can take the nuclear option and use our resources to try to hammer the other folks into the ground. I'd much prefer the former over the latter.
8 years as Illinois Senator. 4 years as US Senator. President of Harvard Law Review. Civil rights attourney. Teacher at UChicago law school ... Ignoring his other community works, what exactly counts as being "productive" in your world?
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Palin's popularity is just an extension of the trend started by Bush - the celebration of naiveté and simplemindedness. Somehow, critical thought and intelligence have become "elitist" traits, while simpletons like Palin are good, honest folk who can be trusted. Until America gets past this unfortunate and destructive paradigm, things will only get worse.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
Still is. False dichotomy? CNN vs. Fox.
They both support a corporate kleptocratic power, which masquerades behind statist rhetoric, to subvert both the functional sovereignty of government and the republican enfranchisement of the people.
The "divide and conquer" tactic of using false right/left pseudo-ideology pits the population against itself, and diverts its energy into fighting non-issues, with no hope of affecting meaningful outcomes.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
That's just it, there is no such animal as a small government type, in government. Whatever they were before they got into government, once they are there, they are for "big government." Republicans do not want a small government, they just want to do away with the parts they don't want (social programs, regulatory agencies, pork for other states) and increase the parts they do want (farm subsidies, the military, pork for their state.) If Republicans wanted small government, they could have it. Al they would have to do is stop taking federal money taken from the taxes of the rich, blue states. They could have their small government quite easily.
Take a look at who pays, and who receives. Poor Republican states are leaching off the rich Democratic states. If Republicans wanted small government and fiscal responsibility, they would pay their own way in their own states.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Setting aside the accusations of rape in Sweden, what US law has Assange been accused of breaking?
In the current Wikileaks drama, it's interesting to note that Wikileaks has only presented the exact same documents with the same redactions as the New York Times, who has done so with the cooperation and informed consent of the State Department. As far as I know, he hasn't even been accused of a crime, and has certainly not been convicted of a crime that has a punishment consistent with what Ms. Palin is suggesting.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I don't care for Kerry, although any average amphibian would be a better choice than Bush, but to say you're being subjective about what Kerry did in 1971 (not 1973.)
Kerry went to Paris and met with BOTH sides that were attempting to negotiate peace. He went there in the presence of other US government officials, for example Senator Vance Hartke. He didn't attempt to negotiate anything with the North Vietnamese as you so clearly allude. He came back and told congress that his primary concern was getting back POWs and that he believed setting a timetable for a withdrawal from Vietnam would result in the immediate return of POWs.
He didn't commit treason, he did less than a US Senator did in meeting with the same parties FOR THE SAME REASON.
FFS, isn't anyone capable of being objective anymore? I don't want Kerry running the government, but I don't have to lie/slander/deceive people about him (a la Ann Coulter.)
Loading...
i would respectfully say that those who run aid the rise of ignorance. you should stay and fight for your country. because when you run away from problems they only grow. soon you'll be running away from wherever you ran to, when a palin pops up there too
people who run away from problems like palin, or avoid the subject, or don't vote out of ambivalence or cynicism: they aid the rise of ignorance. because if you don't fight ignorance, who will? take responsibility for YOUR country, and mold YOUR country in your image. or someone else will. and then you have no right to complain, because you didn't exert any effort. the image of the usa is up for grabs, its always up for grabs. and its image is claimed by those who exert effort to mold that image
if you give up in cynicism and do nothing or run away, then you are perhaps even worse than the idiots who follow palin: at least they are DOING something, even if a false cause. those who exert effort in a false cause are better than those who know what is right, but do nothing. i firmly believe that
there is no excuse for lack of effort, and then complaining when things don't go your way. your enemies are rich and powerful, yes. as if that should stop you in the noble fight for what is right. so get fighting, or be worse than a palin supporter, in my eyes at least
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The problem with logically debating a Sarah Palin / Glenn Beck supporter is that by the time they've supported either one of those two crazies, they've already lost all respect for logic and intellectual debate. You might as well get in a screaming match with someone about whether its better to believe in invisible pink unicorns or to have a dragon in your garage.
When someone makes a move
Of which we don't approve,
Who is it that always intervenes?
U.N. and O.A.S.,
They have their place, I guess,
But first send the Marines!
We'll send them all we've got,
John Wayne and Randolph Scott,
Remember those exciting fighting scenes?
To the shores of Tripoli,
But not to Mississippoli,
What do we do? We send the Marines!
For might makes right,
And till they've seen the light,
They've got to be protected,
All their rights respected,
'Till somebody we like can be elected.
Members of the corps
All hate the thought of war,
They'd rather kill them off by peaceful means.
Stop calling it aggression,
O we hate that expression.
We only want the world to know
That we support the status quo.
They love us everywhere we go,
So when in doubt,
Send the Marines!
You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
Yeah... a hell of a lot of Europeans thought the same thing back in 00/01 about Bush jnr. That he was so damn stupid/daft/incompetent that there's no way he would pull enough votes.
And he didn't.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
Schwarzenegger was a self-made millionaire before he became a movie star.