Slashdot Mirror
Wikipedia Edits Forecast Romney's Vice Presidential Pick
Hugh Pickens writes writes "In 2008, as The Washington Post wrote at the time, 'just hours before [Sen. John] McCain declared his veep choice of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, her Wiki page saw a flurry of activity, with editors adding details about Palin's approval rating and husband's employment. ... Palin's entry was updated at least 68 times, with at least an additional 54 changes made to her entry over the preceding five days.' The obvious — in hindsight — implications of the Wiki activity: Aides were going into the entries to tune them up and clean out any material that was either embarrassing or erroneous. Now Mark Memmott writes on NPR that today's Wikipedia activity may lend a clue to Mitt Romney's vice presidential pick, expected to be announced within a few days. So what's going on now with some of those said to be among the leading possibilities to be joining Mitt Romney on the Republican ticket? On August 7, Rob Portman's Wikipedia page was revised 100 times, the Wikipedia page for Marco Rubio was revised 22 times, and the page for Tim Pawlenty was revised only 5 times. Of course, Memmott adds, somebody who knows about the 2008 Wiki tea leaves may just be messing with our minds."
This is genius. When the Colbert Nation descends upon a Wikipedia page, Wikipedia blocks it out, making any "real" covert updates difficult or impossible. How is Wikipedia supposed to tell the difference between an active Colbert viewer and a campaign shill?
Will the ability (or lack thereof) to apply wiki "make-up" to a potential VP influence the selection?
Ever since they realized they could "Change history" by editing the facts to match Sarah Palin's version of Paul Revere's ride.
Reid will not comment on the matter unless he his on the floor of the Senate. This is because Reid is protected from being sued for telling a lie as long as he is on the Senate floor. You wont see him repeating his lies on the Sunday shows because he can be personally sued for making false statements.
"In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash"
As opposed to your little ad hominem?
I am no paid shill, nor does the USA have socialists in power and I went to both public and private schools.
Way to be wrong on pretty much all accounts.
Good for you, now go talk to the ones holding the "Keep government out of medicare" signs about that.
I would like to inform you that sometimes government intrusion is needed for freedom. Without government intrusion you could not own land, as I could just take it.
So you think that Romney didn't pay ANY taxes for 10 years and the IRS just let it go?
I think I'm going to side on Reid is a moron.
"In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash"
So you think that Romney didn't pay ANY taxes for 10 years and the IRS just let it go?
There are many ways to make millions and not pay taxes. You just need good lawyers and accountants.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Idiots like you often confuse "smaller government" with "no government".
Government provides the legal context for property ownership. That's good. Government also interferes with your use of that land. That's bad.
Just Google "Oregon, man jailed for storing rainwater". Yes, Government is telling this guy that rain water that falls from his roof cannot be stored in a pond his land. In fact, they are putting him in jail for doing so. That's the state government. If he was able to do it, you can be sure that the EPA would be there telling him what he could or couldn't do with the pond.
That is the government that the Tea Party is against.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Everything I read from actual economists indicates that the stimulus worked in that the economy would have been much worse off if it hadn't been done. The stimulus didn't instantly fix everything, but it prevented things from truly entering Great Depression level suckage. I am personally much better off now than I was four years ago, and while Obama is disappointing in many areas, Romney outright terrifies me.
My disappointment with the stimulus is that during the first year or so, Obama could have done a whole lot more to reign in the banks that caused this mess in the first place, or at least tried to. He should have pushed hard to toughen up regulations on banks and big business in general, and also break up some of the bigger institutions so they wouldn't be "too big to fail."
"Obamacare" is disappointing, but only because it really isn't socialized medicine. I'm against the socialization/nationalization of many things, however I'd accept Canada-style healthcare over what we have now absolutely any day. It makes sense in modern society that essential healthcare be considered a fundamental service.
The biggest hit to the the US during Obama's term was the credit rating downgrade. However this was directly caused by Republicans who were literally suggesting that the US default on its debt, including someone who at the time was being taken seriously as a contender for the GOP nomination. The fact that that people who suggest we simply not pay our bills are considered electable also terrifies me.
At this point I'm not sure what Obama could do directly to create employment aside from trying to get the government to hire more (which would mean more government spending, something the GOP will lambast him for). Simply lowering taxes for the rich and corporations will not help, not in the era of globalization. The best he could do is try to create incentives for companies to hire American citizens on American soil (especially Americans who will be involved with the direct production of goods, such as manufacturing), create heavy disincentives for offshoring and using foreign contractors, and also potentially disincentives for consumers buying foreign-made goods. (I'm certain the GOP would also decry such attempts as socialism!)
They shouldn't have to be, but when you run for political office, there's a tacit understanding that you no longer have the degree of privacy you would have if you were just Joe Q. Citizen. Sure, you can refuse to show your tax records at that point, but your opponents and the electorate are also free to draw whatever conclusions they want from that.
The underlying point here is that political damage doesn't have to be logical, rational or, hell, even right. But damage is damage nonetheless. A lot of Republicans are really getting concerned that the longer Romney refuses the more people will assume he has something nasty to hide, so that even if it is nothing more than a bit embarrassing when and if it does come to light, he will have already put too many holes in the hull of his campaign.
Here's my advice for anyone running for public office. If you value your privacy, don't bother. They are mutually exclusive.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I'd like him to make a deal with Obama..Mitt releases these tax returns....and Obama opens up all his college transcripts/records for his years in school....
All of that should provide some interesting fodder for the press......
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Make the taxes on investment income far more progressive than the normal tax code and suddenly it doesn't effect any of the average folks you're trying to protect. Oh but wait, this whole "increased taxes are bad for everyone" motif is just a ruse, so you were being hypothetical and not seeking an actual answer that would solve problems. Sorry, carry on.