And the funny, cross-eyed pic of her daughter fit the bill there?
Never said it was and added a post later to make the point explicit.
For heaven’s sake, it’s still wrong.
It’s really simple – if you wouldn’t want it done to you, then it’s wrong. If the circumstances were exactly reversed and Biden’s email account was hacked, they’d be rightfully outraged. The point isn’t the actions of the hackers, it’s the blindness of people to the doing of wrong in the pursuit of a goal.
Strongly Left-leaning voter here who agrees completely. Justifying a wrong by pointing to someone else’s wrong (or alleged wrong, in this case) is improper no matter who is doing it.
Politically, it’s a bad move as well. It generates sympathy for Palin and detracts from the investigation. Even if nothing actually resulted from the investigation until after the election, she would have been left to twist between now and then. This gives her an out.
Actually I didn’t read it carefully enough. In that case, I just disagree. I’m a counterexample of one. Maybe I’m not “these people”. Are you talking about just the DU posters, or the whole country, or what?
The only possible reference that I can think of is a comment I made years ago about if something walked like a duck, etc. But that was a comment with regard to religion, not politics. IIRC, it had to do with a Jews for Jesus thread (although I could be mistaken on the last point).
Gotta agree with you, Zev. As an outside observer, it seems to me that the level of partisan heat (and consequent bad behaviour by partisans of both sides) is higher in this campaign than I remember from previous US POTUS campaigns.
What kind of an idiot Governor uses a fucking Yahoo account to conduct state business?
Still, it was wrong to hack it. Not only is it an invasion of privacy, it’s stupid. It does nothing for Obama politically and just feeds into the victim card for Palin.
Do the hacked e-mails confirm that she was using the account to conduct official business?
Because it seems that everyone has parsed “Palin has come under fire for using private e-mail accounts to conduct state business. Critics allege that she uses the account to get around public records laws, as the Bush administration has also been charged with doing…” as actual confirmation that she uses the account for official business. But I don’t see where it says that, nor any confirmation of it.
The hacking was wrong, period. There’s no excuse for it under any circumstances short of a court order. It is, in my opinion, a completely separate issue from the question of Palin’s use of personal email accounts for official business.
Personally, i think that if it becomes clear that politicians are using personal email accounts to get around public records laws, then those laws need to be rewritten in such a way that any correspondence related to a public official’s work—whether conducted on a government email account or a personal one—must be preserved.
I don’t know about Alaska, but here in Florida we have something called a “Sunshine Law” that requires that the public be allowed access to most government exchange. Mrs. Palin would probably be subject to impeachment if she tried that shit here.
A few questions for those who abhor it:
[ul]
[li]If there is a working Wikileak link with alleged nefarious shenanigans, do you click the link? [/li][li]If there is a news story about what the emails contain, do you turn the channel/not read it?[/li][li]If there is something substantive in the emails, should the NY Times et al ignore it?[/li][li]If there is a post with email contents, should they be in [spoiler] tags?[/li][li]Does it matter whether or not the emails pertain to official business or personal matters?[/li][li]How do you determine whether the emails are personal or official without reading them? [/ul][/li]
If this is traced back to the campaign, in any way shape or form — even tenuously — could this turn into a fork-worthy incident? Though I sincerely doubt anyone in the upper echelons was aware/authorized it, it’s surely a Watergate-level invasion.
The Rove angle is also interesting. Granted, it approaches New Coke-level conspiracy thinking, but putting something like this out there for a few days of titillation, then having it be discovered that there really isn’t anything there goes a long way to exoneration in the mind of the public. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Rove told Palin to delete X, Y, and Z, then change her password to pitbull08 to see what happens.
And yeah, I thought anonymous was Scientology-focused. Do I have my groups mixed up?
Well, the thing is that Anonymous goes after anyone and anything they want to- they’re not really an organized group. That very aspect of their existence makes the “Rove planned it” conspiracy theory a bit more attractive- there’s no official Anonymous leader who can say, “Uh, no, we didn’t do it.”
Of course, I think it’s more likely that they DID actually do it, but that it was a hack that Palin/Rove kinda wanted to happen anyway.
It’s even more likely, though, that the situation is exactly what it looks like- that Anon DID hack it. Find out who did it, and bust their asses.
That said, Palin was an idiot for using Yahoo mail for official business.