If that’s true then he was an idiot too. So what?
Yeah, I’m aware ‘Anonymous’ is an amorphous gang, not an individual or even a couple of people. I’m not very proud of my own character, either, because I snickered over their blows to the Scientology empire. In my personal cosmology, the whole Scientologist scam and its minions rank right down there with people who dump biohazard needles just offshore public beaches.
My main point stands: invasion of privacy really stinks, even from self-appointed vigilantes.
Do you have a cite? Not that I don’t trust you, I just don’t recall it. I assume your proximity gives you more information.
You want to just make up a crime? How does this constitute any kind of interference with an election?
I’d really like to be able to say I agree with this, but I just can’t.
Bear in mind I’m saying this as both an independent and a rat bastard. If she’s using her personal email account to conduct what is essentially public government business just to dodge having to keep things on record, she doesn’t get to hide behind privacy. If she started throwing government business that should be on record on to her personal account, it’s not her personal account anymore.
Either way, Anonymous committed a crime and should be punished if caught.
Sorry, I think I misread your post. But well, people who didn’t know who they were before know now…or something…
::blinks::
No prob, pepper. My post wasn’t all that clear, and your elaboration on Anonymous was great, IMO. My follow-up blather was mostly to express discomfort on the limits of my own ethics. But what if sneak attacks are used against a really, really bad target, like Scientology, say…
Gack. Damned slippery slopes and all that.
As another Independent and rat bastard, I agree. I don’t think her personal e-mail is sacrosanct in the sense of being beyond the law. As a public official, it’s absolutely fair game for investigators. My problem is with self-appointed vigilantes delving into it–or into anyone’s private sphere. Not their role, not their authority.
If Palin in fact conducted official business via her personal e-mail then hey, sucks to be her, not the least for such a hopelessly clumsy, stupid attempt at evasion. Stuff blown across the internet may do some very temporary damage among a limited group of people. And probably not Palin’s core supporters. Full legal discovery might have some legs and crediblity.
I can understand that, but personally I have a bigger problem with a government official pulling this crap to avoid transparency than somebody hacking them to expose it.
True. It’d also be better if they hadn’t done such a half assed job of it and actually pulled some evidence off before the accounts and possibly any evidence were deleted.
Actually, how they ‘hacked’ it? Her secret ‘I forgot my password’ question was ‘What is my zip code?’
… I jest thee not.
Geez, I can’t believe that’s a recover-your-password question. And it makes me nervous. One of my secret questions (I’m not telling you jerks what it’s to, though) is “What is your father’s middle name?” Now, none of you know my father’s first name, let alone his middle name. But if you were really psycho and really, really wanted to know, it wouldn’t be impossible to find out. And if I were, say, running for Vice President, it’d probably be in my Wikipedia article. (Sarah Palin’s wiki article only gives her dad’s middle initial, though. WHEW.)
If I were a public figure, I’d be INCREDIBLY nervous about being hacked. It looks really shockingly easy given how readily available all this information is.
Oh, and count me in as another liberal who thinks this is really disgusting.
You’re entitled to that opinion. I am entitled to mine. When you make a OP that pretty much defines the wrong doing as “the campaign” then links to a clearly left wing partisan site, I find the implication clear. The fact that it follows pretty much the Republican Dirty Tactics 101, and I now learn that the OP is a conservative, well lets say I find his denials unconvincing.
Regardless of your views of other posters, they are not the topic of this thread and issuing backhanded compliments (and barely disguised insults) are not appropriate to this thread.
Leave it for the Pit or a private discussion.
= = =
And on the subject, Stuffy, everyone got your original point. Unfortunately, having made your point you then had to go out of your way to make sarcastic comments about another poster that were totally irrelevant to the discussion.
Take it elsewhere.
[ /Moderating ]
I apologize. I have been monitoring a couple of GD threads, came to this thread from a separate link, and did not realize that this was actually in the Pit.
I guess you can go on being as nasty as you wish (although I still think it is a bit pointless).
[ /Not Moderating ]
Stuffy, read my OP again. I did not say that the “the campaign” did anything wrong, and, if that wasn’t clear enough, I re-iterated it again. My complaint is against people who are so partisan that even if one of their own does something wrong, they are so blinded by their hatred for the other side that they not only are willing to let it slide but also encourage it. Please show me where I said that the campaign or anyone connected with it was responsible.
Are there conservatives who will latch on to this for gain? Sadly, yes… I agree with you. But that has nothing to do with my point.
In any event, I invite you to peruse the following two links from the 2004 campaign. In the first one, I comment on a stupid paranoid statement made by a Republican. In the second, I call out both parties for their meanness, vindictiveness and demonization of the other side.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=275845&highlight=kerry
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=282934&highlight=kerry
Do you know what my problem is, Stuffy? It’s the lack of civil discourse in America today. I know that I can disagree with someone on an issue and yet hold an intelligent debate with them. I don’t have to resort to name calling, demonization or making the assumption that they’re doing it because they have some hidden agenda. The fact that we simply can’t have a disagreement without all the partisanship, the fact that every debate has to be completely good vs. evil. Well, I’m sick of it. The very fact that you’re accusing me of having a hidden agenda is just simply an example of this. To you, it’s not possible that a conservative could honestly make a legitimate complaint about partisanship on the part of Democrats. And, despite your assertions, had the example been the other way, I would make the exact same point.
I’ve been sick of what has happened to the political process in this country for the last eight years.* It’s become needlessly vile – and that goes for both sides.
Zev Steinhardt
begone, foul confusion.
Tom’s corrected himself.
Oh, and Stuffy… In my second link, make sure you read my posts beyond the OP… I take conservatives to task in that thread.
(BTW, you’re in that thread too.)
Zev Steinhardt
Ok zev, I went outside and took a deep breath. You know what, I’m open to being wrong, it wouldn’t be the first time, and won’t be the last (nobody tell my wife I said that). Like you I’m getting so sick of crap like I’ve posted about that I’m starting to see it, even if it may not have been there. I’ve pulled back from the election this year, for the first time in my adult life I’m neither volunteering, hell I might not even vote. I’m so sick of this shit! Anyway, I only vaguely remember but you seem to have impressed other members with your previous history as an honorable poster so I’ll accept that and let this go. To the other posters I’ve engaged, accept my apologies if I’ve come off as an ass. I’m sure that won’t be the last time either.
Regards
Stuffy
Fine by me. FWIW
Don’t worry about it. There have been plenty of times that I’ve misread posts and there have been times that I’ve gotten bent out of shape over an issue. Happens to all of us.
Zev Steinhardt