Does the tail wag the dog?
Where are all the liberals now?
Seems like all the news coverage did nothing and went no where.
When will be begin to see the liberals emails, that would produce a lot of scandals, or is that not of interest to the media?
Why should it matter about the Sarah Palin emails, and who really cares anyway?
This issue brings to light a lot of questions about the designs of a potentially biased and out of control liberal agenda that allegedly some people are very concerned with. One of the problems we face is that in many instances the media is taking only one side in the political structure of this country.
This creates a disparity and it creates a false sense of fact.
This is a problem for many reasons, the most important of which is that the media is in some cases deceiving the American public into believing a certain thing, when facts may not support that way of thinking.
It is disturbing because of the way the FTC is beginning to define commercials and what is consumed by the public, in some cases it might be viewed as a crime in the future, if an alleged biased media company publishes an opinion or if that news company engages in what could be considered deceptive speech then we might have a condition where censorship might be preferable to the obvious bias that has become a large part of what Americans have come to expect from the news.
When you consider the implications, that are present here you have to think seriously about what it means when a news organization takes an interest in only one party in this case the alleged biased media have show an interest in former Governor Sarah Palin’s emails, considering the issues of privacy attached here, when will see democrat emails being scrutinized, as seriously as Sarah Palin is now.
So, this really opens up the subject of how long it will be before all politicians are subject to having their emails read long after they are out of office and for what purpose would it be?
Why would it make a news story?
Unless there is some equal disclosure of democratic governors or other candidates that are running or might run for office, notice how there seems to be a lack of jurisdiction here.
Sarah Palin is no longer the Governor of Alaska, she is not running for any office, she is a private citizen.
So on what terms did this mass exposure of private material occur?
Could you be next, might you have at some point in your past had a private email discussion, did you have the right to expect you would have privacy?
Should we start to allow full disclosure of all public officials emails?
If not why not?
Because I am sure that the emails of democratic elected officials would be equally interesting to the media.
Should we not have access to all these emails of every elected official?
If not then why not and if why not then why Sarah Palin?
What makes her emails subject to the freedom of information act?
If Sarah Palin had no reasonable expectation of privacy then how can anyone have any expectation of privacy, should we now begin to stop using the internet, because it has been subjected to a double standard of jurisprudence prudence?
(yes, it is totally subjective and that is the object of this article)
I find it interesting here that we can disclose emails when its Sarah Palin but other public officials that perhaps are allegedly biased along with the media are not subject to those same standards.
I find it very interesting that the media thinks that so many people out there are not smart enough to figure this out, perhaps they will begin to take notice when the election of 2012 does not come out the way they think it will or more precisely the way they have hoped to influence the outcome of the election.
One thing remains clear, no one is being fooled.