Categories
Politics

Sarah Palin Emails

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.

Categories
911 aclu

Arizona shooting could security have prevented it?

Every aspect of this tragedy has been covered, right? Perhaps not, while everyone has been trying to point the

We have seen 24 hour coverage on this horrible and tragic even over the last few days, and even seen the Pima county Sheriff come out and blame it on politics, which of course he has admitted he has no proof, however the real story here is Where was Dupnik when this happened, could he have prevented this terrible crime?

Could any reasonable Law enforcement official, who had alleged previous contact with this alleged criminal, have foreseen this event?

Had there been security would this alleged shooter been able to do what the did do?

Since Dupnik seems to want to politicize this thing, Where was he and his deputies, when this tragedy unfolded?

There were signs, the story is coming out now that more and more people saw the signs that something could happen but no one did anything, including the Sheriff, this is a sad thing to know that this could have been prevented if only the sherrif had been on duty at this event, some have said that there was no security, and if that is true it is a very sad thing. But when you see a man like dupnik out there shooting off his mouth about how everyone is to blame but the shooter and dupnik himself, you have to wonder about the mans motivations.

Should dupnik have assigned a security detail at this event, logic tells us yes, and we also know that he could have done this.

As well dupnik could have been aware of the reports of an unstable individual in his jurisdiction.

It is so easy to blame others for what happened, and no doubt this will happen again, as with the Ft hood shootings, and others in the past, the thing is that security needs to be present at these public events, to stop or dissuade this type of horrible thing in the future.