AmericanPapist Comments
Amazingly good editorial from the Boston Globe.
Who knew such a woman would get this kind of reaction. Gawker should take the e-mails down, or they're no better than the asses who hacked them.
As she's now under Secret Service protection, I expect several doors -- and I do hope one of them is at Gawker -- to be knocked on very soon.
Right Zaya. Somebody's going down for this.
The only news outlet (on the net) I see reporting this if Fox. Perhaps the rest of the media finds itself in a quandary. We all know they don't want to mislead and obfuscate the news, so no doubt they're trying to come up with the best way to describe this. Alaska is a part of the USA, so calling this "domestic spying" is out of the question for, as we all know, that refers to the monitoring of emails and phone calls between the USA and some other country.
Thank you for not posting a link to the e-mails themselves. Another blog that I read did post the link, and I thought that it was inappropriate to do so.
Thank you for covering this. I saw a news article on msn.com last night, but it's gone this morning.
I think the hackers and those behind them should be arrested and prosecuted. It should be a federal crime to hack into a governor's email, and especially now that she's a national candidate with secret service protection.
The liberals have gone too far.
I like Jeff J's commentaries.
There will be heck to pay for this crime. Its precedent- former Philadelphia Anchorman Larry Mendte. Now sitting at home waiting for a November sentence in federal court. For obsessively hacking into the personal e-mail of his estranged co-anchor Alicia Lane. Not a Girl Scout herself- was caught allegedly confronting and slapping a New York female police officer early one Sunday morning in December. Mendte would even wake up in the middle of the night to dig into Lane's electronic correspondence. Now he faces a federal prison sentence of up to three years. Career- he's lucky that his wife works at a crosstown rival station for income. There may be far more facing the Palin hackers. That is, if the Justice Department decides to make an issue of it as with Mendte.
Obama's people are playing rough.
If you ask me, I think AP should stand for AP = Anarchist Punks AP = American Pravda.
Oh, and by the way, for anyone interested, check out the AP Board of Directors
http://www.ap.org/pages/about/board.html
Re: Douthat's piece, I'm still burned by the fact that Gibson and co. sliced and spliced Palin's interview, edited out clarifications she made in their ever more pro-DNC effort to destroy her. They tried to trip her up, so they cut her to pieces.
Wired's covering this.
The beauty of this is that not only does almost everyone who's into computers hate griefers, everyone who has a computer hates the idea of someone hacking their email. So obviously, Karl Rove must be controlling the wittle gwiefers over at 4chan. :)
I think I'm more offended by that picture of her. She's not a bad looking woman, but it's as if she doesn't care too much about how she presents herself appearance wise.
Geoff,
I'm sorry, but saying that her hairdo is more offensive than the hacking of her e-mail is itself offensive.
Geoff's remark demonstrates how this Republic will fall: at the hands of lazy, shallow citizens.
People like Geoff should have their heads examined.
I'm a little surpised by you Mr. Peters. In your support of Ron Paul you seemed to be beyond shallow party politics. I admit that Sarah Palin is likeable and many people have been shameless in attacking her, but in the end she does nothing to affect McCain's policies. I would never vote for Obama and consider myself a Paleo-Conservative, but on principle I don't understand how good Catholics can vote for McCain either. If they actually looked at his voting record and his positions they would see a lot that runs counter to Catholic teaching. I wish there were more talk on here about the Third Party Pact... what's wrong with Chuck Baldwin's platform? (Though I'm a little uneasy myself with his affiliation with Jerry Falwell) At least it should be discussed; don't you think?
"...on principle I don't understand how good Catholics can vote for McCain either."
The alternative to McCain is much worse. If McCain is not elected, much worse will be. Not may be; will be.
Thomas:
McCain has a far better pro life record than does Obama. Palin's life story illustrates her pro life principles. Obama has voted in support of infanticide four times.
As a Catholic, one must choose the most viable pro life candidate. There are only two viable candidates for the White House at this point: John McCain or Barack Obama. Do the math. A third party vote is a vote for Obama.
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting evil. The ends do not justify the means.
With the Third-Party pact; you have a matter where left-and-right can take votes away from both and go third-party.
McCain did say that at this point he would not want Roe vs Wade overturned. Palin has absolute zero power as Vice President unless McCain dies. Is it good Catholic Moral Theology to vote for somebody who disagrees with Catholic teaching in hopes that he'll kick the bucket and his strongly pro-life VP will take over?
We're never gonna get change if we keep voting for the Republicrats. Both of their policies will just continue to erode civil liberties, destroy the economy by supporting budget deficits, expand our empire overseas, and lead us to more undeclared, pre-emptive wars. (Karl Keating may tell you preventive war falls under Just-War theory, but Pope Benedict XVI and his predecessors will tell you otherwise)All the while doing absolutely nothing about the Abortion issue. (The Republicans would no longer have that crutch if they actually did something about it.)
I'm not voting pragmatically which is the American thing to do, but on principle which is the Catholic thing to do.
Sorry if that was self-righteous. I am truly sorry. It just seems the more I've looked into Obama and McCain the more I could not feel justified in voting for either of them.
Thomas:
Choosing the lesser of two evils is part and parcel of living in a fallen world as an adult, particularly when it comes to politics, which is the dirtiest adult game there is.
Your second statement about the ends justifying the means is absurd, and I fear it is a reflection of an adolescent pomposity as it bears no relevance to the issues here.
Your rejection of pragmatism for "principle" as a "Catholic thing to do" only affirms your juvenile posturing.
Even the Catechism states that one must vote for the VIABLE candidate that is more pro life, when a perfect one is not available.
Best to get off your high horse and join the human race.
Thomas,
I have written several times on how the Democrat party policies are contrary to the Catholic faith despite protests to the contrary and I know I would like to see some Republicans do more to be fully in line with the Cathlic faith. But what specifically has McCain done or what is there specifically in the Party platform that is contrary or opposed to Church teaching. (I admit to only reading part of the platform but I hadn't found anything so far that strikes me as opposed to it. Whereas I can offer several points where the Democrats positions are in direct conflict with the Catholic Church.) I know in the past Sen. McCains support for stem cell research is an issue but I believe he is changing/has changed his position on that. And of course their are many that feel Republicans haven't done enough to help the poor, immigrants and so on. Many Republicans and conservatives individually might have ideas that run contrary to Church teaching. But does anyone have conclusive statements of what Sen. McCain believes or the platform states which runs contrary to the Catholic teachings.
McCain did say that at this point he would not want Roe vs Wade overturned.
Thomas was that a typo or do you have proof that this is what McCain said as the following news story would indicate the contrary of what you said.
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4330.html
"Another pro-abortion ad is heading to television stations in key battleground states and it contains several inaccuracies. This new commercial attacks Senator John McCain on his position in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade and says 21 states will protect women and children if that happens."
McCain has repeatedly said he favors overturning Roe, which allowed virtually unlimited abortions for any reason throughout pregnancy.
Commenting by HaloScan
