Musings about the law, politics, culture, people, education, teaching and life. An independent voice and an independent perspective - Carpe Diem!
Showing posts with label US Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US Politics. Show all posts
08 December 2010
"Palinisms"...
The recent post that I did on Sarah Palin describing Julian Assange of Wikileaks fame as a terrorist that must be hunted down in the same manner as the US is supposedly hunting down Osama bin Laden has led me to discover the word "Palinisms".
The word has made it into the Urban Dictionary and is defined as follows:
1. Malapropism, non-sensical verbiage, non-sequitor or other illogical, stream of concious meanderings uttered by Sarah Palin.
2. A form of homespun, Midwestern demagoguery and fear mongering comprised of a stream of logically unrelated and unsupported talking points uttered by an attractive woman with nice cans and a presumably fine ass intended to engender loyalty among those inspired by demagoguery, non-sequitors, a great smile, nice tits and a presumably fine ass.
Or, alternatively, like this:
1. An ambiguous colloquial expression that may cause confusion and be interpreted in different ways depending upon circumstance.
2. A statement that has no known basis in science or reality.
3. A statement of religious identity.
So, what does a Palinism look like (courtesy of The Huffington Post):
“Nuclear weaponry, of course, would be the be-all, end-all of just too many people in too many parts of our planet.” -- CBS interview with Katie Couric, September 25, 2008
"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where – where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."
-- CBS interview with Katie Couric, September 25, 2008
"So we discussed what was going on in Africa. And never, ever did I talk about, Well, gee, is it a country or is it a continent, I just don't know about this issue."
-- Fox interview with Greta Van Susteren, November 11, 2008
“I don’t know if I should Buenos Aires or Bonjour, or… this is such a melting pot. This is beautiful. I love the diversity. Yeah. There were a whole bunch of guys named Tony in the photo line, I know that.”
-- Addressing a Charity of Hope gathering, Hamilton, Ontario, April 15, 2010
“Obviously we loved sports, and the baby was born during the spring track season.”
--Going Rogue
“Believe it or not – this was in the 60s – we used to hustle on over the border for health care that we would receive in Whitehorse…. Isn’t that kind of ironic now. Zooming over the border, getting health care from Canada.”
-- Speech in Calgary, Alberta, March 6, 2010
"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."
-- Facebook, Aug. 7, 2009
"When the American people elected President Obama they gave him responsibility to handle this disaster. He promised to “heal the earth, and watch the waters recede...” or something far-fetched like that."
-- On the oil spill, May 27, 2010
“I didn’t believe the theory that human beings – thinking, loving beings – originated from fish that sprouted legs and crawled out of the sea. Or that human beings began as single-celled organisms that developed into monkeys who eventually swung down from the trees.”
--Going Rogue
“With the gray Talkeetna Mountains in the distance and the first light covering of snow about to descend on Pioneer Peak, I breathed in an autumn bouquet that combined everything small-town America with rugged splashes of the Last Frontier.”
--Going Rogue
"I think it's appalling and a violation of our freedom of the press."
—On negative media coverage of Republican congressional candidate Vaughn Ward, Boise, Idaho, May 21, 2010
"Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn't it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate."
—On plans to build an Islamic community center near Ground Zero, via Twitter, July 18, 2010
"'Refudiate,' 'misunderestimate,' 'wee-wee'd up.' English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!"
—Tweet, July 18, 2010
"I'm not politically correct. I am not one to be a word police."
-- Fox interview with Chris Wallace Feb. 7 , 2010
"I didn't really had a good answer, as so often -- is me."
--On writing notes on her hand for the Tea Party convention address, March 5, 2010
06 December 2010
More on Julian Assange and Wikileaks: The Sarah Palin View...
Julian Assange has certainly found more fame than he may have craved in developing Wikileaks into a whistleblower of world renown. The recent release of some 250,000 US diplomatic cables has intensified the hunt for Assange and the "need" to bring him to justice. Assange has some serious legal problems aside from the alleged rape and sexual molestation of which he stands accused of committing in Sweden. There are quite a number of states looking to prosecute him for his part in the publication of the "illegally" obtained diplomatic cables.
Australia is clearly looking to build a case against Assange. However, it would seem that the US is also exploring what options it has in making the case and prosecuting Assange in the US. This has obviously brought the ranting and railing conservative right out. Among them is the former Vice-Presidential candidate from the Grand Old Party (GOP), Sarah Palin. The fact that some might consider her a legitimate contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012 is scary enough, but the latest outburst is indicative as to what lengths this woman will go to try and capitalise on conservative popular opinion. It is also indicative of the fact that she really does not understand the difference between Osama bin Laden and Julian Assange. It is pretty clear that she obviously missed the advocacy class on why not to use exaggeration.
Sarah Palin in her infinite wisdom has taken to Facebook to condemn Assange for his role in releasing to the world some 250,000 confidential and secret diplomatic cables. Fair enough! There are good arguments to be made that it was irresponsible for Assange to publish via Wikileaks. However, Palin was not satisfied stopping there. In order to really ratchet-up the rhetoric she decided to add that Assnage should be hunted down like Osama bin Laden.
Well, after ten years of searching the US has not found or been able to confirm that it has killed bin Laden. So, it would seem that Assange really need not fear the US if it was to mount a similar "search and destroy" campaign that has been mounted for bin Laden. Although, on a more serious note, it would appear that all those who need to know where Assange is, in fact know where he is. It would also appear that an arrest is not that far away once the arrest warrant(s) are in order, assuming Assange decides to surrender to authorities and not seek political asylum in a country favourable to that proposition, Switzerland perhaps.
To further reinforce her point she suggested that Assange is not a journalist in any shape or form and compared this lack of journalistic skill to the current editor of al-Qaeda's English-language magazine, Inspire. Further intensifying the rhetoric saw Assange labeled as anti-American and with blood on his hands.
In any event, this was a political point scoring opportunity that was more about Palin slamming the White House and President Obama by implying that they were complicit in Assange's Wikileaks work because they have not been serious in hunting him down or arresting him.
Yet, this generally fits into the overall rhetoric of US politics with recent claims seeking to force the US government to declare Wikileaks a terrorist organisation. A whistleblower as a terrorist organisation, what an interesting development. However, it is symptomatic of the way the world is post 9/11. Anything that annoys us or possible effects many as opposed to a few is almost immediately labeled a terrorist organisation. I wonder what the Tea Party might need to do to be labeled a terrorist organisation? What about the Republicans or the Democrats?
However, the US is looking to invoke the Espionage Act with a view to criminal prosecution. And, it is imperative in the US view that they do this one by the numbers, and make the case bullet-proof.
The case to shut down sites that release confidential documents needs to be assessed on a merits basis. The reality is that releasing secret or confidential information can always be criminalised, but at what cost?
The question that must be answered here was whether there was any value in the releasing of these particular diplomatic cables? Simply, does the public need to know outweigh the need to maintain confidentiality?
Ho hum...
Australia is clearly looking to build a case against Assange. However, it would seem that the US is also exploring what options it has in making the case and prosecuting Assange in the US. This has obviously brought the ranting and railing conservative right out. Among them is the former Vice-Presidential candidate from the Grand Old Party (GOP), Sarah Palin. The fact that some might consider her a legitimate contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012 is scary enough, but the latest outburst is indicative as to what lengths this woman will go to try and capitalise on conservative popular opinion. It is also indicative of the fact that she really does not understand the difference between Osama bin Laden and Julian Assange. It is pretty clear that she obviously missed the advocacy class on why not to use exaggeration.
Sarah Palin in her infinite wisdom has taken to Facebook to condemn Assange for his role in releasing to the world some 250,000 confidential and secret diplomatic cables. Fair enough! There are good arguments to be made that it was irresponsible for Assange to publish via Wikileaks. However, Palin was not satisfied stopping there. In order to really ratchet-up the rhetoric she decided to add that Assnage should be hunted down like Osama bin Laden.
Well, after ten years of searching the US has not found or been able to confirm that it has killed bin Laden. So, it would seem that Assange really need not fear the US if it was to mount a similar "search and destroy" campaign that has been mounted for bin Laden. Although, on a more serious note, it would appear that all those who need to know where Assange is, in fact know where he is. It would also appear that an arrest is not that far away once the arrest warrant(s) are in order, assuming Assange decides to surrender to authorities and not seek political asylum in a country favourable to that proposition, Switzerland perhaps.
To further reinforce her point she suggested that Assange is not a journalist in any shape or form and compared this lack of journalistic skill to the current editor of al-Qaeda's English-language magazine, Inspire. Further intensifying the rhetoric saw Assange labeled as anti-American and with blood on his hands.
In any event, this was a political point scoring opportunity that was more about Palin slamming the White House and President Obama by implying that they were complicit in Assange's Wikileaks work because they have not been serious in hunting him down or arresting him.
Yet, this generally fits into the overall rhetoric of US politics with recent claims seeking to force the US government to declare Wikileaks a terrorist organisation. A whistleblower as a terrorist organisation, what an interesting development. However, it is symptomatic of the way the world is post 9/11. Anything that annoys us or possible effects many as opposed to a few is almost immediately labeled a terrorist organisation. I wonder what the Tea Party might need to do to be labeled a terrorist organisation? What about the Republicans or the Democrats?
However, the US is looking to invoke the Espionage Act with a view to criminal prosecution. And, it is imperative in the US view that they do this one by the numbers, and make the case bullet-proof.
The case to shut down sites that release confidential documents needs to be assessed on a merits basis. The reality is that releasing secret or confidential information can always be criminalised, but at what cost?
The question that must be answered here was whether there was any value in the releasing of these particular diplomatic cables? Simply, does the public need to know outweigh the need to maintain confidentiality?
Ho hum...
20 October 2010
Meg Whitman, Press Secretaries, Twitter, and an Oops Moment...
I am not sure what the YouTube video below has to do with an endorsement from the San Diego County Deputy Sheriffs' Association other than the fact that Meg Whitman's Press Secretary inadvertently left out a letter at the end of the bit.ly link and instead of getting the endorsement they received the video.
Another one of the dangers of the over-zealous use of technology, perhaps?
Ho hum...
and the actual link that was supposed to be part of the Tweet.
Don't know about you, but the "other" endorsement might work as well.
Thanks to buzzfeed for the links.
Another one of the dangers of the over-zealous use of technology, perhaps?
Ho hum...
and the actual link that was supposed to be part of the Tweet.
Don't know about you, but the "other" endorsement might work as well.
Thanks to buzzfeed for the links.
26 September 2008
Palin, A Stripped Moose, African-Americans, and Jews

But here it is and straight from the mouth of Rep. Alcee Hastings (the Rep. standing for Representative and meaning he is a Congressman in the US) who is a Democrat and former Hillary Clinton supporter and now vocal Barack Obama supporter.
This is what was said:
“anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks.”
This was a comment made to a group of African-American and Jewish Democrats and by all reports brought hoots of laughter and applause from all in attendance.
The idea that being able to shoot and strip a moose in any way reflects how one views race and religion relationships is about the same as Republicans claiming that Barack Obama's middle name says something about how he will deal with Muslims and Non-Muslims. Or that Obama's middle name in some way brings into question his Christian beliefs. It is bizarre and it is stupid!
Anyone who thinks that race and religion are not going to be important factors in this US Presidential race need to think again. Even with the US economy on the brink of free-fall into a recession (some might say the abyss of depression), the idea that race and religion keep coming to the fore says something about this historic moment for the US.
I am not an American. But, if I was I think there are more important things at stake in this presidential election other than whether Sarah Palin can strip a moose or the fact that Obama's middle name is Hussain.
Then again that's just me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)