Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Crowdsourcing Analysis of the Palin Email Trove

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the hey-baby-I-love-your-corpus dept.

Government 284

itwbennett writes "Surely you've got better things to do this weekend than read 24,000 pages of Sarah Palin's email. But just in case you don't, the NY Times is looking for volunteers to help 'identify interesting and newsworthy e-mails, people and events that we may want to highlight.' And, for your easy reference, MSNBC has posted the complete collection online."

cancel ×

284 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

volunteers? (5, Insightful)

waddgodd (34934) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411118)

So wait, we're supposed to do analysis for free for the NYT, which will then hide said work behind their paywall? Yeah, suuuure.

Might Waste Precious Calories Volunteering (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411154)

Fat people eat too much. They spend a long fucking time at delis and service counters everywhere just to make up their mind about a subject they already know so well, which is what to eat. They are oblivious fucks to the line of other customers they are rude to. They take up too much space, another thing they are very good at. Oh yeah fatty, another thing, you aren't fooling anybody - we know you soak yourself in excessive amounts of perfume and cologne because you have serious body odor problems.

And for some reason fat black women (and black women aspiring to become fat) just love the fuck out of crab legs. If you were fishing for them this is what you'd use as bait. I guess maybe some famous fat black woman like Queen Latifah must have ordered crab legs in one of her many mindless sitcoms and B movies. Now the rest of them follow along, marching in lock-step, not really knowing why they suddenly love crab legs but definitely not questioning their newfound taste, merely satisfying it. Like good little consumers. Those little ocean scavengers really please the African woman's palate in any case.

We've seen this sort of hive mind before. At the turn of the century black people everywhere went from pronouncing "r" like "are" to pronouncing it like "arre-uhh". Suddenly that was the (New) Black Way to pronounce it. I do mean at 11:59pm one day none of them did that, then at 12:00am a minute later millions of em did it. Pretend not to notice if you want, or be a crybaby and worry about if it's PC, but that's pretty damn strange. Even ants and bees have difficulty with such large-scale coordination owing to the limitations of their chemical messages.

Re:volunteers? (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411158)

My thoughts exactly.
Why would I want to do this, only to lose access to my own work.
If they made the articles generated by this work under some sort of copyleft I might be interested.

Re:volunteers? (2, Insightful)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411206)

If information wants to be free, why should they have to pay you for finding it?

Re:volunteers? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411664)

Why should they make money with my work? If I do this for the public then they should give my results to the public for free.

Re:volunteers? (1)

dirtygremlin (140876) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411236)

Why don't we crowd source our research to /. and moderation can decide the rest.

Re:volunteers? (2)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411332)

Heh. Why should we bother? It would be tempting to say that the only person who might find something useful in those emails might be Tina Fey. But even her efforts are dwarfed by the stupidity of the object of her ridicule.

Re:volunteers? (4, Informative)

duguk (589689) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411306)

Thankfully, The Guardian (UK) [guardian.co.uk] are doing the same thing. Dug

This is /., not Digg. (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411854)

You seem to be lost. This is Slashdot, not Digg. When we agree with somebody, we don't say that we "dug" their post.

Re:volunteers? (2, Insightful)

makubesu (1910402) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411456)

Yeah who would ever do a detailed analysis just to have it put behind a pay wall? Now if you'll excuse me, I have a journal article I'm working on...

Re:volunteers? (2)

rust (117571) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411516)

The NYT paywall doesn't work - as a page loads in Firefox, I just hit 'stop' after the page loads and before the popup 'You are over your 20 article limit' shows up, and I can read anything i want.

Works all the time, mildly annoying but trivial to defeat their idiotic 'paywall'.

Re:volunteers? (1)

CODiNE (27417) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411678)

I'd love it if everyone contributed to OpenStreetMap instead of Google Map Maker, but the one who makes the easiest to use interface and has all the marketing $$ often snags the willing participants. Especially something as time critical as this, first mover advantage is pretty important.

Re:volunteers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411848)

And they want you to individually download each email in pdf format, no less...

Probably won't find anything... (1)

vinng86 (1978262) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411136)

...because it has been -REDACTED-

Trig birth conspiracy (-1, Troll)

DF5JT (589002) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411152)

I stumbled upon something interesting there:

Remember the conspiracies around Trig's birth, April 18, 2008? According to the mail archive SP was handling governmental stuff a mere couple of hours after the birth. Birth time was supposed to be 6:30 am, so I presume she had little sleep before that, particularly after the flight from Texas with a Vancouver stopover. And hours later after giving birth she is up in bed, reading papers and handling stuff?

I don't believe that.

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411244)

Eh, it was her 5th kid. By then it's pretty much show up at the hospital and pop one out and you're done.

Palin had a son (Trig) and a grandson (Tripp) born in the same year? Most people would think that's crazy.

Plausible (2)

Soulfader (527299) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411292)

After #2 was born around 0100, I passed out completely. My wife was wide awake, did her all-important FaceBook postings, did some writing, even got up and walked around. This was in stark contrast to #1, where she was virtually bed-ridden for the first week.

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (1)

tsotha (720379) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411294)

What is it you think happens during a birth that would prevent this? It seems quite normal to me.

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411328)

My wife came home and cleaned the kitchen. Women aren't always delicate little puffs.

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411454)

My wife came home and cleaned the kitchen. Women aren't always delicate little puffs.

I bet you got big brownie points for that one....

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411608)

unless he was out hunting bears

You're Actually Taking This Seriously?!? (1)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411586)

I stumbled upon something interesting there

That you're a manipulated tool?

Remember the conspiracies around Trig's birth, April 18, 2008?

Uh, no. But now you're scaring us...

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411604)

I found this one interesting: http://palinemail.msnbc.msn.com/palin2011/pdf/5351.pdf [msn.com]

right on... glad he acknowledged his mistake. pis tell him i appreciate his acknowledgment

Although she's not acknowledging one of her mistakes I was surprised to find out that she was even familiar with the concept.

Re:Trig birth conspiracy (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411638)

I'm assuming neither you (if female) nor your wife (if you have one) have ever given birth?

I guarantee (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411180)

That neither the NY Times nor the Washington Post will do this with Obama's emails once he leaves office.

Probably not (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411220)

since the National Archives will do it for them.

Re:Probably not (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411576)

The national archives will ask for volunteers to crowd-source the emails?

Re:I guarantee (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411234)

That neither the NY Times nor the Washington Post will do this with Obama's emails once he leaves office.

I guess it depends if Obama adds a shroud of conspiracy by forcing the media to pick up the emails printed on paper instead of digitally...

Re:I guarantee (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411268)

It's a pretty standard practice for every administration/public official. If you want the docs, you get 'em. And not for 15 million either. ;) So yes, it was done for Clinton, it was done for Bush, it'll be done for Obama... but I don't know if that means that the media is Liberal or Fair and Balanced.

Re:I guarantee (1)

Hartree (191324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411376)

We've sort of moved from a more unified main stream media model to something a little like the opposed advocacy sort of model used in legal proceedings. If it's not something MSNBC will take time to trawl through, Fox pobably will. And vice verse. etc, through the permutations.

And if neither of them get round to it, the opposition research people of the respective opposed parties or primary candidates will.

WTF? (0, Troll)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411198)

Ok, we have a media frenzy about a 1/2 term governor of Alaska who was an unsuccessful candidate for VP. Gotta examine every last email she ever typed.

Meanwhile we have a POTUS where we know almost nothing of his history other than a ghostwritten highly fictionalized (read the intro in the damned thing, it is fictionalized) autobiography. All of his IL Senate records are 'missing', all of his records from Columbia and Harvard are sealed and the media are totally incurious about this. We don't know how the hell a community organizer paid the freight to get a degree at Harvard, not exactly known for it's low low prices. We know almost nothing of his community organizing days with Alinsky founded organizations and with ACORN.

Re:WTF? (3, Insightful)

NiceGeek (126629) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411210)

Someone reads too much World Nut Daily.

Press needs to examine its life (2, Insightful)

techvet (918701) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411280)

His question is legit. Hey, everyone knew Bush's grades but no one cares about Obama's grades? (We only know learned that Gore got a "D" in natural science.) They dug into Jack Ryan's sealed divorce decree when he was running for Senate in Illinois but have no time to bother digging into our current president? The press is complete hypocrisy.

Re:Press needs to examine its life (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411394)

We know what Obama's fucking grades were. Dude graduated summa cum laude. THAT MEANS HE DID REALLY FUCKING WELL.

Re:Press needs to examine its life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411414)

Who paid his tuition? And when are we going to see his emails to Tony Rezko?

Re:Press needs to examine its life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411598)

We know what Obama's fucking grades were. Dude graduated summa cum laude. THAT MEANS HE DID REALLY FUCKING WELL.

That's just gross. I don't care how loud he is during orgasm, and I really didn't need to know that he took a class on f*cking in college. What were his grades for his other classes?

Re:Press needs to examine its life (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411484)

Or perhaps they have and just didn't find anything?

Re:Press needs to examine its life (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411498)

Not to feed the nuts, but there were swaths of Bush's life we knew nothing about. Pretty much everything before he was 40, his alleged drug use, his orgies in the frat house, what he did when he was AWOL, what bribes were made to military personel to insure he would achieve the exact grade he needed to get into the national guard instead of vietnam, all unanswered. My big concern is that we never knew how many people he killed while driving drunk, and how many women he raped. The lame stream media simply did not care.

In point as fact, as Bush was most certainly a felon, he has no more business being in the white house than Obama. Like Obama there was a conspiracy to make sure that none of the felony charges ever went to court or stick. As mentioned he is most certainly guilty of rape, felony drug charges, felony manslaughter due to recklessness. Beyond that the fact that his daddy bribed government official to get him into the national guard, and then bribed government officials agains so he did not have to serve, meant he never went to jail for draft dodges and never received the court martial he deserved for being AWOL.

But the worst error was not impeaching him for 9/11. Do you think Bush and to less extent Cheney were not owned by the Saudis? Do you not think that as soon as Bush was elected the Saudis knew they have carte blanche to murder US civilians without any fear of repercussions? We saw the photos when Bush got the news of the attacks? Did he look surprised? Why was he out of Washington for a very infrequent business trip instead of on vacation? Do you not think that Bush knew exactly where Osama Bin Laden was, but did not choose to kill him because that would be like killing family. So he created these conflict to increase oil prices so the Saudies would get richer. He passed policies guaranteed to raise the public debt so the US would be vunerable to future attacks and other hostile action. He probably had the CIA build the housing for bin laden, and probably talked about the caves knowing that the American people could never know the truth, that his brother Bin Laden was safe in a palace.set up with a new young wife to keep him company, while the average american were having their homes repossessed.

You see how easy it is to manipulate available facts into a narrative. No rational person could possible believe that Bush was not a murderer and Bush/Cheney did not welome the 9/11 attacks. That is no rational person who watches fox news. Everyone else knows the difference a good story and reality.

Re:Press needs to examine its life (1, Informative)

Apocryphos (1222870) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411714)

Mod parent up. Brilliant turn around to make a point.

Re:Press needs to examine its life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411684)

All I remember was that Jack Ryan was married to Jeri Ryan [skins.be] . But I doubt that was a motivator in peoples interest in that case. (shrugs).

Re:WTF? (1)

MoeDumb (1108389) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411862)

Someone's got his facts straight. Those are legitimate questions, but the answers are still sealed even two years later. Why? I mean seriously, Why?

Re:WTF? (2)

sandytaru (1158959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411224)

Paranoid troll much? While I agree the scrutiny on Palin is eye-roll inducing, I think I'd rather have them devote their energy to exploring actual, serious presidential candidates, like Romney and Cain. Or exposing the extremist crazy of Michelle Bachman, who is still at least in office.

Re:WTF? (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411382)

Paranoid troll much? While I agree the scrutiny on Palin is eye-roll inducing, I think I'd rather have them devote their energy to exploring actual, serious presidential candidates, like Romney and Cain. Or exposing the extremist crazy of Michelle Bachman, who is still at least in office.

Even a broke clock is right twice a day. So, even if he is paranoid (which calling him so is trolling... The irony...) his point is totally valid.

Re:WTF? (1, Insightful)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411384)

> Paranoid troll much?

Ok since you obviously know these things that nobody else does, perhaps you know Mr. Obama's GPA, his SAT score or have access to his thesis? We know these things about other Presidents. We have even seen Mrs. Obama's senior thesis. For example we know W's GPA was actually comparable to Gore or Kerry's. Yet somehow Gore and Kerry are considered so super smart while W is universally ridiculed as an idiot. So where does Obama fit in? Everyone in DC says he is the smartest guy who ever sat in the comfy chair. Is he? I haven't seen the slightest evidence of it in his (not his speechwriters) words or in his deeds. So put us all some knowledge on dude.

Or maybe there is a reason his records are sealed. Because they would make it plain he is a below average shlub who was admitted and honored more for his biography and 'diversity' than his ability.

All I'm sayin' is if the media still have the energy and resources to root around in Mrs. Palin's old emails, air drop into Alaska back in the campaign to root around in her trash cans, etc. perhaps a little attention to the guy who actually IS president and appears to want to run for reelection might be worthy of the basic scrutiny the media would give a candidate for governor or senate. Or we might want to face the reality that the media already know Obama's story and are intent on the voters never learning it.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411510)

Or maybe there is a reason his records are sealed. Because they would make it plain he is a below average shlub who was admitted and honored more for his biography and 'diversity' than his ability.

Or maybe we KNOW the motherfucker graduated summa cum laude. You're fucking retarded.

Re:WTF? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411538)

He was magna cum laude. Verified by Harvard. Not as high as summa, but the point remains that he was top 10% of his class at Harvard.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411554)

Still didn't learn there are only 50 states in the US, did he? Not toooo bright.

Obama - top 10% of his class, magna cum luade (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411706)

So Obama got into Harvard for the sake of diversity (affirmative action), and then graduated at the top 10% of his class, magna cum luade.

Barack Obama must have somehow used his black powers to graduate at the top of his class.

Luckily your racist idiot powers remind us that he's just another affirmative action nigger.

What do you call a nigger who graduates magna cum laude and is elected president of the United States? A "diversity" admission. Well... that's what racists call him anyway.

Re:WTF? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411840)

the motherfucker graduated summa cum laude.

Eww. Just eww. Now you say he has loud orgasms during coitus with his own mother (who is dead)?

You're fucking retarded.

Hey, leave GP's SO's IQ out of this.

Re:WTF? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411524)

you don't have to be smart to go through the motions, that's one of the jokes of an education

Re:WTF? (5, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411548)

All I'm sayin' is if the media still have the energy and resources to root around in Mrs. Palin's old emails, air drop into Alaska back in the campaign to root around in her trash cans, etc. perhaps a little attention to the guy who actually IS president and appears to want to run for reelection might be worthy of the basic scrutiny the media would give a candidate for governor or senate. Or we might want to face the reality that the media already know Obama's story and are intent on the voters never learning it.

Well, go for it dude. Certainly there have to be a couple of more folks with your bent to get together and sort this out. Certainly the Fox News folks and persons of similar persuasion have the means and the motive to go look for dirt in his past. Perhaps they have done that and found he was a B+ student who wrote boring things, didn't do drugs and didn't get arrested -- basically a meh story. Who knows? Obama is your typical bog-standard Politician, no more no less. Not nearly as entertaining as an attractive batshit insane ex cheerleader with dubious command of history, geography and language.

What's not to like?

Re:WTF? (1, Flamebait)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411838)

I know Bill O'reilly gives short shrift to anyone bring up crap about President Obama's birth. He generally just cuts them off. I'm sure he's looked into it and realizes that it's a non-issue. I wish everyone else would give it up too as I'm about sick of hearing about it. If they can't find enough to criticize with the shithole the economy is in and the determination the administration seems to have to finish it off as soon as possible then they need to just quit and go home. At this point I don't give a shit if he was born on Mars. Do something about the deficit already.

Re:WTF? (2)

LanMan04 (790429) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411874)

Do something about jobs and housing already.

FTFY

Re:WTF? (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411768)

Oh come on. You know better. President Obama is their (NYTimes') guy. They worship him and they'd never do anything to smirch his reputation. Palin is their enemy. They hate her and her family and would do anything at all to smear her. I'm pretty ambivalent about the whole thing. Sarah Palin is fake and about as real as President Obama. I really could care less about either of them but I find it amusing that people get upset about these professional hucksters getting ridiculed as they deserve.

Obama - top 10% of his class, magna cum laude (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411788)

So Obama got into Harvard for the sake of diversity (affirmative action), and then graduated at the top 10% of his class, magna cum luade.

Barack Obama must have somehow used his black powers to graduate at the top of his class.

Luckily your racist idiot powers remind us that he's just another affirmative action nigger.

What do you call a nigger who graduates magna cum laude and is elected president of the United States? A "diversity" admission.

Well... that's what racists call him anyway.

Re:WTF? (2)

PC and Sony Fanboy (1248258) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411814)

Or maybe there is a reason his records are sealed. Because they would make it plain he is a below average shlub who was admitted and honored more for his biography and 'diversity' than his ability.

... lol ... same reason his birth certificate couldn't be found. Brilliant PR ... let the loonies make the right wing look completely half-cocked, so no one wants to affiliate themselves with the right, gain votes, and get in.

But hey. You're free to believe whatever you want, and I'm free to believe you're an idiot.

Re:WTF? (4, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411828)

For example we know W's GPA was actually comparable to Gore or Kerry's. Yet somehow Gore and Kerry are considered so super smart while W is universally ridiculed as an idiot.

GPA wasn't why Bush was and is considered pretty stupid. The reason he's considered stupid is that he's not really accomplished all that much - his military record was mediocre at best, most of his business ventures (which wouldn't have started without money from his dad's friends) flopped, and his political campaigns were also basically inheriting his dad's political apparatus. That and a speaking style which provoked unfavorable comparisons to Dan Quayle gave him a reputation of being rather stupid, deservedly or no. Basically, there's good reason to think that if he had started out in the same environment as Ronald Reagan did, he would have been a nobody.

Re:WTF? (1)

n6kuy (172098) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411728)

> Paranoid troll much?
> ...extremist crazy of Michelle Bachman

Hmmm...

Re:WTF? (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411252)

Yeah, what a circus. Not even sure which ones are the clowns anymore. I kinda read /. so I can avoid this kind of story. Now I'm ashamed for having posted in one.

Re:WTF? (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411390)

Yeah, what a circus. Not even sure which ones are the clowns anymore.

All of them. Still amazed that people think there is any difference between the parties.

Re:WTF? (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411430)

Never mind, you could always take a leaf out of Jello Biafra's book and run for mayor of San Francisco.

(For those who don't know, one of his manifesto policies was that all businessmen should be forced to wear clown suits. IIRC, he finished third out of a field of nine.)

Re:WTF? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411352)

We also know he's a friggin' negro and just DOESN'T BELONG THERE, amirite? :)

And no mention of the disappearance of Bush's documents? Post back with the 'missing' docs that they couldn't find of Bush's and you get to get out of the rabid fanatic box.

Re:WTF? (1)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411422)

We also know he's a friggin' negro and just DOESN'T BELONG THERE, amirite? :)

I think you're looking for the word "mulatto".

Re:WTF? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411462)

No, most that have irrational fear of him generally don't know the word "mulatto". Now Moolatte, THAT'S a different story.

Re:WTF? (0)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411660)

> We also know he's a friggin' negro and just DOESN'T BELONG THERE, amirite? :)

Oh really. Except for the sperm donor the closest Barry came to black growing up was when Gramps arranged for some mentoring on 'blackness' by fellow CP member Frank Davis. Why do you think the guy acts so white Biden made the (racist if uttered by a Republican so I won't repeat them) remarks he made back in the campaign? Why do you think Obama so desperately tries to act black and fails? He had zero connection to the African-American experience until he got to college where he so wanted to be an African-American instead of a half African raised as an upper middle class white boy. Even joining Reverend Wright's racist church for twenty years hasn't made him truly 'Black', just given him enough cred to 'pass' when he needs to. But his 'people' will always be ivy league rich progressives.

Re:WTF? (2)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411406)

To be fair, this data dump is fulfilling a FOIA that was filed two YEARS ago, when she had just been nominated vice president (by a few thousand people that probably shouldn't have just taken everything on authority and should have known better, I might add.)

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411702)

is she still nominated? was that FOIA request such a valuable investment that they can't let it go?

MSM are a complete hypocrisy and we both know it.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411420)

Palin is the rock star of GOP politics. If she decides to run, and she'll do it as late as she can get away with and still get on the primary ballots, her candidacy will have a similar impact as Trump would have had. The crowds in New Hampshire and some of the early states will get larger and larger and will steal all the headlines come January and February. The story will not be what Palin says or stands for, but the reaction of the voters going to her rallies.

Imagine you're her campaign manager... you get decide what rock music to fire up the crowd with before Sarah hits the stage. Maybe it'll be the obvious choice [amazon.com] . Or perhaps a chick oldie crossover [amazon.com] . It's an embarrassment of riches, you'll look like a genius almost whatever you do. Michelle Bachmann is a passionate and good looking woman but she doesn't have anywhere near the same effect on people.

Re:WTF? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411850)

Michelle Bachmann is a passionate and good looking woman but she doesn't have anywhere near the same effect on people.

They both have the same effect on Rep. Anthony Weiner.

Re:WTF? (1)

Dracos (107777) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411886)

She'll never run.

She'll never give up her cushy "job" at Fox. Never put herself in the position where she needs to answer questions from the press, or debate anyone. Never compromise her sanitized "public" existence.

She is a circus side show, and all she cares about is getting paid.

Re:WTF? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411504)

We don't know how the hell a community organizer paid the freight to get a degree at Harvard, not exactly known for it's low low prices.

and you're not exactly know for your understanding of higher education pricing. If Harvard wants you, they'll find a way to make it affordable - with their endowment they can afford a few scholarships here and there. You only pay full freight if you can afford it and they really don't care if you attend.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411596)

I'm from Europe from a country with much lower salaries. I also went to Harvard and guess how much I paid for it? Nothing. It's called financial aid and it's provided by the school for those who can't afford it. For an undergraduate degree at Harvard, you won't pay a penny for it if you're from a low-income family. BTW, Harvard's definition of "low-income" is way above the average American salary... If you don't know what you're talking about it's better to not say anything. Go read:

http://www.fao.fas.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do

This archive is hilarious. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411308)

I searched LOL to start with. Sarah Palin certainly doesn't think highly of Jay Ramras (the comments about keeping young uns away from him in particular made me chuckle).

No thanks (4, Funny)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411318)

No thanks I'm pretty sure reading Sarah Palin's emails would lower my IQ by a factor of ten.

So we have an illegal war in Libya (4, Insightful)

hsmith (818216) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411324)

And people care about some moron congressman tweeting his penis and dumb Sarah Palin. Glad to know the media is focusing on what is important.

Re:So we have an illegal war in Libya (1)

jmottram08 (1886654) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411408)

mod parent up

Re:So we have an illegal war in Libya (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411830)

now _this_ should be insightful. and the regrettable thing is its too flacking obvious either.

Wikileaks? (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411392)

Did the NYTimes put out the same crowdsourcing call for various Wikileaks docs?

Also, is there any particular reason Palin's emails have been released? Do all governors' emails get released? (Don't know.) And George W's?

Re:Wikileaks? (2)

threeseas (2245516) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411460)

Palin's emails got released as there is little damage they can do. In fact they would probably be beneficial as a distraction from the exposure of the paranoid power tripping delusional fraction of 1% of the population messing with the 7 billion rest of us that not only Wikileaks helps to expose but got and getting a verifying reaction of these psychological handicap in need of constraints from their positions of command.

Re:Wikileaks? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411622)

Did the NYTimes put out the same crowdsourcing call for various Wikileaks docs?

Not that I'm aware. I think they care more about Wikileaks.

Also, is there any particular reason Palin's emails have been released?

A Freedom of Information Act request, filed when she announced her candidacy for Vice President in 2008.

Do all governors' emails get released?

Consult the Sunshine Laws in your state.

Documents from past presidencies are handled by the National Archives. It's to be assumed that they get something less than the full juicy details, especially with the past regime.

Climategate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411796)

Did they do this for Climategate emails?

Search the archive for "intelligent design" (1)

Legal.Troll (2002574) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411426)

(with quotes) and you'll be rewarded with quite a gem.

As the great Bart Scott once said... (1)

jmac_the_man (1612215) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411436)

I can't wait for people to cite these e-mails as evidence of wrongdoing on her part just because they were released. Look what happened when Tennessee State Representative Mike Kernell's son hacked Sarah Palin's e-mail account [wikipedia.org] . To this day, people claim that David Kernell's hack proved wrongdoing on Palin's part, even after Kernell told 4chan that he DIDN'T find anything interesting.

Re:As the great Bart Scott once said... (2)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411488)

Actually, she did do something wrong. She used a non government account for official business, so much of the email would not be tracable.

Re:As the great Bart Scott once said... (0)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411600)

To this day, people claim that David Kernell's hack proved wrongdoing on Palin's part, even after Kernell told 4chan that he DIDN'T find anything interesting.

"Kernall told 4chan ... "

Do you see what you did there?

grep (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411458)

Need I say more?

It's a pointless exercise (5, Insightful)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411474)

The reason it took them 3 years to release the emails is it took that long to screen out all the damaging material. Palin switched to her private email accounts for all the juicy stuff and she was pretty disciplined about it on top of that. We've got some indications of conversations since emails to those accounts both from and to official aides have been released. I heard on the news last night from the Mother Jones reporter who initiated the email request that stuff like conversations with Cheney and "Same Sex" thread have been completely redacted.

You think they'd wait 3 years, dump the emails ONLY to printed paper, redact the hell out of the content, and charge people if they *really* wanted to give you access?

Re:It's a pointless exercise (1)

snl2587 (1177409) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411744)

From looking at just a few emails, it seems like absolutely everything of interest is redacted. One that comes to mind is an email detailing a set of campaign plans. The moment the writer gets to a bulleted list (I think), everything from then on out is redacted.

And so yes, this is a completely pointless exercise, and nothing will likely come out of it except putting Palin back in the spotlight.

Bread and circuces (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411574)

The whole Palin phenomena seems to be a huge troll whose sole intention is to divert attention from important issues at hand. Don't concentrate on the invasion, war, poverty, theft, corruption and the gathering of international criminals.

Instead, concentrate your attention on the glorified village idiot that is Palin.

Make the gov do backups for you w/email? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411580)

1. encrypt your back up file.
2. Email it to them.
3. FOI the date.

What am I missing?

If it was a threat, they would have to sit and decrypt it anyway.

"and the kids dressed up as moose nuggets" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411610)

"and the kids dressed up as moose nuggets"

Almost a day and no bombshell yet? (1)

saikou (211301) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411632)

What surprises me is that it's been almost a day and we don't have a giant first page headlines "WE CONFIRMED SHE IS EVIL! Email details ... ". Nothing beyond regular (and sometimes understandable) stuff.

Which probably will result in more conspiracy theory to the tune of "Well we know She's Evil, it's just only those months of emails that weren't released must contain the Pure Evilness!", which is kinda silly.

I think every governor should have emails released, frankly, before he/she leaves office. The whole transparency thing, people love to talk about so much (but never deliver). That way someone who's about to become a public official will know that the public will see all communication for sure, without a need to file information requests (plus some states don't seem to care much to store the data as long as Alaska does). It will probably disrupt their "ability to negotiate" (like releasing the list of people who visit the White House) but isn't transparency worth it?

Re:Almost a day and no bombshell yet? (-1, Troll)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411790)

The only thing that's confirmed is that lefties across the board were frothing at the mouth at her, and calling for her death. If that's not a bombshell well who knows. And they happily sent it by email, there's a few hundred pages of those last I heard. Probably a few thousand by now.

This is technical "news" for ./ ?? (0)

plastick (1607981) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411654)

Really? Sarah Palin who is really a joke and non-issue? The New York Times who wants you to pay for their news? This is science and technology? Wow. "Celebrity" smear news? I think the IQ for the ./ readership is dropping faster than the "value" of "bitcoin" articles. Furthermore, even though I think Sarah Palin is an idiot, the liberal bias on this site is just unreal. Ya, I'll probably take mod hits but the truth is the truth. This is lame.

Who gives a damn about her emails? (1)

Xacid (560407) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411666)

Maybe I missed something somehow but is there a reason there's a desire to peruse through these records? If there's an investigation going on then it's not my job. If there isn't then it's none of my damned business and I have better shit to do with my time than be a voyeur to someone like Palin. Send this waste of time to the tabloids.

Re:Who gives a damn about her emails? (1)

FrankSchwab (675585) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411832)

Because she was an elected public official and these are official public records?

An unwillingness to examine the job that your government is doing will be the death of us. /frank

p.s. I completely agree with you if this had been a hacked personal email dump - that kind of thing is none of my business. Unless, of course, she we doing government business over her personal email, in which case I consider those to be official public records also.

AI processing engine (1)

fletchrox (2256610) | more than 3 years ago | (#36411692)

At first I thought this would be a good application for some sort of Artificial Intelligence processing engine, but 'Artificial Intelligence' probably doesn't work well on itself.

The Left's paranoia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411718)

...used to manifest itself as Bush Derangement Syndrome; which has morphed into Palin Derangement Syndrome

Read some, they are funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411742)

She passes off everything to other people.... Good for a laugh as always.

For instance, was her e-mail.

Disgusting (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36411752)

Is she a psychopath with a PCL-R rating of 40 or something like that? I can find no other excuse for something like this.

I wonder how long it'll take her to commit suicide or be committed.

Disgusting, just disgusting.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>