Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Republicans United States Politics News Technology

Sarah Palin's Stance On Technology Issues 1115

Posted by Soulskill
from the wait,-alaska-has-electricity? dept.
Revolution Radio writes "BetaNews has a short description of what we might expect from Governor Palin regarding technology issues. She demonstrated her familiarity with the internet by initiating an online education program for state workers, using the web for government transparency, and a supporting the general concept of 'long-distance distribution of services' (similar to net neutrality?)." We've previously discussed Senator Joe Biden's tech voting record and compared the technology platforms of Obama and McCain. In addition to the above story about Palin, Betanews also has analyses of Obama, McCain, and Biden regarding tech policy.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sarah Palin's Stance On Technology Issues

Comments Filter:
  • by Davemania (580154) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:23PM (#24901757) Journal
    They sure can do alot with tubes in Alaska
    • by adisakp (705706) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @05:07PM (#24904329) Journal

      They sure can do alot with tubes in Alaska

      Hey... she knows how to use EBay***

      *** Sarah Palin remarked on her ability to reduce graft by putting a state-owned luxury jet worth $2.7 million dollars on EBay.

      Technically, she told the truth -- her exact quote in her speech was "That luxury jet was over the top. I put it on eBay."

      The whole truth is that the jet never sold on EBay. Sure she "put it on EBay", but if failed to actually ** SELL **. The jet only received one bid and that fell through -- apparently the buyer wasn't "vetted" thoroughly.

      Instead, the plane was sold for $2.1M to Republican entrepeneur Valdez in a no-bid transaction that basically had no oversight at a $600K loss from the original purchase price.

      The same plane sells on the open market through airplane brokers for about $2.4M. Still the $2.1M sale price was $300K below the price she should have expected on the open market if she went through a broker than doing it herself on EBay -- which contrary to Republican opinion, EBay is not the best marketplace to sell a luxury commercial quality jet.

      But selling off a gov't resource to a rich friend of a fellow republican at $300K below market value in a no-bid transaction doesn't sound nearly as down to earth as, "she sold a luxury jet on E-Bay because she likes to drive to work".

      Wanna know how McCain is telling this story now : "You know what i enjoyed the most? She took the luxury jet that was acquired by her predecessor and sold* it on eBay â" made a profit*," McCain said, introducing Palin. (*Technically not true statements)

      . . . Nope, it didn't *SELL* on EBay and it certainly didn't make a profit . . .

      • by Oligonicella (659917) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @05:54PM (#24904753)
        Well, FUD to you too. The jet was draining the budget, jets require on-going maintenance, even if parked. Getting rid of it saved money. It depreciated, hence the 600K drop from purchase. Where did you find the market value and did you consider transportation? Good spin, though.
        • by adisakp (705706) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @06:15PM (#24905007) Journal
          Sorry, I should quote my sources. The $300K below market came from the Chicago Tribune [chicagotribune.com]. I'm sure you will continue to say that number is just "spin" though because all the press is "liberal media" trying to smear Palin rather than an actual attempt to get news out about an unknown candidate who's suddenly a possible VP for our nation.

          Instead, the 23-year-old 10-seat Westwind II was sold in August 2007 for $2.1 million to a Valdez, Alaska, entrepreneur; that's about $300,000 less than a broker's asking price, according to news accounts. -- Chicago Tribune

          Sarah Palin did not need the jet because she could drive to work. However, there are areas of Alaska where there are only two forms of transportation: airplanes and boat. Any Alaskan can tell you that air transportation would be a necessity for a governor who lived in one of those areas since boat is too slow for state business. However, there is no reason such a governor could not use public air flights instead of a private jet.

          BTW, there is one small mistake in my post, the entrepeneur is not named Valdez but from Valdez. His name is Larry Reynolds and he is a good friend of Republican speaker of the Alaska House, John L. Harris, who brokered the no-bid deal. Reynolds made campaign contributions to both Palin and Harris in 2006 and 2007.
          • by mr_matticus (928346) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @06:32PM (#24905173)

            Sorry, I should quote my sources. The $300K below market came from the Chicago Tribune.

            It's not $300K below market, but $300K below the offer price. Given the aviation slump, this is not unusual. How about some sources from the time, free of the election spin and the Chicago-spin:

            http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/us/25jet.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]

            http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=6422443 [ktuu.com]

            Republican speaker of the Alaska House, John L. Harris, who brokered the no-bid deal.

            Not true. The plane was sold through a private aircraft broker named Heckmann, who is anything but a state lackey, having had prior legal encounters with state contracts.

            The final price did indeed end up saving money, given the costs of insurance, storage, maintenance. The bid fell through because the buyer backed out.

            As a lifelong liberal, even I am disgusted at this smear campaign. It's okay for Obama to be selective about stories from the past, but not for Palin? Let's not lose sight of the fact that she pledged to get rid of the plane and did so, responsibly and through a private broker who signed off on the deal.

  • by Ecuador (740021) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:23PM (#24901763) Homepage

    Isn't the fact that if it was up to her our schools would be teaching creationism [google.com] enough for a Slashdot reader? You can call me a troll/off topic, but I think if we have a FAIL in basic science, technology issues are unimportant.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Ecuador (740021)

      Oh, and you will notice that I linked to a mild article with an actual title of "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor". If you read even that mild article you will still easily realize she just hasn't pushed the issue in the past, yet she does not believe in evolution ("believe in evolution"??? I cringe even typing such a phrase about someone) and she would obviously like to see creationism taught. Go ahead, give her the power :)

      • by Tubal-Cain (1289912) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:08PM (#24902245) Journal

        yet she does not believe in evolution

        I think she may be confusing evolution with abiogenesis. Most people do.

    • by houstonbofh (602064) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:32PM (#24901851)

      Isn't the fact that if it was up to her our schools would be teaching creationism [google.com] enough for a Slashdot reader? You can call me a troll/off topic, but I think if we have a FAIL in basic science, technology issues are unimportant.

      Did you read the article you referenced?

      "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor"
      "As a candidate for governor, Sarah Palin called for teaching creationism alongside evolution in public schools. But after Alaska voters elected her, Palin, now Republican John McCain's presidential running mate, kept her campaign pledge to not push the idea in the schools."
      "When asked during a televised debate in 2006 about evolution and creationism, Palin said, according to the Anchorage Daily News: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.""
      "In a subsequent interview with the Daily News, Palin said discussion of alternative views on the origins of life should be allowed in Alaska classrooms. "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum," she said."
      "Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that if she were elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add creation-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum, or look for creationism advocates when she appointed board members."
      "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them."
      "Neither have Palin's socially conservative personal views on issues like abortion and gay marriage been translated into policies during her 20 months as Alaska's chief executive. It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans."

      Sounds like she understands basic science and theory just fine. Also she seems to have a grasp on that "separation of church and state" thing.

      • by IgnoramusMaximus (692000) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:44PM (#24902007)

        Sounds like she understands basic science and theory just fine. Also she seems to have a grasp on that "separation of church and state" thing.

        Err... no.

        Let me put this in a way you might understand, since you too apparently have a difficulty with grasping this "basic science and theory":

        "Palin has not pushed Flat Earth Theory science as governor"
        "As a candidate for governor, Sarah Palin called for teaching Flat Earth Theory alongside evolution in public schools. But after Alaska voters elected her, Palin, now Republican John McCain's presidential running mate, kept her campaign pledge to not push the idea in the schools."
        "When asked during a televised debate in 2006 about Earth being spherical and Flat Earth Theory, Palin said, according to the Anchorage Daily News: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.""
        "In a subsequent interview with the Daily News, Palin said discussion of alternative views on the shape of the Earth should be allowed in Alaska classrooms. "I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum," she said."
        "Palin said during her 2006 gubernatorial campaign that if she were elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add Flatness-based alternatives to the state's required curriculum, or look for Flat Earth Society members when she appointed board members."
        "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have Flat Earth Theory taught in them."
        "Neither have Palin's socially conservative personal views on issues like abortion and gay marriage been translated into policies during her 20 months as Alaska's chief executive. It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans." ... right, pull my other one!

        There, I hope this gets through better.

      • NO (Score:5, Insightful)

        by je ne sais quoi (987177) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:54PM (#24902101)
        A vote for a creationist or someone who thinks both is okay is a vote for the U.S. as a backwater religious theocracy. The fact that you seem to think that teaching both in the classroom is "okay" means YOU don't understand the difference between the separation between church and state, or that you don't understand that creationism or intelligent design is NOT science, it it religious dogma masquerading as science. It has no testable hypotheses, it does not teach critical thinking, and it has no place in the science classroom! It does not deserve to be taught both as Palin states and the fact that you think she is "being reasonable" means you fell for the religious propaganda.
      • by zoogies (879569) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:00PM (#24902171)

        Palin sounds so very reasonable when she says those things. Fact is, she believes creationism is an alternative theory on equal grounding with evolution. Psh. "Healthy debate is so important." Hah.

        There's no debate here: evolution is biology, creationism is not.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Tangent128 (1112197)
          Evolution is archeology. Natural selection is biology.

          One's history, one's science.
      • by thermian (1267986) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:06PM (#24902227)

        The simple fact is, if she came out and said creationism was bullshit, she'd lose tens of thousands of votes. Actually, likely a lot more if she said it during the presidential election.

        You *can't* be all out against it and get anywhere in the extreme conservatism of modern US politics.

        It doesn't matter that pushing a version of how life arose which was discredited two centuries ago is insane for the US as a country.

        Its all about the fact that if you say such things as 'Evolution is a proven fact, creationism is a philosophy with no basis in fact', you won't get anywhere in politics, at least not to a high level.

        In reality this is all about pandering to the right wing christian voters.

    • by ral8158 (947954) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:33PM (#24901859)
      um, Palin's current stance is that doesn't believe that creationism should be taught in school in addition to evolution, but that it should not be a prohibited topic. If you're going to diss a candidate, at least don't act like a raving fool and use actual arguments and assessments.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by ageoffri (723674)

      When asked during a televised debate in 2006 about evolution and creationism, Palin said, according to the Anchorage Daily News: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."

      The key here is healthy debate. While I think creationism is not even worth being called science, what is worse is the knee jerk reaction to not teach it. The US education system needs to teach critical thinking and you can not teach critical thinking by ignoring or banning things you disagree with.

      Another action that is a very big plus for the next Vice President of the U.S. is directly from the article you linked.

      But after Alaska voters elected her, Palin, now Republican John McCain's presidential running mate, kept her campaign pledge to not push the idea in the schools.

      This is perhaps the best part of the article. She made a pledge and has kept. Unlike so

      • by RightSaidFred99 (874576) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:52PM (#24902077)
        They should teach it, but it should be in a "world religions" class and not taught as science as it's just a bunch of stories made by the ancients to explain things they didn't understand. So teach it in a class about make believe things people in the olden days believed.

        The Bible, like it or not, has had a huge impact on the world and shouldn't be ignored. Really if you're not at least passingly familiar with the bible you're uneducated. So schools shouldn't just skip it altogether, they should teach it as a piece of literature, along with the Koran, the writings of Marx and Lenin, and other shit that has had a huge impact (good or bad) on history.

      • by modmans2ndcoming (929661) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:00PM (#24902175)

        Teaching non-science in a science class is not healthy debate.

        The debate belongs in a philosophy class.

      • by zoogies (879569) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:02PM (#24902189)

        How is this a knee jerk reaction? Creationism as you say, is not worth being called a science. You don't teach evolution and creationism side-by-side. Agree with other comments here: teach about it, fine, in a *world religions* class. Not present it as an alternative to the evolution model, which it is not.

    • Re:Hello... Books? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by wytcld (179112) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:38PM (#24901915) Homepage

      Okay, as mayor she tried to fire the town librarian (went so far as to give her a letter announcing she was fired) for not banning books from the library that people Palin knew found offensive [libraryjournal.com]. Can we look forward to a Net with all the offensive stuff removed, or else?

      Perhaps to her small credit, Palin backed down from firing the librarian. She went ahead, however, with firing the police chief. There had been a bunch of serious drunken driving bashups. The bars in Wasilla are open until 5 a.m. The chief proposed the closing time be moved to 2 a.m. The bar owners where friends and backers of Palin.

      The chief sued for unlawful termination. It went to the Alaska Supreme Court. They threw it out on the basis that in Alaska a mayor can fire a police chief at pleasure, without any requirement for justification.

      At first, this may seem unconnected to tech policy - unlike Palin's desire for censorship. But consider how much of the Net is devoted to selling drugs. The Wasilla area is the meth capital of Alaska [juneauempire.com]. Now, if you know small towns with drug problems, you know the patrons of the bars are also the patrons of the meth labs. How else do you expect them to stay up drinking until 5 a.m., before they go off to crash their trucks? Palin's in good with these country folks.

      So for the Net under Palin, bottom line: less porn, more drugs.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by exley (221867)

        Now, if you know small towns with drug problems, you know the patrons of the bars are also the patrons of the meth labs.

        Citation needed. Sure, that sounds good, and might even be true, but if you're gonna generalize like that you've gotta back it up.

        So for the Net under Palin, bottom line: less porn, more drugs.

        What? More drugs? Are you serious, or am I having a "whoosh" moment?

    • by arthurpaliden (939626) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:06PM (#24902221)
      Actually Creationism is an affront to God as it teaches us that God, who is supposedly all powerful and all knowing, was not smart enough to develop a dynamic system but had to settle for a static one.
  • Does it matter? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CSMatt (1175471) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:24PM (#24901769)

    I remember responses on Slashdot to Biden's poor tech record being rebutted with "well, he's just vice president." Couldn't you argue the same thing for Palin as well?

    • Re:Does it matter? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by martinw89 (1229324) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:33PM (#24901857)

      McCain is 72 and has had cancerous growths. Obama is 47 with a good health record.

  • Oh Great. (Score:4, Funny)

    by mweather (1089505) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:36PM (#24901903)
    Now we know who taught Ted Stevens about the internets.
  • by PFritz21 (766949) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:39PM (#24901939) Homepage Journal

    Palin is very attractive. Pictures of her are all over the Internet. And last time I checked, that's what the Internt is used for.

    Porn.

  • Technology? (Score:4, Informative)

    by toby (759) * on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:47PM (#24902029) Homepage Journal
    Her scandalous record on the environment [independent.co.uk] alone should perpetually disqualify her from government.
  • by plasmacutter (901737) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:54PM (#24902109)

    Again this so called tech source ignores the DMCA completely.

    This is the equivalent of talking about global warming and failing to mention the US addiction to the open road.

  • Bleh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tnk1 (899206) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @01:58PM (#24902147)

    Sarah Palin knows probably as much about the Internet as any other politician of her age does who did not work in tech. Which is to say, its unlikely that she'll be able to always avoid looking like an idiot to people who know tech, but she probably has a much better grounding than McCain or Biden and people of about that age.

    In the end, the censorship aspects don't really bother me, because it tends to be a very local issue. You don't censor anything without some sort of agitation behind it, and she's much more likely to find a high percentage of similarly minded people in East Nowhere, AK than in national office.

    And yes, I have to say that while her stance on certain things is not where I'd like it to be, the fact is that all indications are that she'll keep her nose out of the worst of it.

    Ultimately, though, I don't know many people who will for for or against her based on her tech stance. Its going to be the Economy, the War, and then the various wedge issues like abortion, in some order.

  • Linux? (Score:3, Informative)

    by blind biker (1066130) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:01PM (#24902187) Journal

    If what this guy said [slashdot.org] is true, they/she are not against the use of Linux at the state level.

  • by sskagent (1170913) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {10edapskcalb}> on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:04PM (#24902209) Homepage
    From TFA

    Sen. Barack Obama has made government transparency part of his platform. Gov. Palin has indeed taken that a step further by actually taking action in Alaska government. Currently, any check written by the state government over $1,000 is posted to the Division of Finance Web site.

    I am intrigued to see if this act spreads any. Having government spending records more freely available to the public is always good in my opinion.

  • The Daily Show (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Britz (170620) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @02:34PM (#24902527) Homepage

    This one is soooo cool:
    http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086&title=Sarah-Palin-Gender-Card [thedailyshow.com]

    You know, I don't care if they are right or left or nuts or both. But double standards are double standards and the right wing conservatives have a lot of issues where doublethink is required.

    Disclaimer: I used to like McCain back in the 90s when I read some smart foreign policy stuff and when he was working for campaign finance reform and generally across party lines. But I am not sure if he would make a better president than Obama.

  • Bullshit. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DaveV1.0 (203135) on Saturday September 06, 2008 @04:45PM (#24904105) Journal

    This is not "Sarah Palin's Stance On Technology Issues". This is "What BetaNews thinks Sarah Palin's Stance on Technology Issues are".

He keeps differentiating, flying off on a tangent.

Working...