Palin's Facebook tough talk falls flat
January 05, 2010 6:08 pm ET by Simon Maloy
It would be difficult to sum up all the things that are wrong, silly, and ridiculous with former half-term governor Sarah Palin's terrorism policy paper/Facebook status update, so we'll just break it down, piece by piece.
We are at war with radical Islamic extremists and treating this threat as a law enforcement issue is dangerous for our nation's security. That's what happened in the 1990s and we saw the result on September 11, 2001.
Funny, I heard the exact same thing on The O'Reilly Factor last night from Dick Morris. Equally funny is how Sarah Palin found the one way to make herself even less credible on national security matters -- copping material from Dick Morris. Moving on:
It simply makes no sense to treat an al Qaeda-trained operative willing to die in the course of massacring hundreds of people as a common criminal.
What an odd thing to write, particularly when you consider that earlier today we learned that Zacarias Moussaoui -- the Al Qaeda-trained operative willing to die in the course of massacring thousands of people on 9-11 who was tried by the Bush administration as a common criminal -- had his conviction upheld in court after a federal appeals court denied his appeal. Slogging forward:
Reports indicate that Abdulmutallab stated there were many more like him in Yemen but that he stopped talking once he was read his Miranda rights.
I certainly haven't seen any "reports" to that effect. In fact, CNN reported today that they spoke to law enforcement officials and they "would not say whether [Abdulmutallab is] cooperating or if he was read his Miranda rights." Continuing:
Giving foreign-born, foreign-trained terrorists the right to remain silent does nothing to keep Americans safe from terrorist threats. It only gives our enemies access to courtrooms where they can publicly grandstand, and to defense attorneys who can manipulate the legal process to gain access to classified information.
You know, I've heard this one before too -- and it's already been debunked. Federal courts don't do televised trials, thus making a "public grandstand" pretty close to impossible. And lastly:
President Obama was right to change his policy and decide to send no more detainees to Yemen where they can be free to rejoin their war on America. Now he must back off his reckless plan to close Guantanamo, begin treating terrorists as wartime enemies not suspects alleged to have committed crimes, and recognize that the real nature of the terrorist threat requires a commander-in-chief, not a constitutional law professor.
Gotta love the false choice between tough ("commander-in-chief") and smart ("constitutional law professor").
I always suspected Palin had an ulterior motive for quitting as governor, and now I know what it is -- she wanted to spend more time absorbing warmed-over right-wing talking points and copying-and-pasting them onto Facebook as her very own. Mission accomplished.

















Anybody who would vote for this woman is a moron... plain and simple.
Gawd bless her.
*sarcasm
<sarcasm>
I remember on TechTV, on The Screen Savers, they tried to destroy one of those. Sledgehammer, saw, etc.... the d**n thing just wouldn't die!
The Constitution Sarah, you know that document you Claim to love guarantees a Terrorist his day in Court.
Your Lack of a Sophisticated Education is Glaring.
Your love of the Constitution is Wearing.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
There better not be any truth to that last part.
Life is tough enough without having to worry about seeing that at the newstand.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told the media on Tuesday that Mr Abdulmutallab had "spent a number of hours with FBI investigators in which we gleaned usable, actionable intelligence".
Because don't you know, since he's a terrorist, it'd be okay to terrorize him - because, don't you know, it's okay for us to terrorize terrorists.
But, if it's okay to terrorize terrorists, how come it's not okay for us to rape child rapists, or torture people like the guy who kidnapped Jaycee? Well, it's not okay for us to do those things because that's not who we are. We don't rape rapists as punishment. We don't chop off the hands of thieves. And we shouldn't feel free to terrorize terrorists.
Not because they don't DESERVE to be terrorized. But because we, as a people, as a nation, WE don't do that kind of stuff!
Answer: Because Muslim terrorists are not US citizens. They are in fact POW's so we interrogate them - we do not "terrorize" them.
At what point will you lefties finally realize we are at war against Muslim terrorism? Will it be after a few more fellow Americans are forced to jump to their deaths from a 1,200 foot building rather then be barbecued to death - while a few thousand more Americans are just blown to pieces?
Why do you not care about other Americans or even other people? What is it that makes you so indifferent and uncompassionate towards fellow human beings?
And please don't trot out your usual Ben Franklin quote "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety". He also said, "Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn." Those who refuse to accept profiling Muslims, refuse to agree with treating Muslim terrorists as POW's, closing Gitmo, etc are indeed ignorant and unwilling to learn.
BTW: I was right (again) this years election will purge many leftists out of Congress. Already a couple demoncrat Senators are quitting and a Representative have switched parties, along with a few other big shot Demos bailing. Demoncrats will pay the price of going against the vast majority of Americans on the war on terror and Obamacare (not to mention Cap and Trade, 2008 stimulus, giving the Auto makers to unions, etc, etc, etc.).
Technically, your "Muslim terrorists" are not POW's, since they do not belong to a country with which we are at war. They belong to that murky "enemy combatant"/ "infiltrator" / "spy" category.
However, the issue is not what THEY are, but how WE treat them. I prefer that we treat them like the "civilised" country we claim to be.
We interrogate suspected criminals in criminal cases. These fools want to be able to do MORE than that. More than interrogation is terrorizing, then torturing.
The problem is US terrorizing or torturing anyone isn't about WHO we're doing it to. It's about US doing it.
That's the point at your kind never gets. Because you're so blinded by your ideology. You're traitors to the USA, all the while thinking that you're being patriots.
What do I need to break through that thick head of yours? A brick? The USA does not terrorize anyone! Not even POW's! At most we deprive POW's of some sleep and force them to listen to elevator music! Maybe a few get water boarded. Big deal! A very small thing when compared to the saving of thousands of American lives.
DD: "That's the point at your kind never gets. Because you're so blinded by your ideology. You're traitors to the USA, all the while thinking that you're being patriots."
Yeah, I'm the traitor because I want thousands of Americans saved from certain death by treating Muslim terrorists as POW's and you’re the patriot for endorsing the death of same. Makes perfect sense to libbies though.
Yeah, we all pine for the glory days when we had a real War Prezdint.
Yeah, someone with military experience, like Sarah...oh, whoops, she's neither a commander nor a professor. But hey, to beat Hitler it took a commander in chief who...whoops, FDR never served. America's other great wartime President, Lincoln, had all of three weeks militia experience. America's greatest military strategist to achieve the White House was Grant, an inept President who presided over an astonishingly corrupt administration.
Sorry Bible Spice, nobody is buying this.
The Good news: The Republican party is connecting themselves more closely with this fringe group of idiots.
Wonder if the might Ms. P is going to be on the subway Pantsless on Sunday. She'll have lots to twitter about then!
". . .and recognize that the real nature of the terrorist threat requires a commander-in-chief, not a constitutional law professor."
IMHO, it would seem more likely that a constitutional law professor might be inclined to know what the constitution actually says than a quitter governor of the least populous state in America.
We need Sista Sarah to stay around for more insanity and giving the Teapartiers what they want. I can't wait until the day she decides that God is talking through her. Oh that God of ours really picks some fine conduits.(Conduit, isn't that some type of Eskimo tribe. I'll twit Sarah and ask her).
Those who have been incarcerated in Gitmo, some have been released thanks to the previous administration. ALL are recruiting tools for our enemies and some on the fence. OUR Judicial branch has found against those lemmings on the right who favor what Bush and his cohorts in CRIME have done or purposed. Now that some of those at Gitmo have been tortured to confessing, they really can't be tried.....what to do, what to do? OUR "shining light" has been doused in the GOParty of panderers railroading ignoring the "rule of LAW" which our country was BASED!!!!!