Comments: But Invading His Privacy Is a Bad Thing

You mean to say he accused the film crew of trespassing as they were standing in his yard filming the Palin's fence. It is.

Palin, and apparently you, think it's an invasion of privacy for neighbors to look at each others homes from their own yards/decks. It's not.

It's pretty simple, if you don't want a neighbor 15 ft from your window, don't build an addition to your house that extends to within 15 feet of the property line.

Posted by Jim at May 28, 2010 01:42 PM

...and if you don't want borderline-crazy obsessed stalkers (working under the label "reporter"), don't be a female Republican who runs for national office. It's all your own fault if you do.

Posted by cirby at May 28, 2010 01:54 PM

Exactly because Democratic candidates never get followed by reporters. Just ask John Edwards or Gary Hart.

Posted by Jim at May 28, 2010 02:02 PM

Ya' know Jim, your right. She earned a stalker by accepting McCains offer.

But Hart should have been left alone for some "Monkey Business" and Pretty Pony had a right to make sex tapes and knock up his PR chick without all that Media hassle. I mean they were just campaigning that's all.

Posted by Gus Bailey at May 28, 2010 02:35 PM

No, they all "earned" attention from reporters. They're public figures.

The guy rented a house. All the stalking/peeping nonsense comes from a facebook smear by Palin - because the guy was on his deck and that deck is visible from the Palin house. That's all we know actually happened. No peeping into Willows room -- if you look at the two houses the Palin's 2nd story is a lot higher than the rental, assuming Willow sleeps upstairs I have no idea how anyone could see into her bedroom but now we're getting into details and Sarah isn't big on details she just wanted to take a swipe at the guy and her fans went into the requisite faux outrage mode.

So again, film crew in my yard without premission, trespassing. My neighbor looking at my yard, not trespassing. Not stalking, not peeping, not...anything. There's no there, there.

Posted by Jim at May 28, 2010 02:56 PM

Fair enough.

He's still creepy and his motives don't pass my smell test.

Then again, perception is reality and Palin's motives may fail your smell test.

Have a nice weekend.

And let us all remember those who gave all for our country.

Posted by Gus Bailey at May 28, 2010 03:16 PM

Thanks Gus, have a great one too, and as you say let's remember why we have Monday off.

Posted by Jim at May 28, 2010 03:17 PM

So Jim - the lib that you are - we assume you are as equally indignant toward the bus loads of union thugs that stormed the porch of a Bank of America executive - and scared the hell out of a 14 year old child. I wonder - did you rail against them some where in the blogosphere as you are the reporter, film crew & Sarah Palin????? Hmmmmmmmmmm???

Posted by mixitup at May 28, 2010 05:11 PM

I didn't see anyone defending the union thugs, so no, I didn't feel the need to go on record and agree with everyone else that they were acting like jerks. If it makes you feel any better though I can -- Bad union thugs, bad!

They were at the very least trespassing. The neighbors of the BoA exec who watched what was happening on his lawn from their lawns were not. See how this works?

Posted by Jim at May 28, 2010 05:27 PM

"Just ask John Edwards"? The Enquirer had to do that because the "media" couldn't be bothered to look at a democrat. Palin isn't having an illicit affair with someone, she is living at her house. How you can even equate the two shows how far gone you are

Posted by dagny at May 28, 2010 09:30 PM

I wonder how Jim would feel if some man was looking into his young daughter's bedroom window?

Posted by incognito at May 28, 2010 09:39 PM

Jim would be outraged. Just as any good little democrat with a double standard would be.

There's rules for liberals. And there's rules for the rest of us. Simple.

Posted by John at May 29, 2010 06:05 AM

Jim, I understand what you are saying and technically you are correct, however there seems to be a clear difference in moving in next to someone with a clear motive of what you are going to do. Do you expect McGinniss to have a fair accounting of what he will see?

The thing we are all worried about is that the left has a much bigger history of the lunatic fringe that will take harmful action toward political figures they hate.

And as far as not seeing anyone defending what the Union Thugs did, you may be right, but I sure haven't seen anyone on the left condemning what they did.

Posted by Mike at May 29, 2010 11:28 AM

Personally, I'd try to see more of McGinnis
1. Purchase a new .243 Remington rifle with 3-9 Leupold scope
2. Purchase a shooting bench and sandbags
3. Purchase a box of .243 ammo
4. Purchase brass polish, Brasso or equivalent
5. Polish the ammo until it glistens, wax to preserve the shine.
6. Arrange shooting bench to face McGinnis' rented house.
7. Arrange 12-15 rounds of ammo standing up on the shooting bench in easy reach
8. Using the .243 rifle, examine every inch of the house McGinnis is renting, and his car, and his haberdashery, under variable powers of magnification.
9. Repeat as necessary.
.
Note that I never said I'd LOAD the rifle. That might be illegal. . . . But I doubt that sitting on one's own property, pointing a perfectly legal firearm in the direction of one's choosing, constitutes ANY sort of illegal action absent any other threats. . .
.
It's one of those things like oh, say, having a stalker move in next door, where the police would say "We can't do anything as long as he has not made any overt threats . . . he's within his rights."
.
I have no doubt McGinnis would be the first to blink, so to speak.

Posted by outnow at May 29, 2010 04:16 PM

What office is Palin currently running for? Or holding? Hart and Edwards were campaigning; she's not.

GFY, Jim.

Posted by Rob Crawford at May 29, 2010 07:59 PM

OUCH - Jim you are such a snarky guy!! When I grow up I hope I can be half as snarky as you.
By the way, about 10 stories down CY opened up a discussion about the union thugs and their horror show. Funny, there were 21 comments posted, but I didn't see any of your signature snarky comments CONDEMNING the thugs. Guess you missed that one, but obviously had the time to beat up on Palin and some innocent reporter just trying to do his job. Like Mike above said, "sure haven't seen anyone on the left condemning what they did." I guess that applies to you - what a missed opportunity to be un-hypocritical(yea - I know it not a real word - but you get my meaning - I hope!!!!!!!!

Posted by mixitup at May 29, 2010 08:43 PM

什么是佩林办公室当前正在运行的?或控股?哈特和爱德华兹竞选人,她不是。 以绿植租摆

Posted by jk at May 30, 2010 04:34 AM

outnow, in any jurisdiction I'm aware of, that's called "brandishing", and it's illegal. Pointing a gun at a house is automatically negligent and stupid.

"Warning shots are BS. Never point a gun at anyone unless you intend to shoot them. Never shoot a gun at anyone unless you intend to kill them."

Posted by SDN at May 30, 2010 10:45 AM

i just can't imagine being sarah palin. what she and her family have to go through, it's like reading a medieval book, far, far away. like she is the rightful heir to the throne and the enemy in control is doing everything they can to destroy her.

imho, we are living in very historic times, at least in my life time. a president that is at war with the american people, a president that is a racial divider, a class divider, a divider, divider, divider. his foreign policy against Israel, God's chosen land and people, is crazy. the list can go on forever.

one thing i do know, is that GOD is in control and Israel will never go down. don't believe me? read the book of revelation with a commentary if needed. the other thing that i know is, obama will not win against our almighty GOD. it may seem that he is winning for awhile, however, he will not prevail.

Posted by southernsue at June 1, 2010 08:57 PM