WARNING PALIN DIASTER WARING PALIN DIASTER

Post Reply New Topic

They ran the story, people said 'eh?' and that was pretty much the end of it, as I recall. When the National Enquirer hired investigators and photographers to trail Edwards and actually have hard evidence, then that story went from 'Eh?' to 'Oh!' ... that's the way journalism works - poorly corroborated stories don't get traction, while well researched ones can.



Let's be honest - the Republican controlled Alaska legislature had a bi-partisan committee to investigate, and that committee appointed an investigator. Palin said she would cooperate, and then tried dragging her feet and blocking the investigation. The report says in black and white that she violated ethics laws, and she claims that the report cleared her entirely! And now that people are reading the report, McCain and Palin are crying politics.

Here's what the Anchorage Daily News says about it:

Unfortunately, many liberal sycophants took it seriously for no other reason than because it was in the NYTimes.

This particular story was the worst kept secret... EVER. All news outlets were aware of it; only one was brave / willing / foolish enough to break it. The rest followed when there was no longer a choice. More direct evidence of journalistic malfeasance. Feh.


Gosh monty; it seems you didn't take the time to read what I'd just written. Briefly, it said the state investigator skipped several logical steps before coming to a prejudicial conclusion. Should I provide a link so you can catch up?

No, I did read it - I just don't agree.

The fact that no one came right and said 'fire him' doesn't mean that there wasn't a clear pattern of inappropriate conduct. It was clear that the Governor, her staff and her husband were putting pressure on anyone involved in the process. There are laws and regulations for dealing with personnel matters, and there were repeated attempts by Palin to jump over the normal course of action.

If Palin simply disagrees with the report or rejects it as a political hatchet job, why did she claim it clears her and proves that she has broken no laws and done no wrong?? Anyone who compares her statement on the report to the report itself will conclude either that she is loony or is lying. Why didn't she provide sworn testimony outlining what she did and didn't do? Why did the Alaska Attorney Generals office not cooperate with subpoenas? Why did Palin maintain a Yahoo email account for conducting some of her official business? Why did Palin want to prosecute Wooten for Moose poaching even though her own father was a party to the crime, and then she pulled back the complaint when the investigator for that said that they couldn't just investigate wooten, they would have to investigate everyone in the party?

At the end of the day, I think it is clear that she used her office for a personal vendetta.

If these things were so important then how come Obama is ahead in the polls 14 points? The fact is Americans are tired of the attacks they want to hear talk about stuff that concerns them and as of right now the American people think that Obama is addressing their issues, I don't know if you have heard or not but a 106 year old nun named Cecelia Gaudette has stated that she is going to vote for Obama, the last president she voted for was Dwight David "Ike" Eisenhower. I think someone who has lived through 18 different presidents would really know the best candidates from the less than best candidates.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=6037036

Also I suggest you take a look at this poll.

http://abcnews.go.com/politics/PollTrac ... id=5611512

Let's see: a public servant under Palin's purview uses a taser on an 11 year old, drinks on the job, and makes a death threat against the Governor's family, yet escapes any serious repercussions. Despite the fact that Monegan himself admits the Palins did nothing wrong, I for one salute any effort she may have made to get an obviously dangerous employee off the State's payroll.

Obviously you don't agree. For you, this is a serious topic while Ayers / Wright / Rezko / ACORN are merely 'distractions'.

See the problem is with these nitpicky issues that really have nothing to do with the presidency is that the McCain camp has the exact same problems, so they basically get cancelled out.

Ayers? Well Palin has the Alaska Independence Party, which is a lot closer to being a traitor to the country IMO.

ACORN? You still haven't addressed McCain at an ACORN event in 2006.

Wright? Palin's religious leader is an evangelical nut who likes to accuse old women of being witches.

Rezko? He's just a guy who likes to give huge sums of money to the democratic party. If he has a shady past, so what? The democrats are supposed to refuse donations from anyone who has ever had a misdemeanor or felony? Does the republican party refuse donations from people with misdemeanors or felonies? I don't think so. I'm sure if you try you can find many felons who have donated money to McCain, but since it doesn't make a lick of difference I wouldn't bother if I were you.

If X is elected, beer will be illegal.

If Y is elected, they will pry your gun from your cold dead fingers.

Ah. Yes. Minimize the relevancy of the argument that you have lost. Nice.

Lets see... Add that to tacitly, and occasionally, obtusely insult the intelligence of the people debating with you in order to try and discredit them' and I guess that makes you a master debater.

(For the record, I don't consider a needle in the haystack google search to be citing your sources. )

Any politician is going to have skeletons in their respective closets; the 'usual' shady business associates, and special interest groups. Now, I wasn't going to bring this crud up, but since we are mud-slinging at politicians who could care less what we,- The Great Unwashed- think, what the heck.

For example:

James Hensley (A.K.A John McCains father-in-law) has a long an convoluted history of consorting with embezzler's, engaging in gambling rackets, and maintaining his own mafia connections.

-Kemper Marley
-Peter Licavoli (-who is a mobster with now doubt.)
-Bugsy Siegel (- again^)
-Gus Greenbaum

On another note:
-Charles H. Keating Junior

Now. Granted McCain escaped his association with Keating (a $359,000.00 association) and the Savings and Loan Scandal with only a rebuke for "poor judgement" by a Senate Ethics Committee, which frankly just tells me that he is only a certain higher caliber of criminal, but certainly not any less of one.

They are all crooks. McCain is just a little smarter about it. His father-in-law is associated with high dollar scum-bags that should scare the ever-living-p*** outta you, since you are apparently worried about that sort of thing.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about James Hensley and his mafia connections. Like I said, They Are All Crooks. Pick your poison.

So far I have seen you offer spurious speculation such as "mobster" connections (based on what? The the first name Tony?)

Repeated attempts to discredit those arguing with you by focusing on spelling minutia and slinging insults.

Not to mention (again), a blatant minimization of facts when you lose an argument.

I thought your whole underlying point was to call attention to lack of ethics? If only criminal businessmen, fringe groups, and shady lobbyists count, you're still supporting the wrong guy.

You've given me a few things to look into and think about, but for the most part, I'm not going to waste any more of my (or your) time.

Precisely.

Monegan and his staff said that it was made clear to them that their budget (for public safety of the state) was reduced as a political move to punish him for not firing Wooten outside of channels. So don't say that Monegan admits that Palin did no wrong; Monegan and his staff made serious charges, and you are trying to spin the picture on irrelevant details.

If there were allegations that there was an erratic, dangerous employee working for the state, by all means, that should be investigated. But the rules should be followed - why should there be a different standard for those that displease the power elite, and those who displease an average citizen??

Those are Monegan's own words, guy.

Believe, don't believe. Meh.

Yes, if you read the report, you will find Monegan's own words, and the words of staffers for Monegan. Regardless of whether you accept them or not, they demolish your claim that Monegan said that the Palins did no wrong. Clearly he said exactly the opposite, and clearly you cannot accurately describe what he said. You are a cheap propagandist.

I don't embarrass you when you missspell "misspell". You embarrass you.


27,700 hits weren't enough?


And will never be president, nor anywhere in the chain of succession. Desperate.


This has been dealt with: exonerated. But by all means, go on tap-dancing.


But Obama's the only one of the top tickets that wouldn't be able to get even a low-level security clearance if his past were scrutinized. Now he's a candidate for president, thanks entirely to the biases of the mainstream media.

Again, you are spinning and distorting.

Do let us know here across the pond, precisely when America sinks beneath the waves.
(Like Atlantis.)