I disagree, but since you were kind enough not to tear apart my hideous excuse for a sentence, I won’t object if someone else awards you the cookie.
Taking these three sentences together it’s hard to tell whose side you’re on, but in case you’re serious, the investigator wasn’t convinced that anyone felt seriously threatened:
That’s far and away the most adorable Taser anecdote I’ve ever read.
From the mouth of Walt Monegan himself:
“Friday” would have been August 29, 2008.
Now, if Branchflower thinks that’s abuse of power (and it is only Branchflower, we’re talking about - there is no “panel”), that’s all well and good. However, this is just Branchflower’s report to the Legislative Council, not the findings of the Legislative Council. There’s no there there.
Not saying there won’t be, mind you. Just that it’s not there yet.
And thus it is confirmed: no minds are changed.
Again, those who are hardcore Palin syncophants will remain so, those who are are hardcore Obama haters will remain so, those who are just lovers of McCain for other reasons will remain so. Those who see Palin as proof of McCain’s poor judgment will continue to believe so, but no more so than they already did.
The rest are already ignoring that Palin exists or consider her mildly either way other than as a bit of distracting entertainment of no real import … like celebrity gossip. The rest have been concluding that Obama seems more Presidential than McCain, is less risky than McCain, and more likely to to get us on a better path to the future than McCain.
Allow the Palin lovers their justifications; there is enough other evidence of McCain’s unsuitability for the job without beating the issue of Palin any more.
Update: Palin denies any wrongdoing, says “You gotta read the report!”
Did SHE read it? I bet she thinks it’ll give her extra time to stall.
You know mate, this sort of thing is disappointing. In reading up on this I find your objection an almost copy paste of the party political people, but in reading the actual document, I am hard pressed as a Tory sort to see tortured reasoning.
It seems clear the woman let her offices (and was actively involved in enabling such, or alt. was stunningly incompetent and disinvolved in managing her smallish provincial offices) be used for furthering a family feud.
This is despicable behaviour that fundamentally undermines proper democracy. (pity its too common in local government here, but…) Calling the reports conclusions “tortured” - at least at my ordinary understanding of reasonable behaviour without getting into empty legalisms - seems touching the depths of empty party political behaviour. I have been looking in amazement at own party criticism of the current candidacy on the right, but with this I think I understand it. Like Labour in the 70s or the Tories c. early 90s, a side has become impossibly blinded to its own corrupt idiocy. Natural, and the partisans need to be whacked. Will happen, one hopes soon, in UK (after properly whacking Maggie at the end), and should happen there.
And really mate, you should read your note in utter shame, unless you’re one of those party political diehards (whatever formalities it is behaviour that counts).
You have not read many of magellan01 posts, have you?
I agree. The sufferers of Palin Derangement Syndrome continue to wail to an uncaring heaven. By all means, ignore the facts. Don’t actually address the issue. Care to comment on what I posted other than your fingers-in-ears-la-la-la attitude? But go ahead; believe in your empty-suit messiah and your borderline insane VP choice. We’ll be over here when you all are ready to rejoin reality.
If I didn’t know any better, I could attribute this exact quote to the other side and it would have equal relevance.
People who use the phrase “empty suit messiah” rarely have anything to say that is worth responding to…
Huh. And the Republicans manage to combine one in Sarah Palin.
While there are certainly some Obama fans who think he’s an amazing, charismatic leader full of hope for the future, practically flawless in every way, even you can’t claim that they believe he’s a literal religious savior. That kind of freakish devotion and utter insanity belongs to your team’s loonies:
From The Strang Report: Prayin’ for Palin.:
So which side again has the “empty suit messiah”? Which side’s candidate actually believes this shit? The same side that calls Obama the antichrist. Such charming beliefs they have! Such a Jesus-like love for their fellow man!
The original Queen Esther, it must be said, was never found guilty of abusing power and firing a guy merely to further a shabby family squabble. Apparently those who are GOD-APPOINTED and GOD-CALLED these days are allowed a bit more leeway for sleaze.
On your own ADN cite, there’s a recorded phone call from one of Palin’s subordinates calling a lieutenant in Monegan’s office saying, among other things, that “the governor is scratching her head as to why [Wooten] is still representing the department.” Given this, the numerous emails, dozens of phone calls from Palin’s staff but also Palin herself and Todd Palin, as well as mentioning the issue to Monegan in person several times, it’s clear that Palin not only wanted Wooten fired but wanted Monegan to do it. And this was all AFTER the investigation into Wooten concluded and he had already been punished for his illegal and improper conduct.
As the report says, there’s no dispute that Palin could have fired Monegan because his moustache scared her, but she was improperly using her position of authority (with her husband muscling in as well) to try and get Wooten fired after he was already punished for his actions.
Interestingly enough, you never actually have to say the words “fire that man” to strongly imply this is your desire, nor do you have to say them to coerce someone in to helping you achieve that end.
Maybe I’m not understanding your position, but are you arguing that nobody tried to pressure Monegan in to firing Wooten? Do you think saying “This isn’t a person that we would want to be representing our state troopers.” implies that you would like the “person” to not have a job as a state trooper?
I hereby acknowledge these facts:
Fact: A bipartisan legislative committee of the Republican-dominated Alaska legislature unanimously called for an investigation of potential abuses of power and/or improper actions by members of the executive branch.
Fact: Palin then prompted her attorney general to begin a separate investigation, which the Republican chair of the House Judiciary Committee called “harmful to the credibility of the administration, harmful to the process and harmful to all the parties involved” and “the worst possible thing to be doing.”
Fact: After repeatedly saying she would cooperate fully, Palin declined to be interviewed.
Fact: Palin filed an ethics complaint against herself with the Personnel Board, which answers to her.
Fact: When the legislative committee declined to call off its investigation, Palin’s lawyer told the Personnel Board there was no reason to proceed on the ethics complaint.
Fact: The investigator found that the governor had abused her power in violation of state law: AS 39.52.110(a) of the Ethics Act.
There’s no if there.
The reality is that no one here believes Obama is a messiah but he is certainly not an empty suit. He has faced shrewd, experienced, and well-connected opponents in the primary and general elections and outmaneuvered them at practically every turn. He has shown himself to be not just a stirring orator but a savvy campaigner and an effective debater with extensive knowledge and deep understanding of the major issues of the day. Say you disagree with him, but to call him an empty suit at this stage of the game shows a willful blindness to reality.
Here’s a letter from today’s newspaper:
Tell me again about reality and those who live in it. It’s such a charming fable from the party of the loony.
Yes, now, that’s the sort of thing I suspected probably happened. Just horseplay, which they all laughed at until they decided he was the enemy.
Arizona, to be fair no doubt few minds would have been changed if this report exonerated her either. But it didn’t.
Branchflower was hired with the unanimous approval of the bipartisan panel to investigate the allegations made. The panel is made up of 4 Democrats and 8 Republicans. They also, unanimously, appointed Sen. French to manage Branchflower. Unanimously. A panel the majority of which were Republican.
Branchflower is no political hack. For 28 years he was Anchorage prosecuter and returned to run the newly created Office of Victim Rights. His job as prosecuter was prinarily to evaluate cases for prosecution. He was not objected to by either side because he has been widely respected by Alaskans in general.
Palin agreed to this process and promised cooperation. On multiple occassions. She then rescinded that promise once she was under Team McCain’s wing.
The findings are Branchflower’s report, akin to the report of an independent special prosecuter. The panel agreed to release it. They have not per se endorsed it.
What is clear?
Palin’s extended family is a motely crew and there has a been a messy divorce with various allegations made, some possibly based on fact, some not, some with some exaggeration.
Some disciplinary action was taken against Wooten but the Palin family was not satisfied.
The Governor’s office and the Governor’s appartchik’s were used to put pressure on Monegan from virtually the day he was sworn in, pressure that made it clear that the governor was displeased that Wooten was on the force. Monegan made it clear that he had no reason to revisit past disciplnary actions.
Palin has a clear history of firing people who she has felt are not loyal enough to her. She has been within her legal rights to do so each time. Monegan was as aware of that history as anyone else.
There is no clear proof that Monegan was fired for refusing to fire Wooten and Palin is within her legal rights to fire him.
The independent investigator hired unanimously by a bipartisan comittee, a professional prosecuter, did find that the use of the Governor’s office to pressure Monegan was an abuse of power and constituted a violation of the ethics rules.
Now I am not wailing about this. I really don’t care. I have plenty of other reasons to have already concluded that Palin is not a suitable person to be a heartbeat away from being our country’s President. If I did not have those reasons then this alone would give me only a moderate amount of pause but not be a deal-breaker. And if I otherwise admired Palin then this would be something I could find in my heart to ignore. I would hope that I would not delude myself like you have done, but accept her character flaw as part of a complete package that is overall to my liking.
No minds will be changed on the basis of this alone.
McCain rolled the dice on Palin. And she gave a damn good convention speech. But the dice kept rolling and they didn’t end up buying baby a new pair of shoes. She will get him some turn-out among the hardcore RR, but she has ended up losing him some of the middle. Just some. Most of the middle McCain has lost himself … and Obama has won over. No, they have not become convinced he is the messiah, just that he is an effective politician who has the skill set to be an effective President. This eternal process has given them enough of a chance to conclude that.
Wail about it if you want.
It should also be noted that up here Branchflower is known as a conservative.
The Times article on Friday, based on interviews with people who finally talked, mentioned Todd meeting with Monegan in a state conference room. Todd had a stack of personnel folders on the table. I’d want to know how someone unconnected with state government and with no official capacity got private folders. That must be against some privacy laws.
Arizona, if your principal’s spouse had it in for you for some reason, would you be happy if he/she got access to your private records?
The article made me think Alaska was being run like some family owned company, where the rules didn’t really apply and family rules supreme. Why do we think she wouldn’t run the country the same way?
Shit, poor kids. So basically, the kids could end up with their messed up shithead of a father, because Auntie couldn’t be arsed to take the legal means to deal with him.