Breaking News. Palin abuse of power.

the wolf wrote:

oh, i agree. laws were broken. i was just "reporting" what was on the news and trying to do it in a "bipartisan" way.

Oh ok, gotcha. Just making sure.

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

Fishy contibutions to a group called Acorn. Ties to radical named Ayers which he said and I quote, "'I assumed that he had been rehabilitated'"

did ayers spend any time in jail...?

what's he doing now, is he in gitmo....?

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

Fishy contibutions to a group called Acorn. Ties to radical named Ayers which he said and I quote, "'I assumed that he had been rehabilitated'"

I see that you're still hung up on that entire Ayers thing. Today John McCain called Barack Obama a good man. Which is it? Is he a terrorist supporter or a good man? Americans are tired of this crap and after seeing the market drop this past week who has time for ridiculous accusations? John McCain should put his country first and vote for Barack Obama.

MrSmith wrote:

its ok to abuse power as long as your preacher isnt a nutjob.

all preachers are nutjobs

Sludge Factory wrote:

I in no way want to defend Palin, but some are saying the Alaskan ethics law that was broken actually says if someone uses their political authority for personal financial gain. I could be wrong about the law, I'm just relaying what I read in the yahoo news release.

Yea there seems to be some confusion and fogginess surrounding whether or not she actually broke the law. Some reports have her saying she did, some say she didn't. Either way, I'm going to assume she did since there's so much uncertainty. She definitely abused and misused her authority regardless of whether or not a law was broken.

Pats54 wrote:

Not to mention 20+ years with Mr. Goddam America himself The Wright Reverend and Obama supposedly a very smart person says "I never heard him speak like that in all the time I was in the church" his voters really are pretty stupid and uninformed.

20+ years huh? Funny because he completely severed ties from what I heard. Show me the proof Obama was there when Wright was spouting off. No wait don't because it's not even an issue. It's just something McCain and his supporters are clinging to because they can't win on the real issues like the economy, war, health care and so on. If you wanna bring up religious figures tied to the candidates let's talk about McCain's buddy Pastor Hagee and Palin's buddy Thomas Muthee. It's not just one sided. Oh and a little off topic but the Patriots suck and so does Bruschi. See their game against the Dolphins this year? Slaughtered.

bootlegger10 wrote:

I would think an abuse of power would be not firing a police officer who used a stun gun on a 10 year-old kid. Seems common sense to me, but evidently not to this public safety chief. Now I guess Palin takes the fall for making sure a stun gun happy police officer is off the streets.

Excuse me, but that's not the issue at all. That's hearsay. Palin wanted him fired for her and her sister's PERSONAL reasons. Which in itself is verging on breaking the law. If he stun guns a 10 year old it's not the governors job to make sure he's fired. It's the local law enforcement's job to arrest him if he abused a child. Then it would be his superior's job to fire him. So if someone stun guns a child who IS NOT the husband of the governor's sister, it's the job of the Governor to make sure that person is fired? Is that what you're saying? If you are the answer is no. You're missing the point that Sarah Palin as governor has no business trying to get her sister's husband or ex-husband fired. Nice try at twisting the issue though. Try again. Better yet, don't.

fugawzi wrote:

Excuse me, but that's not the issue at all. That's hearsay. Palin wanted him fired for her and her sister's PERSONAL reasons. Which in itself is verging on breaking the law. If he stun guns a 10 year old it's not the governors job to make sure he's fired. It's the local law enforcement's job to arrest him if he abused a child. Then it would be his superior's job to fire him. So if someone stun guns a child who IS NOT the husband of the governor's sister, it's the job of the Governor to make sure that person is fired? Is that what you're saying? If you are the answer is no. You're missing the point that Sarah Palin as governor has no business trying to get her sister's husband or ex-husband fired. Nice try at twisting the issue though. Try again. Better yet, don't.

Oh the hatred spewed from the left. If a policeman uses a stun gun on an innocent 10 year old kid (one that is not at risk of harming anyone), then YES, he should be fired. And guess what, if the guy in position to fire him doesn't, then there is someone higher who should fire that person too. And that is how we get to Palin.

And welcome to earth if you didn't know that having ties to a powerful politician can have bad effects too. If you were a CEO of a company, with an office in New York City, and an employee of one of your 25 manufacturing locations (lets say this one is in North Carolina) treats your daughter badly (maybe slaps her a couple times), then you would want that individual fired from your company. Even though you are 15 steps in the chain above that individual, you will tell whoever the person is who is in the position to fire this guy, to fire him. And if that person doesn't listen, then you'll probably fire him too. And you know what, if it wasn't personal, you might not have fired the employee. Its just the way the world works.

Pick and choose what you want. Anyway, the report didn't say any criminal action or censure was necessary. Non-issue. You should try again (maybe not).

bootlegger10 wrote:

Oh the hatred spewed from the left. If a policeman uses a stun gun on an innocent 10 year old kid (one that is not at risk of harming anyone), then YES, he should be fired. And guess what, if the guy in position to fire him doesn't, then there is someone higher who should fire that person too. And that is how we get to Palin.

And welcome to earth if you didn't know that having ties to a powerful politician can have bad effects too. If you were a CEO of a company, with an office in New York City, and an employee of one of your 25 manufacturing locations (lets say this one is in North Carolina) treats your daughter badly (maybe slaps her a couple times), then you would want that individual fired from your company. Even though you are 15 steps in the chain above that individual, you will tell whoever the person is who is in the position to fire this guy, to fire him. And if that person doesn't listen, then you'll probably fire him too. And you know what, if it wasn't personal, you might not have fired the employee. Its just the way the world works.

Pick and choose what you want. Anyway, the report didn't say any criminal action or censure was necessary. Non-issue. You should try again (maybe not).

HAHA...where do I start?

1) I don't follow left or right guidelines or partisanship as you suggest. That's part of the problem today. If you don't line yourself up with someone you consider to be on the opposite side, then that person is automatically wrong?

2) What hate are you referring to? Because I disagreed with you or Palin or whoever? Please show me the example of my "hate" to which you are referring.

3) Thanks for the welcome to Earth, nice planet you have here. I'm fully aware of the negative effects of being close to a politician. How does that excuse Palin's behavior? Does it make it right? No.

4) I'm sorry but your analogy is severely flawed. That's NOT really how the world works actually. Just because it does in SOME cases doesn't make it right. I didn't say someone who abuses a child should not be fired. Again you're missing the issue at hand. That's not the allegation here.

It doesn't go from the officer in question, his superior, and then the governor. If the officer was found guilty of child abuse I'm sure his superior would have fired him, and if not his superior's superior could fire him. The governor has nothing to do with it, except in this case because it was her SISTER'S HUSBAND OR EX-HUSBAND.

You avoided my question maybe because you didn't understand. So I'll ask again. If it wasn't Palin's sister's hubby or ex hubby, should Palin see to it that the person was fired? No. That's the issue. She has no business trying to fire someone for personal reasons. And obviously the panel who concluded that she abused her authority agrees. Keep in mind the panel was comprised of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats, hardly a "left" panel.

Oh and it IS an issue. Palin abused her authority according to the panel and report to which you refer. Not to mention she wasn't honest about it, including her campaign's spin they put on the report yesterday.

bootlegger10 wrote:

That is disgusting.

Don't discount the liberals' blind hatred either though. Joe Lieberman, four years from being a Democratic VP candidate, is blackballed for only voting down the Democratic party line 95% of the time. Not a lot of tolerance on either side (although, too much tolerance is a very bad thing).

Lieberman....you know he asked Obama to help him raise funds in 06, when he lost the primary and was running as an Independent. Obama was the hottest Democrat, so Lieberman used him in 2006, and knifed him in the back in 2008. Maybe that's why he's a man without an Island in the Senate. you want a real laugh, watch him try and defend Palin, who believes in just about everything Lieberman opposes. So far his best defense has been: Let's hope McCain lives 4 years