Is this the final straw?

[LEWCWA]

Palin found to have abused her power as Governor. Will this seal the deal for Obama?

[MJZiggy]

You beat me to it by 10 seconds...

[Joemailman]

This will probably be a 2 day story and then go away as the next debate looms. It may force her to curtail her attack dog role, although that was probably going to happen anyway. McCain has found she has created a monster he can't control with the Ayers related attacks on Obama. McCain was actually defending Obama's character today, and getting booed by his own crowd for doing so. The maverick and the lunatic fringe just don't mix well.

[Bretsky]

Having to vote for either candidate sickens me

[mraynrand]

The maverick and the lunatic fringe just don't mix well.

I agree. That's why people don't like Bill Ayers.

[hoosier]

Having to vote for either candidate sickens me

Well that's original. What realistic candidate would you prefer?

[Kiwon]

The maverick and the lunatic fringe just don't mix well.

I agree. That's why people don't like Bill Ayers.

Don't disturb their alternative universe thread, mraynrand. It's therapy for them.

If a tree falls in Alaska does anyone hear it? Remember, Palin's so unqualified that she doesn't have any power to abuse.

Obama, on the other hand, thanks to Bill Ayers, at age 33 had $50 million to dole out in Chicago for education and did nothing but purchase political influence with it as "a community organizer." He struck the activist jackpot and then placed his personal ambitions before the needs of the school children of Chicago.

One more time, kool-aid drinkers, just who abused the trust placed in them?

[digitaldean]

Palin's abuse was to deal with a safety commissioner that wouldn't fire a trooper who:
1.) Was drinking beer in his squad car on duty.
2.) Was poaching wildlife
3.) And used a taser on his son.

Yup, that's abuse all right. I wish all officials were this abusive in getting rid of deadbeats in gov't.

I do NOT like either presidential candidate. McCain is democrat-lite, Obama has embodied socialism under the guise of "fairness".

I suppose it shouldn't matter anyway now, since the Treasury wants to buy into 10-15% of stocks. There is a point of regulation, but that isn't one of them.

[th87]

Noonan doesn't like the Palin choice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDBW0SbDxPo

Conservative hypocrisy (what else is new, Kiwon):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXaGmHhCpMw

[texaspackerbacker]

Sheesh! You people are just beyond weird.

Obama was brought into politics and nurtured by a TRUE TERRORIST who committed MURDER against a cop in San Francisco and bombed the capitol, Pentagon, and NYC Police HQ (how Ayers was NOT executed or at least imprisoned for a long term is beyond comprehension), and Obama lied through his teeth about his association with the guy. That's not even bringing up Rezco, Wright, and the rest.

Yet you people try to make a big deal about Palin standing up for her sister against her wife abusing, child abusing ex-husband?

That's liberals for you!

That's the liberal principal of Moral Equivalence for you!

[th87]

Sheesh! You people are just beyond weird.

Obama was brought into politics and nurtured by a TRUE TERRORIST who committed MURDER against a cop in San Francisco and bombed the capitol, Pentagon, and NYC Police HQ (how Ayers was NOT executed or at least imprisoned for a long term is beyond comprehension), and Obama lied through his teeth about his association with the guy. That's not even bringing up Rezco, Wright, and the rest.

Yet you people try to make a big deal about Palin standing up for her sister against her wife abusing, child abusing ex-husband?

That's liberals for you!

That's the liberal principal of Moral Equivalence for you!

Whenever some sin of the conservative is pointed out, it always comes back to, "but look at what the liberals do!"

We're not talking about Ayers here. We're talking about Palin.

[SkinBasket]

We're not talking about Ayers here. We're talking about Palin.

What is there to talk about? She acted properly and legally.

[texaspackerbacker]

Sheesh! You people are just beyond weird.

Obama was brought into politics and nurtured by a TRUE TERRORIST who committed MURDER against a cop in San Francisco and bombed the capitol, Pentagon, and NYC Police HQ (how Ayers was NOT executed or at least imprisoned for a long term is beyond comprehension), and Obama lied through his teeth about his association with the guy. That's not even bringing up Rezco, Wright, and the rest.

Yet you people try to make a big deal about Palin standing up for her sister against her wife abusing, child abusing ex-husband?

That's liberals for you!

That's the liberal principal of Moral Equivalence for you!

Whenever some sin of the conservative is pointed out, it always comes back to, "but look at what the liberals do!"

We're not talking about Ayers here. We're talking about Palin.

That's precisely the point.

The so-called "sin" of the conservatives virtually always is piddlingly minor compared to some truly heinous offense by Dem/libs, not to mention the fact that whatever the conservative event is that you can name is overblown, over-publicized, and over-punished, while the Dem/lib event is covered up if possible and minimized if it can't be covered up, and virtually always under-punished or not punished at all.

Witness Kennedy (John--moral turpitude), (Ted--Chappaquiddick), Barney Franks (running a male prostitution ring of Congressional pages), Clinton (offenses too numerous to mention), and many many more.

Could you possibly have the gall to deny this? Could you possibly have the gall to cite any lame examples of Republicans equivalently guilty and equivalently under-punished?

[MJZiggy]

What is there to talk about? She acted properly and legally.


Except for that finding of abuse of power, sure. The Monegal firing was legal, her trying to force him to fire a trooper for her personal gain was not.

[texaspackerbacker]

What is there to talk about? She acted properly and legally.


Except for that finding of abuse of power, sure. The Monegal firing was legal, her trying to force him to fire a trooper for her personal gain was not.

She did something "illegal"? Even your own article doesn't say that. She "forced" the guy to fire the ex-brother-in-law? I don't think she is even accused of that. Suggested it/inquired about it/whatever, I ask you AGAIN, what's wrong with that? The creep stun-gunned his young step-son! That means NOTHING to you? How hypocritical can you get? You'd be yapping incessantly about how bad that is--iif the liberal/conservative positions were reversed here. Deny that!

[mraynrand]

Could you possibly have the gall to deny this? Could you possibly have the gall to cite any lame examples of Republicans equivalently guilty and equivalently under-punished?

I heard some guy tapped toes with a cop in a restroom stall. Perhaps he should be 'lynched.'

[MJZiggy]

It's not hypocrisy and she was accused of abuse of power. If he stun gunned his stepson, she should have had him arrested. Immediately. They're not immune to that you know. Were the police called in that instance?

She does not get to have people fired for personal revenge, that breaks the public trust. It's what she's accused of. You just don't like it because Palin did it, rather than a democrat.

[mraynrand]

It should be pointed out that some of the actions of the trooper are based on hearsay (I think the tasering is in this group), and also I think the supervisor who is referred to as being 'fired' was actually reassigned. Finally, the one thing that seems to have merit in the case is that Todd Palin apparently used the governor's office to pursue getting the cop fired. How that actually worked, and what the evidence for it consists of, I am uncertain.

[mraynrand]

Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

[mraynrand]

IS this the FINAL STRAW???: Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

[texaspackerbacker]

It's not hypocrisy and she was accused of abuse of power. If he stun gunned his stepson, she should have had him arrested. Immediately. They're not immune to that you know. Were the police called in that instance?

She does not get to have people fired for personal revenge, that breaks the public trust. It's what she's accused of. You just don't like it because Palin did it, rather than a democrat.

The guy ADMITTED he did it.

What if the liberal Democrat female governor of Michigan, for example, did something like Palin did? Are you actually gooing to claim you wouldn't be diametrically on the opposite side?

[MJZiggy]

It should be pointed out that some of the actions of the trooper are based on hearsay (I think the tasering is in this group), and also I think the supervisor who is referred to as being 'fired' was actually reassigned. Finally, the one thing that seems to have merit in the case is that Todd Palin apparently used the governor's office to pursue getting the cop fired. How that actually worked, and what the evidence for it consists of, I am uncertain.

That is the crux of the finding in the case, not the Monegan firing.

[mraynrand]

It should be pointed out that some of the actions of the trooper are based on hearsay (I think the tasering is in this group), and also I think the supervisor who is referred to as being 'fired' was actually reassigned. Finally, the one thing that seems to have merit in the case is that Todd Palin apparently used the governor's office to pursue getting the cop fired. How that actually worked, and what the evidence for it consists of, I am uncertain.

That is the crux of the finding in the case, not the Monegan firing.

No, they are both part of the same case - thus two findings, including:

Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.

[MJZiggy]

And yet she was still unanimously found to have abused her power. That finding came from the threat, not the actual firing.

Come on, you can say it. Sarah screwed up.

[mraynrand]

And yet she was still unanimously found to have abused her power. That finding came from the threat, not the actual firing.

Come on, you can say it. Sarah screwed up.

I already did, councilor (it's low level). Now let's hear you give an honest evaluation of the real significance of this - or are you just going to continue baiting.

[MJZiggy]

Of course you know the real significance of this depends on how and where the story spreads and how it plays out in the media.

I found it through a sideline link in USAToday to a blog in the Anchorage paper, but I haven't looked to see where else the story hit this morning. If the media leads with Palin's wrongdoing just to get away from stories on the failing markets, she has a problem. The fact that the finding came on a Friday doesn't help her and this gives Obama a nice bit of ammo in case she gets too nasty. I think McCain may have seen this coming because after the articles on his spurring on the anger in his crowds at rallies broke, he's backed off from that and was booed yesterday for defending Obama against the rage.

The importance of this event truly depends on how the folks who have somehow gotten this far in an election cycle without forming an opinion take to this news. But considering that they've already let the dogs out, it sure doesn't help.

[mraynrand]

Of course you know the real significance of this depends on how and where the story spreads and how it plays out in the media.

I found it through a sideline link in USAToday to a blog in the Anchorage paper, but I haven't looked to see where else the story hit this morning. If the media leads with Palin's wrongdoing just to get away from stories on the failing markets, she has a problem. The fact that the finding came on a Friday doesn't help her and this gives Obama a nice bit of ammo in case she gets too nasty. I think McCain may have seen this coming because after the articles on his spurring on the anger in his crowds at rallies broke, he's backed off from that and was booed yesterday for defending Obama against the rage.

The importance of this event truly depends on how the folks who have somehow gotten this far in an election cycle without forming an opinion take to this news. But considering that they've already let the dogs out, it sure doesn't help.

Well, that was a really nice political evaluation. But I was asking about it's actual significance. It's obvious you think it's an abuse of power, but where do you rank it? What do you compare it with? How often has the Governor in your state or any other state done something similar to this? Do you know? Did you hear of it? Were you outraged?

[MJZiggy]

I'm not outraged because of what Palin did. I've already told you that my opinion of the significance of this is worthless because I already didn't like her when I learned this piece of information. What does have value is the significance that those who haven't already formed a strong opinion of her attach to it, and the significance that her supporters see.

And what you see as baiting is really just me trying to get Tex or Sheep or someone to admit that a Republican isn't perfect and screwed up.

So now it's "she screwed up, but what governor hasn't, therefore it's not important?"

[mraynrand]

So now it's "she screwed up, but what governor hasn't, therefore it's not important?"

At the level of this particular issue, yes, you're exactly right.

[sheepshead]

Final Straw?? You wish

[Joemailman]

What is there to talk about? She acted properly and legally.


Except for that finding of abuse of power, sure. The Monegal firing was legal, her trying to force him to fire a trooper for her personal gain was not.

She did something "illegal"? Even your own article doesn't say that. She "forced" the guy to fire the ex-brother-in-law? I don't think she is even accused of that. Suggested it/inquired about it/whatever, I ask you AGAIN, what's wrong with that? The creep stun-gunned his young step-son! That means NOTHING to you? How hypocritical can you get? You'd be yapping incessantly about how bad that is--iif the liberal/conservative positions were reversed here. Deny that!

If she had evidence that the guy had stun-gunned his step-son, shouldn't she have reported that to the police so he could be arrested? How would getting him fired stop the abuse of his step-son?