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!