Yahoo! Main Page, Palin guilty of Violating Ethics

[delusionsofNORMALity]

isn't it amazing, how partisanship works. on a site where i have often heard deafening cries over the abuses of law enforcement's power, we now seem to have so many who are coming to the defense of such abuse. i can only find it excruciatingly humorous that, for the sake of defending the mighty liberal cause, y'all are willing to overlook the faults of this officer and the failure of his superiors to properly chastise him in order to attack someone who was trying to do what most of you would usually applaud. oh, if only she were on the other side of the aisle, then you could pat her on the back for a job well done.

the hypocrisy of partisanship knows no bounds.:S2:

[Mississippi Steve]

isn't it amazing, how partisanship works. on a site where i have often heard deafening cries over the abuses of law enforcement's power, we now seem to have so many who are coming to the defense of such abuse. i can only find it excruciatingly humorous that, for the sake of defending the mighty liberal cause, y'all are willing to overlook the faults of this officer and the failure of his superiors to properly chastise him in order to attack someone who was trying to do what most of you would usually applaud. oh, if only she were on the other side of the aisle, then you could pat her on the back for a job well done.

the hypocrisy of partisanship knows no bounds.:S2:

The hyprocrisy in general knows no bounds... The question I have is simply this... How many of you could stand to have your personal, private, family, and professional lives opened up to the world and broadcast all the questionable and bad stuff on the evening news and CNN??
Could you pass muster?? Ever heard of a glass house??

I am Mississippi Steve, and I approve this message.:thumbsup:

[daihashi]

Then why is he still working and why wasn't this a priority of the next Public Safety Commissioner? Apparently at first, Walt Monegan was stating that he was never contacted about firing the brother-in-law then later on he recanted his story. Something just doesn't add up here....

Have a good one!:s4:

I'm honestly not sure what you're defending here. Palin said it was for budgetary reasons and then there were obviously things happening at home that would've created a conflict of interest.

So please tell me exactly what you're arguing or defending here because it seems that you're jumping point to point now with no clear direction.

I am not going by what was said; I am going by the situation and circumstances surrounding the situation.

Abusive brother-in-law...Palin has her husband put pressure on Monegan.. he doesn't. Palin fires his boss and then argues that it was for budgetary reasons. Palin never denied the ordering of the firing. So I'm unsure what your argument is. At first you list one question that is a relevant Question.. Why is he still working. Then you make a statement in the opposite direction that honestly has no relevance here unless you are trying to say that Walt Monegan was fired for no reason. Which clearly isn't the case:

Gov. Palin's husband, Todd Palin, met with Monegan in January 2007, a month after his wife took office, to say that the trooper was unfit for the force. Monegan also said the governor sent him e-mails, but Monegan declined to disclose them, saying he planned to give them to the independent prosecutor.

Palin initially denied that she or anyone in her administration had ever pressured Monegan to fire Wooten. She said she had raised the matter with Monegan just once, relaying the allegation that Wooten made a death threat against her father.

But this summer, Palin acknowledged that a half-dozen members of her administration had made more than two dozen calls on the matter to various state officials.

Palin Focus of Probe In Police Chief's Firing - washingtonpost.com

Really I'm not sure why Walt would deny that except to possibly protect the Palins from scrutiny. He would've gained no benefit of denying he was contacted. Matter of fact it would've given him a clean slate to say he was unjustly fired.

Monegan said Todd Palin told him that Wooten "shouldn't be a trooper."

"I've tried to explain to him," Monegan said, " 'You can't head-hunt like this. What you need to do is back off, because if the trooper does make a mistake, and it is a terminable offense, it can look like political interference.'

"I think he's emotionally committed in trying to see that his former brother-in-law is punished."
ad_icon

Monegan said he was also contacted by three other Palin-appointed officials, including the attorney general, regarding the trooper. Each time, he said, he told the administration officials that he would keep an eye on the trooper, but that unless he violated a rule, nothing could be done.

Palin Focus of Probe In Police Chief's Firing - washingtonpost.com

When Palin acknowledges the reasons and Monegan confirms it... nothing seems fishy to me. Honestly he stands to benefit here; why would Palin acknowledge a situation that would come back to haunt her. That's like going into a police station with bloody hands and confessing to murder. Case shut and closed.

The argument again, does not make clear sense; but maybe I am misunderstanding the direction you are going with this. Maybe you can clarify?

In regards to your first question. I am not sure if he's working and to be honest I haven't read the actual report that was posted earlier yet (browsing the web is a pain since I moved. Don't have a solid internet connection yet.), but if he is still working then I strongly believe he should be under review and fired; never being allowed to work for any law enforcement agency again. In addition to going to jail for his past misconducts.

:hippy:

[daihashi]

isn't it amazing, how partisanship works. on a site where i have often heard deafening cries over the abuses of law enforcement's power, we now seem to have so many who are coming to the defense of such abuse. i can only find it excruciatingly humorous that, for the sake of defending the mighty liberal cause, y'all are willing to overlook the faults of this officer and the failure of his superiors to properly chastise him in order to attack someone who was trying to do what most of you would usually applaud. oh, if only she were on the other side of the aisle, then you could pat her on the back for a job well done.

the hypocrisy of partisanship knows no bounds.:S2:

hypocrisy? I think not. Fact is that she put herself in a bad situation for even involving herself. For making a family matter a political one. Honestly she had several opportunities prior to becoming governor to pursue this. The circumstances surrounding the firing of Monegan are fishy. While I acknowledge the ex brother-in-law is an asshole; that does not give Palin the right to fire Monegan under the premise that he would not fire her ex brother in law. Something Palin acknowledges her husband and administration brought to his attention and Monegan acknowledges a well. Then to fire Monegan and claim it was for budgetary reasons when the state of Alaska apparently has made enough money to give each citizen a $1200 check. Considering the large surplus Alaska has firing due to financial reasons does not seem likely.

It is not her brother in law that I disagree with. I believe he should be brought under review, stripped of his job, never allowed to work for a law enforcement agency again and serve a criminal sentence for everything that happened prior to this. It is the matter in which her administration conducted the matter. She could not single out a single person the way she did, and to complicate matters further it involved a family issue. It just was not a smart move politically.

I think Sara Palin is Great. I was extremely pleased when she was announced on the VP ticket and I continue to think she would make a great VP and a great Asset to America; but I don't excuse her from this moment of stupidity.

So hypocrisy.. no... viewing a situation for what it is and how it rates from a legal/political standpoint. Yes

I typically agree with your posts, you lean much further right than I do; so if you take my post as just bantering then by all means rebuttal by calling my a hypocrite instead of arguing against my post showing how I was wrong and Palin was not stupid for involving her political office into a family affair.

:hippy:

[daihashi]

The hyprocrisy in general knows no bounds... The question I have is simply this... How many of you could stand to have your personal, private, family, and professional lives opened up to the world and broadcast all the questionable and bad stuff on the evening news and CNN??
Could you pass muster?? Ever heard of a glass house??

I am Mississippi Steve, and I approve this message.:thumbsup:

How many of us are in political office that would create a situation that would put our family under scrutiny. Something that could've been handled from a civil standpoint and taken up to Alaska's State Supreme court if needed. There was plenty of evidence prior to this to file a suit. Given that a number of the events pre-date when Palin became governor; a member of her family could've filed for legal recourse and seen it all the way through.

Palin made a mistake politically. I don't feel she was necessarily wrong, but I feel it was stupid. Her brother needs to be taken care of and personally I'd rather see him behind bars than I would care for him to lose his job. Something that only the court systems would be able to do.

[Mississippi Steve]

As I have said many times before... what you do in the privacy of your *OWN* home, is your business....anything you do in public is subject to scruteny.

I really wish they would focus on what the candidates *can* do, instead of looking for crap to fling into the fan... They seem to forget that when it hits the fan, that it goes *EVERYWHERE*, and all concerned get splattered.....including the "flinger". They try to make the other folks look bad, and only succeed in making themselves look worse....and it really makes the media look like crap for trying to sensationalize it.

[daihashi]

As I have said many times before... what you do in the privacy of your *OWN* home, is your business....anything you do in public is subject to scruteny.

I really wish they would focus on what the candidates *can* do, instead of looking for crap to fling into the fan... They seem to forget that when it hits the fan, that it goes *EVERYWHERE*, and all concerned get splattered.....including the "flinger". They try to make the other folks look bad, and only succeed in making themselves look worse....and it really makes the media look like crap for trying to sensationalize it.

You're right, what you do in your own home is your business. Being in public office brings your private life into scrutiny automatically. Furthermore using your authority over what is seemingly a family matter brings further scrutiny.

However I think it is relevant; just as I think Obama's personal relations with multiple questionable people is relevant.

This doesn't change my vote; I'll still be pulling the lever on the McCain/Palin ticket come November.

[DaBudhaStank]

How many of us are in political office that would create a situation that would put our family under scrutiny. Something that could've been handled from a civil standpoint and taken up to Alaska's State Supreme court if needed. There was plenty of evidence prior to this to file a suit. Given that a number of the events pre-date when Palin became governor; a member of her family could've filed for legal recourse and seen it all the way through.

Palin made a mistake politically. I don't feel she was necessarily wrong, but I feel it was stupid. Her brother needs to be taken care of and personally I'd rather see him behind bars than I would care for him to lose his job. Something that only the court systems would be able to do.

Truth, here. I sure as shit don't want my life up on CNN. But I'm not running for vice president. If someone thinks they can help lead this country, I deserve to know every scrap of information about them, big and small. It's not for THEM to decide it's important, it's for ME, for US to decide. She could have had the whole thing taken care of in Alaska prior to the election, but nope. She also said previously that she fired Monegan because he went on an APPROVED trip to a convention/budget meeting on rape and sexual assault, or something to that effect, to see about increasing their budget for such crimes. She then said she did NOT support him going, but he went anyway. But then, Palin doesn't care about rape victims and what not, she probably thinks it's God punishing them for dressing slutty. But that's my personal bias.

hypocrisy? I think not. Fact is that she put herself in a bad situation for even involving herself. For making a family matter a political one. Honestly she had several opportunities prior to becoming governor to pursue this. The circumstances surrounding the firing of Monegan are fishy. While I acknowledge the ex brother-in-law is an asshole; that does not give Palin the right to fire Monegan under the premise that he would not fire her ex brother in law. Something Palin acknowledges her husband and administration brought to his attention and Monegan acknowledges a well. Then to fire Monegan and claim it was for budgetary reasons when the state of Alaska apparently has made enough money to give each citizen a $1200 check. Considering the large surplus Alaska has firing due to financial reasons does not seem likely.

It is not her brother in law that I disagree with. I believe he should be brought under review, stripped of his job, never allowed to work for a law enforcement agency again and serve a criminal sentence for everything that happened prior to this. It is the matter in which her administration conducted the matter. She could not single out a single person the way she did, and to complicate matters further it involved a family issue. It just was not a smart move politically.

I think Sara Palin is Great. I was extremely pleased when she was announced on the VP ticket and I continue to think she would make a great VP and a great Asset to America; but I don't excuse her from this moment of stupidity.

So hypocrisy.. no... viewing a situation for what it is and how it rates from a legal/political standpoint. Yes

I typically agree with your posts, you lean much further right than I do; so if you take my post as just bantering then by all means rebuttal by calling my a hypocrite instead of arguing against my post showing how I was wrong and Palin was not stupid for involving her political office into a family affair.

:hippy:

We sort of agree here. There's no hypocrisy because most people would see this guy in jail. However, he is not, and Monegan was fired. Palin seems to have a history with people who don't obey her to the letter, and attempting to get rid of them. She seems very spiteful to me. I believe she would have pushed to have him fired, personally or not, until he was, regardless of how long it took. I'm also horrified that she could be anywhere near the white house. Executive experience or not, the woman is dumb as a bag of bricks and hasn't said anything worth listening to, IMO. Experience doesn't even mean anything anyway. I reference George W. Bush for this. G dub was governor of Texas for much longer and has a rich history of politics in his family. By all rights he should have been an amazing president. And yet, he didn't have the slightest clue what he was doing.

[Psycho4Bud]

I'm honestly not sure what you're defending here. Palin said it was for budgetary reasons and then there were obviously things happening at home that would've created a conflict of interest.

So please tell me exactly what you're arguing or defending here because it seems that you're jumping point to point now with no clear direction.

I am not going by what was said; I am going by the situation and circumstances surrounding the situation.

-This "story" insinuates that the brother-in-law was fired which is false, he's STILL working today

-When first questioned about it, Walt Monegan was stating that his termination had nothing to do with the dismissal. It wasn't until she became a candidate for V.P. did his story change.

-IF the reason behind his dismissal was that he wouldn't terminate the brother-in-law then why hasn't his replacement done just that. Seems that she would have hired somebody with that in mind from day one.

Clear direction here....seems like there is 1 part truth and 2 parts politics going on.

Have a good one!:s4:

[daihashi]

-This "story" insinuates that the brother-in-law was fired which is false, he's STILL working today

-When first questioned about it, Walt Monegan was stating that his termination had nothing to do with the dismissal. It wasn't until she became a candidate for V.P. did his story change.

-IF the reason behind his dismissal was that he wouldn't terminate the brother-in-law then why hasn't his replacement done just that. Seems that she would have hired somebody with that in mind from day one.

Clear direction here....seems like there is 1 part truth and 2 parts politics going on.

Have a good one!:s4:

I see.. thanks for the clarification. I was confused with where you were going with this earlier.

Honestly I can see what you're saying now, but at the same time Palin's story isn't exactly solid. I'll probably have a more permanent opinion once i get on a connection that's worth a crap so I can read that report.

:hippy: