"If you read the report, you'll see that there's nothing unlawful or unethical about replacing a cabinet member.

Proof that Palin has spent a whole lot more time learning how to spin than how to govern.

Another right wing pathological liar with a less than mediocre intellect and a lust to be in a position of power.

This country can't take another four years of humoring a delusional despot at the expense of our own best interest.

Ugh.

(Palin's) response was absurd: "If you read the report, you'll see that there's nothing unlawful or unethical about replacing a cabinet member.

During the Reagan administration, the moral standard for Republicans sank from "Is it moral?" to "Is it technically illegal?"

When Dubya's administration came to power the standard sank further, to "Will we leave enough evidence to be indicted?"

Now the standard seems to be, "We'll be pardoned before we go to jail, won't we?"

Palin's statement might signal that she would return to a Reaganesque moral standard. But I doubt it.

Better to ask her why she allowed Todd Palin to continuously contact state officials about Wooten.

He has already admitted to the acts which are now deemed to be examples of abuse of power. Just ask her why she allowed it to continue.

Then if she argues with the known facts, it'll be pretty clear. If she avoids answering the question, that will also be clear.

I truly believe that Palin believes herself to be innocent, that she is so out of touch with reality as to think the McCain campaign's "report" was actually the real one. What's even more sad is that she, like W, will never be forced to face or pay for her crimes.

Palin is now attacking Obama on abortion--

She said today in a rally: "Obama said a woman shouldn't have to be punished with a baby" (boos and jeers from crowd). "That's what he said, that you shouldn't have to be PUNISHED (emphasis mine) with a baby".

-------------
Oh, this will be interesting.

You forget that reading reports is something that people who read do. You know, effete intellectual nerds. Not hockey moms.

Her reaction was entirely predictable, if you've been trying to figure her out. She has already shown that she lacks the "sense of ethics," just as if one were tone-deaf or unable to taste: she is morally tone-deaf. What leads to such a developmental deficiency? My guess is, a family setting of individuals who are talented and have potential, but are isolated and by choice insular, and who create their own reality from the start. Happens in plenty of places besides Alaska - including Texas.

She violated ethics rules. What are the stated consequences in Alaska when the Governor violates such ethics rules? Does anybody know?

This has to be converted to lay person speak

Abused her power
Found by a non-partisan commission
Do you want a V.P. who is that reckless with her role?

That Walt Monegan is a million times more ethical that Sarah Palin shown brightly last night in his interview on Rachel Maddow's show. His strong ethics also came forth in his deposition that was a part of the report released by Branchflower. No wonder Monegan is so well-respected in Alaska.

And yet the McPalin camp insisted on slamming him again after the findings were released. I wonder if Monegan can sue them for slander?

Sometimes you can go with the report you wish you had, rather than the one you have.

The vetting of Sarah.

Power absolutely corrupts.

She used her power in an absolutely corrupt way, even if ethics weren't technically violated.

Gosh, I feel like we can go back to trusting her every word now, being the GOP diva that she is!

The funniest thing is what was she doing, hiding her face? Nobody should be punished with McCain/Palin campaign. Too bad there's only one day to get an abortion from this BS and it is still 3 weeks and a stock market crash away! I wonder if she'll go on the speaker circuit after the Republican party is purged from government. She can always team up with Zig Zigler, Newt, Meg, Joe Montana and Carly and pals! They can each present 2 hour sessions on "How I helped destroy common sense in America!", except for Joe who is better at throwing footballs.

Wouldn't that be a "follow-up question" -- strictly forbidden by the ethical standards of modern journalism?

Considering the source, does anyone else get the sense the this "ad-hoc press conference" was staged to get her spin out?

Sarah's cherry picking the report which said that it was in the governor's perogative to replace the commissioner. The stupid reporter should hone in on the part that cites chapter and verse of the laws she violated.

Her answer is a Palinate, an example of something that I got in an email a few days ago
-----------------
My 13 year old grandson just coined a new word.

He said the word was palinate. I didn't get it so he told me to ask him a question.

So I asked him "How are you doing in school?"

He answered, "I would like to tell you about my World of Warcraft addiction."

I still didn't get it.

He looked at me like I was dumber than dumb and said, “PALINATE Grandma.

It's when you give an answer to a question that has nothing to do with the question, like Sarah Palin does.”
-----------

Why do all the reports, in the traditional media and here, indicate Palin "abused" her authority?

The fact is, the report indicates she violated Alaska law.

So will a trial ensue?

And, what does anyone know about the rest of the report, the parts that weren't officially released. Any leaks or suggestions about what those parts contain, and why they weren't made public?

Ms. Phail'in is a transparent, hypocritical liar. A prerequisite for the Greedy Oil-soaked Phascist party these days. Anyone who abuses the power given to them by the people of their state is a TRAITOR, in the true sense of the word. She has betrayed the public's trust as evidenced by the conclusion of the special prosecutor, "...I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 2952.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act." It could not be any more clear than that.

The Troopergate report was just released yesterday.

Based on the finding that Gov. Sarah Palin had violated Alaska's Ethics Act by letting her husband, Todd Palin, use her office to launch a personal, family-feud vendetta against her sister's ex-husband, is anyone ready for Todd Palin (if his wife is elected vice-president) to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?

This is my take on what a McCain/Palin presidency would mean.

That Todd Palin, who has numerous connections to far, right-wing militia groups, would have a very high platform from which to push the interests of all these groups (Timothy McVeigh would be soooo evnious) if his wife ends up being vice-president (a heartbeat away from the presidency)...just as Sarah Palin herself would have a very high platform, too, from which to push her hardcore, anti-U.S. Constitution religious bigotries and biases, with her witch doctor pastor friend no doubt being called upon by her to exorcise all the "witches" from our nation and drive out the "liberal devil"...which would be the death-knell for our freedom-loving, liberal democracy.

(Remember, Jesus Christ was a LIBERAL).

Obama/Biden '08.

For many, it's hard to think that finding a way to get rid of a threatening individual who taserd his son is all that bad. I also suspect that, since Palin has angered republicans equally or more so then democrats, that this is anything but bipartisan. Someone who angers both parties is someone we need, but we need a lot more of them.

It also occurred to me that this illustrates one of Obama's major faults. That being that he has no executive experience and never makes decisions.

Perhaps because making decisions also involves taking a risk that you might be wrong. How many times has he voted "present" because he couldn't decide (or was he already thinking of the presidency and didn't want a vote used against him or to reveal his true intents to the centrist majority?).

The only decisions that you can evaluate him on are who he decided to hang out with, like the avowed terrorist (Ayers), criminals (Resko), America haters (Wright), Kenyan presidential political campaigners (who he actively advised), and the ACORN voter fraud program. Oh, I almost forgot Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines.

Legislators do not have the power to take formal legal action against the governor; that would be up to Alaska's Personnel Board.

If the Board decides Mrs Palin violated state law, the case will be referred to the president of the state Senate. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/us_elections_2008/7662820.stm)
*************************************

So, should the State Personnel Board decide to take action, it can be next up in the vendetta related firings by the power-abusing, terror-inciting, propaganda-spewing Alaskan Paliban.

Pete @ 6:11,

For many, it's hard to think that finding a way to get rid of a threatening individual who taserd his son is all that bad. I also suspect that, since Palin has angered republicans equally or more so then democrats, that this is anything but bipartisan. Someone who angers both parties is someone we need, but we need a lot more of them.

Pete @ 6:11,

For many, it's hard to think that finding a way to get rid of a threatening individual who taserd his son is all that bad. I also suspect that, since Palin has angered republicans equally or more so then democrats, that this is anything but bipartisan. Someone who angers both parties is someone we need, but we need a lot more of them.

pete, since you obviously have no idea what the word "think" means, you shouldn't be spending time discussing what others might or might not "think."

in fact, you should stfu and learn a little reality: this report doesn't show us a problem with obama. this report shows us that sarah palin doesn't understand what it means to be ethical.

I can always work in low tax countries for the next few years.

Iraq has a big surplus, why don't you go there?

Howard,

You shouldn't be so angry because it appears very likely that Obama will be the next president and what I, individually, think is not going to change that.

Even though I am afraid of the policy/regulatory/economic/judicial/political directions he might take us along with a Democratic Pelosi/Reid/Frank/Dodd/Boxer majority, I actually think that there are many people who will be so overjoyed and that there could be a real "feel good" benefit at least for a little while.

In fact, I think the "feel good" factor is dominating voters selections and that there is actually a significant lack of thinking in regards to Obama. What I write is an attempt at specific thinking and I am disappointed in responses such as yours that appear to in fact be driven from feelings and not thinking.

Back to Palin. I understand that the report said she violated the ethics rules by not keeping her husband out of it. I don't disagree that she may have some fault. What I was saying in my earlier post was simply, that many people in this country will sympathize with her actions as they related to family safety.

She wasn't getting a house for a song with Tony Resko's help, she wasn't associating with known terrorists, managing Kenyan presidential campaigns, going to church for 20 years with an America hater (Wright), sponsoring ACORN who is now and probably in the past was involved in a massive voter fraud program, and getting campaign advise from ex Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines.

You may be angry that Obama has done such things and that it interferes with the feel good nature of the man, but please don't sacrifice critical thinking by taking your anger out on others.

If you want to convince me or others like me, you have to think about these associations and then explain why they are not what they appear. For me the problem with Obama is that he has no record, so all I can go by is his associations and his 100% liberal positions, which to me means socialism. On top of that I question his true motives because he avoids believable explanations about the meaning of these past associations.

I'm not thrilled by McCain either or any of the presidential candidates since John Anderson the 1980 Independent who lost to Reagan and Carter. We need someone much better, but I don't suspect that we collectively deserve it yet.

Jassalasca Jape,

That was good, except that Bush was somewhat popular with his part in the beginning but became unpopular because of his actions. Palin was unpopular with her party in the beginning and remains so, but is wildly popular with the people (highest popularity in the country).

BTW, I highly dislike Bush. In fact I didn't vote for any presidential candidate in the last 2 elections, though I did vote for other positions. I felt the presidential choices of Bush/Gore and Bush/Kerry were equally bad, so no one can blame me for the state we're in.

America is getting a far left president, . . .Posted by: McAristotle

If it were only true. The country has veered so far to the right that we need at least eight years of socialism to bring the country back to the middle.

Dumb ass. Obama's not liberal in the least.

Palin was unpopular with her party in the beginning and remains so, but is wildly popular with the people (highest popularity in the country).

Your numbers are a few weeks out of date. You might want to take a look at current polls.

Jeff II

I don' get what you're saying - "we need at least eight years of socialism to bring the country back to the middle.", but then you say "Obama's not liberal in the least."

So, does that mean we need Socialism, but we're not going to get it? So you're voting for someone else?

BTW extreme liberalism is essentially the same as Socialism and Obama is the most liberal of all Senators, so you will get Socialism with him and a Democratic Congressional majority. Don't worry.. be happy!

I actually wish that candidates and voters would say what they really want. I suspect, though that most people don't really want to become a Socialist country, and so, candidates have to dance around it. I suspect that Obama's generally slow and deliberate responses are because he has to be so careful to avoid slipping up and revealing what he really thinks, although that's not necessarily any different than for most politicians.

I think many are looking for the politician who has grounded principles, which allows them to speak w/o the filter of thinking about whether what they are about to say fits their "fool em" strategies. That's perhaps part of the appeal of a Gov. Palin.