Page 3 of 8

Posted: September 1, 2008 6:55 pm
by Lightning Bolt
I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:01 pm
by Finsupinfla
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
Well said. The story makes you wonder if she was fully vetted before she was picked. Like any other candidate Dem or Rep, ther will be people looking for dirt or skeletons in the closet!

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:36 pm
by diverg
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT


...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
This is true. The only problem I have is with the media. They are so far in the tank for the democrats that they tend to bury unfavorable stories on the democrats, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to run negative stories on them. Now of its a Republican they will not even verify a story before they are of to the races with it.

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:36 pm
by Tequila Revenge
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
Let's hope so. Check out the poor BIL

Is Wooten a good trooper? (7/27/08)
PALIN'S EX-BROTHER-IN-LAW: Union says yes, but investigation found serious concerns.
By LISA DEMER
ldemer@adn.com

Published: July 27th, 2008 12:02 AM
Last Modified: July 27th, 2008 08:08 PM
Legislators are seriously considering hiring an independent investigator to examine whether Gov. Sarah Palin, her aides or her husband pressured commanders to fire Trooper Mike Wooten, and whether she then fired the state's top cop when Wooten stayed on the job. Palin denies anything like that happened.

All that aside, what kind of trooper is Mike Wooten?

The picture painted by the Palins is pretty bad. The trooper brass isn't saying one way or another, citing personnel rules that protect his files. Union leaders defend him as a dedicated trooper who was already punished for his mistakes.

Efforts to speak with Wooten were unsuccessful. He did not return phone calls when the controversy first began two weeks ago. He now is out of the country on a long-planned vacation, said John Cyr, executive director of the Public Safety Employees Association, the union for troopers. They are not in touch. An e-mail to Wooten was answered with an out-of-the-office auto reply.

Wooten is 35, a state trooper since March 2001 and an Air Force veteran. He's a father of young children who has been married and divorced four times.

The accusations are detailed in two thick binders, the result of a nearly yearlong investigation by troopers. When the investigation appeared to stall, Palin -- more than a year before she was elected governor, and about two months before launching her campaign -- pushed trooper commanders to take action against Wooten. At one point, Palin and her husband, Todd, hired a private investigator.

Wooten recently gave his union permission to release the entire investigative file, all 482 pages and hours of recorded interviews.
"The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession," Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was

She warned that if he messed up again, he'd be fired.
"This discipline is meant to be a last chance to take corrective action," Grimes wrote. "You are hereby given notice that any further occurrences of these types of behaviors or incidents will not be tolerated and will result in your termination."

It's nearly impossible to know whether other complaints have come in about Wooten in the last two years. His personnel file is confidential. But the fact he remains on the force is an indication that he hasn't had the sort of trouble that Grimes warned against.
Grimes declined to comment, as did various troopers involved in the investigation.

'... NOT WITHOUT A BLEMISH'
As the investigation got under way in 2005, Wooten was in the midst of a bitter divorce from Palin's sister, Molly McCann. The couple was fighting over custody of their two young children. Accusations flew from both sides.
Troopers eventually investigated 13 issues and found four in which Wooten violated policy or broke the law or both:
• Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.
• He illegally shot a moose.
• He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.
• He told others his father-in-law would "eat a f'ing lead bullet" if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.
Beyond the investigation sparked by the family, trooper commanders saw cause to discipline or give written instructions to correct Wooten seven times since he joined the force, according to Grimes' letter to Wooten.
Those incidents included: a reprimand in January 2004 for negligent damage to a state vehicle; a January 2005 instruction after being accused of speeding, unsafe lane changes, following too closely and not using turn signals in his state vehicle; a June 2005 instruction regarding personal cell phone calls; an October 2005 suspension from work after getting a speeding ticket; and a November 2005 memo "to clarify duty hours, tardiness and personal business during duty time."
"Mike is not without a blemish," the union's Cyr said. But some of the problems noted by Grimes were small matters, he said. Many troopers were told to reimburse the state for personal cell phone calls, he said. Wooten had to miss work for court during the divorce, he said.
The union president, Rob Cox, is a 17-year trooper veteran who worked alongside Wooten in the Valley. Cox said he never thought of him as a rogue cop.

It's significant that Wooten served for a while on the Special Emergency Reaction Team -- like a SWAT team, Cox said. Officers have to be especially cool-headed to perform in crisis situations, Cox said.
Wooten was the first backup officer to arrive at the scene of a standoff in 2006 at the Valley trailer home of Donald Voorhis.

TROOPER INVESTIGATION
Wooten's history spilled into public view after the July 11 firing of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The former commissioner has said he doesn't know why Palin wanted him out but wonders if Wooten's situation was part of it. He has said that members of Palin's administration, and the governor's husband, talked with him about the accusations against Wooten, which he considered improper.

"Never put pressure on Walt Monegan to fire -- hire or fire -- anybody," Palin responded.
The troopers' investigation into Wooten began after Chuck Heath -- Wooten's father-in-law and Palin and McCann's dad -- alerted troopers about a domestic violence protective order McCann had obtained against Wooten on April 11, 2005. McCann filed for divorce the same day, according to the court docket.
The trooper had not physically assaulted his wife but intimidated her and threatened to shoot him, Heath told troopers, according to a memo about the complaint.

The same day, a concerned neighbor of the couple called troopers with more accusations, including alcohol abuse, based on what Heath and McCann had relayed to him. Wooten seemed "disconnected" lately, the neighbor said. He told troopers that Heath and McCann were afraid to call troopers themselves.

"Extreme verbal abuse. violent threats & physical intimidation," McCann wrote in her April 11, 2005, petition to the court. He had driven drunk multiple times, threatened her father, told her to "put a leash on your sister and family or I'm going to bring them down," her petition says. A judge issued a 20-day protective order to keep Wooten away.
In written orders to Wooten sent the next day, trooper Capt. Matt Leveque echoed the court's directive. Leveque, now a major, also told Wooten to give up his department-issued guns, badge, credentials and vehicle during his off-duty time, while the order was in effect.
On April 27, 2005, trooper Sgt. Ron Wall began the internal investigation, interviewing and re-interviewing more than 15 people over a period of months. Witnesses included Palin, her husband, Todd, two of their children, Heath, McCann, her son, Wooten, friends, neighbors, a bartender, and other troopers.
Here's what the troopers found out:

ILLEGAL MOOSE HUNT
In September 2003, Wooten, McCann and a friend who was a Wasilla police officer, Chris Watchus, hunted moose from a boat in the Jim Creek area.

McCann had drawn a permit for a cow moose but had never done that kind of hunting before, she told troopers in the investigation. They brought Wooten's rifle, a .300-caliber Winchester Magnum. Chuck Heath had been riding her to make sure the permit was used, Wooten told Wall. It was the last day for the hunt, McCann said. The Mat-Su lottery tags are highly coveted.

Minutes into the trip, they spotted a cow. "Do you want to shoot the moose?" Wooten says he asked his wife. As he recounted it, she told him that she didn't.

McCann said that Wooten took out the gun and shot the moose.
The killing of the moose without a permit was a criminal misdemeanor, Grimes wrote in the March 2006 letter to Wooten. He was removed from wildlife investigations.
Wooten was never charged criminally. Troopers say the moose shooting wasn't investigated as a crime.
"Once a complaint is received on a trooper, more often than not it goes into what we call an administrative inquiry, and that's how the discipline is handled," said Col. Gary Folger, now director of the state Division of Alaska Wildlife Troopers, which was formed after Palin took office in 2007. At least that's true for wildlife offenses, he said.
Col. Audie Holloway, director of Alaska State Troopers, said he couldn't speak about wildlife cases in the separate division but said generally, "a trooper has to answer for his crime." He said he couldn't talk specifically about Wooten's situation.
The statute of limitations for shooting a moose without a permit is five years.

TASING THE STEPSON
One day -- maybe a year or two before the investigation -- Wooten showed his stepson his Taser. He had just been to Taser instructor school. Wooten told Sgt. Wall that the boy was fascinated and pleaded to be tased.
"So we went in our living room and I had him get down on his knees so he wouldn't fall. And I taped the probes to him and turned the Taser on for like a second, turned it off. He thought that was the greatest thing in the world, wanted to do it again," Wooten told the investigator. The boy flinched but nothing more, he said. The boy was about 11 at the time.
In his interview with troopers, the stepson said it hurt for about a second, according to Wall's report. The boy said he wanted to be tased to show his cousin, Palin's daughter Bristol, that he wasn't a mama's boy. The probe left a welt on his arm, he said. His mother was upstairs yelling at them not to do it, the boy said.
As Bristol remembered it, the jolt knocked the boy backward, the trooper report says. She said she was afraid.
The probes are attached by thin wires to the Taser cartridge. In the field, an officer fires the probes into a suspect's skin or clothing and the suspect receives a jolt of electricity for five seconds, said Steve Tuttle, a spokesman for Taser International, which makes the devices. They are only incapacitated during that time. In demos, the probes might be taped to a person so that they don't accidentally strike an eye or injure the volunteer, he said. If the Taser is fired for just a second, it would feel like your funny bone was hit but the quick jolt wouldn't knock you over, Tuttle said.

DRINKING AND DRIVING
Wall evaluated several accusations that Wooten was drinking and driving. He didn't substantiate them. Some came only from McCann and family.
But Grimes re-interviewed a couple who lived nearby and found them believable about an incident that occurred in the summer of 2004. Adrian and Marilyn Lane told her they are friends of the Heaths but wouldn't lie to help the family.
Wooten stopped by their house one morning in his white patrol car and drank a beer from the fridge in the garage, the couple said. On his way out, he grabbed another beer, popped it open, and got behind the wheel, they both told Grimes.
"And I was like "Whoa!" Adrian Lane said. They both thought he needed to watch himself.
Wooten contended he never drank in his patrol car. Grimes determined that he did.
Troopers looked into another drinking episode that occurred late one night in March 2005.
Wooten was at the Mug-Shot Saloon with a friend. Wooten got into it with another man, whom he thought was causing trouble for his friend. Wooten's friend had to hold him back, and the bartender held back the other man, the bartender told troopers.
Wooten told the bartender he needed to eject the other man, the bartender said.
The bartender thought Wooten was out of line.
"Then he whipped out his badge and said 'Lemmie let me introduce myself. I'm State Trooper Wooten," the bartender said, according to a transcript of his interview.
The other man took a cab.
Wooten and his friend left in a black Audi, with Wooten driving. It belonged to the friend's brother but the friend was drunk, Wooten told the investigator.
Barely two blocks away, Trooper Dave Herrell pulled them over. Wooten jumped out to talk to him. Herrell told the trooper investigator that he "felt kinda weird" when he realized the driver was another trooper.
The bartender had called in to report Wooten as a possible drunken driver. "Said that you guys were severely intoxicated and caused a fight in the bar and then you guys left," Wooten told the investigator, recounting what Herrell said.
As Herrell remembered it, "I was sitting there talking to him and I smelled ... just a faint odor of alcohol that was coming from his breath," according to a transcript.
Herrell, who said he was No. 1 at the Palmer post with more than 250 drunken-driving arrests, didn't think Wooten seemed drunk. He didn't slur, his eyes weren't bloodshot or watery. Herrell didn't ask him to take any field sobriety or breath tests. That's always up to the officer's discretion, troopers say.
Was Wooten drunk?
"No," Herrell told Wall. "I believe that he consumed an alcoholic beverage, but I don't believe that he's intoxicated. Or overly intoxicated above .08."
That's the legal limit for driving.
Still, Herrell, who is now a sergeant, told Wooten to park the car. He gave the men a lift back to the friend's house.
McCann told the trooper investigator that Wooten called her about 3 a.m. to pick him up. They were separated, but he still came to the house to shower and get his things. He told her he and his friend "tore down the house last night" and were pulled over. "Oh I can play a good sober when I need to," he said, according to what she told troopers.
In his investigation, Wall didn't find that Wooten broke any policies or laws that night.

"F'ING BULLET"
The other incident happened in February 2005. Both McCann and Palin gave troopers detailed accounts of what happened. Wooten was headed home in a rage, McCann said.
She called Palin and put the phone on speaker so Palin could listen when Wooten got there and get help if things got bad. Palin had her teenage son Track listen in, too.
As McCann remembered it, Wooten said if their father got a lawyer for her "he would eat a f'ing lead bullet. I will shoot him."
Palin was interviewed by troopers too.
"Mike in the conversation never did get to the bottom of what, what the foundational issue he was dealing with, he just kept screaming, "I'm gonna F'n kill your dad if he gets an attorney to help you," Palin told troopers, according to the transcript.
Track told troopers he heard the comment, too.
Palin drove over and watched through the window. She and McCann both said Wooten was all wound up. A neighbor who stood watch as well later told troopers that Wooten looked angry but that McCann wasn't cowering or anything.
Wooten told troopers he never said anything like that about his father-in-law.
The investigation concluded he did. It wasn't a crime, because he didn't threaten Heath directly. But it did violate trooper policy, the investigation found.
In August 2005, nearly four months after the investigation began, Palin wrote a lengthy e-mail to Grimes about Wooten that included some new accusations and new witnesses. She wrote that she was writing not as his sister-in-law but to express concern over the lack of action about a trooper whom she said many described as a "ticking timebomb" and "loose cannon."
In October 2005, Palin announced she was running for governor. Sgt. Wall, who is now a lieutenant over patrol in Fairbanks, finished his investigation the same month. The following March, Grimes handed out the punishment.
The union's Cyr says that ultimately Wooten was treated fairly by the Department of Public Safety.
"Clearly the folks have the ability to file complaints, and the state has the obligation to investigate them and that is what was done. He was disciplined, appropriately so we believe in the end. And you know, basically end of story. The only question in our mind would be has this pattern continued and has pressure been brought on anybody, I mean, after this whole sorry mess."

Wooten and McCann's divorce was finalized in January 2006. They continue to have disputes over custody and visitation.

Since that divorce, Wooten remarried and divorced again.

He remains on the force in Wasilla.

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:38 pm
by diverg
Finsupinfla wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
Well said. The story makes you wonder if she was fully vetted before she was picked. Like any other candidate Dem or Rep, ther will be people looking for dirt or skeletons in the closet!
the so called troopergate has been out in the public for awhile. This story is not a surprise to the mcCain campaign.

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:42 pm
by Tequila Revenge
diverg wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT


...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
This is true. The only problem I have is with the media. They are so far in the tank for the democrats that they tend to bury unfavorable stories on the democrats, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to run negative stories on them. Now of its a Republican they will not even verify a story before they are of to the races with it.
Come on. The whole thing is a dispute over a messy divorce. I heard that on the radio, watched it on the TV and read it on the internet. It's only a messy divorce, and nothing more.

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:43 pm
by diverg
Tequila Revenge wrote:Check out the poor BIL

Is Wooten a good trooper? (7/27/08)
PALIN'S EX-BROTHER-IN-LAW: Union says yes, but investigation found serious concerns.
By LISA DEMER
ldemer@adn.com..........
Seems to be this bozo should have been fired instead of protected.

Posted: September 1, 2008 7:46 pm
by diverg
Tequila Revenge wrote:
diverg wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT


...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
This is true. The only problem I have is with the media. They are so far in the tank for the democrats that they tend to bury unfavorable stories on the democrats, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to run negative stories on them. Now of its a Republican they will not even verify a story before they are of to the races with it.
Come on. The whole thing is a dispute over a messy divorce. I heard that on the radio, watched it on the TV and read it on the internet. It's only a messy divorce, and nothing more.
You mean a trooper drinking on the job? Tasering his step son? Isn't that child abuse and against the law? Threating to kill his father in-law? Isn't that against the law?

Posted: September 1, 2008 8:07 pm
by RinglingRingling
diverg wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT


...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
This is true. The only problem I have is with the media. They are so far in the tank for the democrats that they tend to bury unfavorable stories on the democrats, and have to be dragged kicking and screaming to run negative stories on them. Now of its a Republican they will not even verify a story before they are of to the races with it.
right.. Rush and the other talk-show whores bury all the demo stuff and slathers mud on Reps with the rest of the MSM...

christ. It's amazing there is a single Repub in office with the vast conspiracy to keep them out of office...

Posted: September 1, 2008 8:46 pm
by East Texas Parrothead
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
I so agree. The heat will only ratchet up ... and it's not just from the Dems. Very little time was spent vetting her. Now, the Republican Party has sent a 10-person Rapid Response team, including a couple of attorneys, to Alaska today ... they're going to find out that Troopergate is the tip of the iceberg ... according to what I've read in the Alaska papers online, she was almost recalled by her city council for an improper firing (a librarian and a chief of police) ... is not well-respected in her own capitol (and not soley because of her 'maverick' persona) ... at one time, she was on board for the "bridge to nowhere" ... she's only been overseas one time (to Iraq and Germany) ... there is an audio of her laughing as an opponent is called a b**** ... there are at least 24 recorded phone calls by her or her staff pressuring the guy she fired to fire the trooper (whether the trooper should have been fired is not at issue here .. it's her alleged abuse of power that caused the bi-partisan committee to spend $100,000 to investigate the matter ... the strongarm tactics ... if someone needs to be fired, then follow the proper procedures) ...

There are a lot of talking heads defending her, but I can tell you, the party's movers and shakers are not happy ... this is not over ... they're putting on a fierce defense of her, but some of this stuff is pretty thorny and problematic.

I used to be really involved in politics ... have never seen an implosion like this ... I still have some contacts ... Made a few calls today and found out that there is serious talk that she might step down ... saying her family needs her ... Which would make the way for McCain to get his way and tag Joe Lieberman, his original choice. Not my words ... theirs.

As Dorothy said to Toto, "We are not in Kansas anymore." :o

Posted: September 1, 2008 9:19 pm
by mermaidindisguise
Elrod wrote:She graduated from college in '87 and had a job in '88. That's another category where she is ahead of Obama.

According to the bio on his Senate website "Obama graduated from Columbia University in 1983, and moved to Chicago in 1985 to work for a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor neighborhoods..."

Where was he for two years?

For a candidate that claims his administration would be built on service and encourages others to enlist, 1983 would have been a great time to enlist.

He missed the boat.
To answer your question....
He graduated in 1983.

He then went to work at Business International Corporation (a company that provided international business information to corporate clients) and NYPIRG this was between 1983 - 1985.

NYPIRG:

http://www.nypirg.org/

Let's face it - this woman is going to be put under a very hot spotlight and I would bet the farm she bows out stating that she needs to be with her family at this time. She knew her daughter was pregnant when she said yes to be the VP - not sure what she was thinking.

Posted: September 1, 2008 9:38 pm
by Tequila Revenge
mermaidindisguise wrote:
Elrod wrote:She graduated from college in '87 and had a job in '88. That's another category where she is ahead of Obama.

According to the bio on his Senate website "Obama graduated from Columbia University in 1983, and moved to Chicago in 1985 to work for a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor neighborhoods..."

Where was he for two years?

For a candidate that claims his administration would be built on service and encourages others to enlist, 1983 would have been a great time to enlist.

He missed the boat.
To answer your question....
He graduated in 1983.

He then went to work at Business International Corporation (a company that provided international business information to corporate clients) and NYPIRG this was between 1983 - 1985.

NYPIRG:

http://www.nypirg.org/

Let's face it - this woman is going to be put under a very hot spotlight and I would bet the farm she bows out stating that she needs to be with her family at this time. She knew her daughter was pregnant when she said yes to be the VP - not sure what she was thinking.

We have learned that only women can stay at home and take care of kids, especially special needs children. We have learned that the fringe left is every bit as nasty as the fringe right.

Posted: September 1, 2008 9:42 pm
by SMLCHNG
Ya know.. even Obama said today that "Family, children are off limits in the political arena"..

Posted: September 1, 2008 9:43 pm
by Tequila Revenge
East Texas Parrothead wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
I so agree. The heat will only ratchet up ... and it's not just from the Dems. Very little time was spent vetting her. Now, the Republican Party has sent a 10-person Rapid Response team, including a couple of attorneys, to Alaska today ... they're going to find out that Troopergate is the tip of the iceberg ... according to what I've read in the Alaska papers online, she was almost recalled by her city council for an improper firing (a librarian and a chief of police) ... is not well-respected in her own capitol (and not soley because of her 'maverick' persona) ... at one time, she was on board for the "bridge to nowhere" ... she's only been overseas one time (to Iraq and Germany) ... there is an audio of her laughing as an opponent is called a b**** ... there are at least 24 recorded phone calls by her or her staff pressuring the guy she fired to fire the trooper (whether the trooper should have been fired is not at issue here .. it's her alleged abuse of power that caused the bi-partisan committee to spend $100,000 to investigate the matter ... the strongarm tactics ... if someone needs to be fired, then follow the proper procedures) ...

There are a lot of talking heads defending her, but I can tell you, the party's movers and shakers are not happy ... this is not over ... they're putting on a fierce defense of her, but some of this stuff is pretty thorny and problematic.

I used to be really involved in politics and still have some contacts ... Made a few calls today and found out that she might step down ... saying her family needs her ... Which would make the way for McCain to get his way and tag Joe Lieberman, his original choice.

As Dorothy said to Toto, "We are not in Kansas anymore." :o
So what America really wants is NOT change, but well connected DC insiders like Lieberman and Biden? :roll: :roll: There's no place for a strong woman that took on special interest, big business and corruption.... and won? So we SAY we want change but let's face it, we ONLY WANT the change we KNOW we're getting... the known commodity. We're way past in need of a third party

Posted: September 1, 2008 9:54 pm
by Lightning Bolt
Tequila Revenge wrote:
East Texas Parrothead wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
I so agree. The heat will only ratchet up ... and it's not just from the Dems. Very little time was spent vetting her. Now, the Republican Party has sent a 10-person Rapid Response team, including a couple of attorneys, to Alaska today ... they're going to find out that Troopergate is the tip of the iceberg ... according to what I've read in the Alaska papers online, she was almost recalled by her city council for an improper firing (a librarian and a chief of police) ... is not well-respected in her own capitol (and not soley because of her 'maverick' persona) ... at one time, she was on board for the "bridge to nowhere" ... she's only been overseas one time (to Iraq and Germany) ... there is an audio of her laughing as an opponent is called a b**** ... there are at least 24 recorded phone calls by her or her staff pressuring the guy she fired to fire the trooper (whether the trooper should have been fired is not at issue here .. it's her alleged abuse of power that caused the bi-partisan committee to spend $100,000 to investigate the matter ... the strongarm tactics ... if someone needs to be fired, then follow the proper procedures) ...

There are a lot of talking heads defending her, but I can tell you, the party's movers and shakers are not happy ... this is not over ... they're putting on a fierce defense of her, but some of this stuff is pretty thorny and problematic.

I used to be really involved in politics and still have some contacts ... Made a few calls today and found out that she might step down ... saying her family needs her ... Which would make the way for McCain to get his way and tag Joe Lieberman, his original choice.

As Dorothy said to Toto, "We are not in Kansas anymore." :o
So what America really wants is NOT change, but well connected DC insiders like Lieberman and Biden? :roll: :roll: There's no place for a strong woman that took on special interest, big business and corruption.... and won? So we SAY we want change but let's face it, we ONLY WANT the change we KNOW we're getting... the known commodity. We're way past in need of a third party
I'm with you there, TR
If nothing more, the third-party nominee can represent that polar extremism will not be tolerated from the eventual Republican/Democrat victor.

John Anderson - 1980
Ross Perot - 1992

Posted: September 1, 2008 9:56 pm
by East Texas Parrothead
SMLCHNG wrote:Ya know.. even Obama said today that "Family, children are off limits in the political arena"..
Today's news isn't going to be her undoing ... I think it's all the stuff they didn't uncover with the brief vetting she got. I wouldn't want (1) to be in the War Room right now and (2) have had *anything* to have done with putting her name in the hat.

Posted: September 1, 2008 10:04 pm
by SchoolGirlHeart
Tequila Revenge wrote:So what America really wants is NOT change, but well connected DC insiders like Lieberman and Biden? :roll: :roll: There's no place for a strong woman that took on special interest, big business and corruption.... and won? So we SAY we want change but let's face it, we ONLY WANT the change we KNOW we're getting... the known commodity. We're way past in need of a third party
Yeah, I think so. If we REALLY wanted change, we'd be supporting a third (and fourth and fifth) party candidate and giving him/her a real shot at winning...

Posted: September 1, 2008 10:20 pm
by East Texas Parrothead
Tequila Revenge wrote:
East Texas Parrothead wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
I so agree. The heat will only ratchet up ... and it's not just from the Dems. Very little time was spent vetting her. Now, the Republican Party has sent a 10-person Rapid Response team, including a couple of attorneys, to Alaska today ... they're going to find out that Troopergate is the tip of the iceberg ... according to what I've read in the Alaska papers online, she was almost recalled by her city council for an improper firing (a librarian and a chief of police) ... is not well-respected in her own capitol (and not soley because of her 'maverick' persona) ... at one time, she was on board for the "bridge to nowhere" ... she's only been overseas one time (to Iraq and Germany) ... there is an audio of her laughing as an opponent is called a b**** ... there are at least 24 recorded phone calls by her or her staff pressuring the guy she fired to fire the trooper (whether the trooper should have been fired is not at issue here .. it's her alleged abuse of power that caused the bi-partisan committee to spend $100,000 to investigate the matter ... the strongarm tactics ... if someone needs to be fired, then follow the proper procedures) ...

There are a lot of talking heads defending her, but I can tell you, the party's movers and shakers are not happy ... this is not over ... they're putting on a fierce defense of her, but some of this stuff is pretty thorny and problematic.

I used to be really involved in politics and still have some contacts ... Made a few calls today and found out that she might step down ... saying her family needs her ... Which would make the way for McCain to get his way and tag Joe Lieberman, his original choice.

As Dorothy said to Toto, "We are not in Kansas anymore." :o
So what America really wants is NOT change, but well connected DC insiders like Lieberman and Biden? :roll: :roll: There's no place for a strong woman that took on special interest, big business and corruption.... and won? So we SAY we want change but let's face it, we ONLY WANT the change we KNOW we're getting... the known commodity. We're way past in need of a third party
I hear you. I voted for Perot.

Even though it might not be enough of a change for you, I understand that McCain really wanted Lieberman ... the choice of someone who had broken with his party would have represented a huge maverick move ...

I don't have a problem with a woman. I was hoping for Kay Bailey-Hutchinson.

We're only now getting the whole story on Palin ... They really didn't vet her enough. The team should have been in Alaska before today ... Now, they're having to put out fires everywhere ... they're finding out her original position on the 527 and her close ties to Ted Stevens, Washington's current poster child for corruption ... her firing of city employees without going through the proper channels ... and the fact that her city and her state have benefitted a *lot* from the earmarks McCain is campaigning against ... they knew about Troopergate, but they didn't dig deeply enough. Or, so it would seem.

Posted: September 1, 2008 11:10 pm
by Tequila Revenge
East Texas Parrothead wrote:
Tequila Revenge wrote:
East Texas Parrothead wrote:
Lightning Bolt wrote:I hear you... and I am not pointing fingers, or saying who/what's right or wrong here.

I'm only pointing at the fact that once you get yourself into the national political/public forum,
you're really gonna get your ENTIRE personal and family life put under a VERY HOT SPOTLIGHT

...and EVERYTHING you claim to stand for is going to put to an intensely thorough litmus test.

Today is just the beginning...
I so agree. The heat will only ratchet up ... and it's not just from the Dems. Very little time was spent vetting her. Now, the Republican Party has sent a 10-person Rapid Response team, including a couple of attorneys, to Alaska today ... they're going to find out that Troopergate is the tip of the iceberg ... according to what I've read in the Alaska papers online, she was almost recalled by her city council for an improper firing (a librarian and a chief of police) ... is not well-respected in her own capitol (and not soley because of her 'maverick' persona) ... at one time, she was on board for the "bridge to nowhere" ... she's only been overseas one time (to Iraq and Germany) ... there is an audio of her laughing as an opponent is called a b**** ... there are at least 24 recorded phone calls by her or her staff pressuring the guy she fired to fire the trooper (whether the trooper should have been fired is not at issue here .. it's her alleged abuse of power that caused the bi-partisan committee to spend $100,000 to investigate the matter ... the strongarm tactics ... if someone needs to be fired, then follow the proper procedures) ...

There are a lot of talking heads defending her, but I can tell you, the party's movers and shakers are not happy ... this is not over ... they're putting on a fierce defense of her, but some of this stuff is pretty thorny and problematic.

I used to be really involved in politics and still have some contacts ... Made a few calls today and found out that she might step down ... saying her family needs her ... Which would make the way for McCain to get his way and tag Joe Lieberman, his original choice.

As Dorothy said to Toto, "We are not in Kansas anymore." :o
So what America really wants is NOT change, but well connected DC insiders like Lieberman and Biden? :roll: :roll: There's no place for a strong woman that took on special interest, big business and corruption.... and won? So we SAY we want change but let's face it, we ONLY WANT the change we KNOW we're getting... the known commodity. We're way past in need of a third party
I hear you. I voted for Perot.

Even though it might not be enough of a change for you, I understand that McCain really wanted Lieberman ... the choice of someone who had broken with his party would have represented a huge maverick move ...

I don't have a problem with a woman. I was hoping for Kay Bailey-Hutchinson.

We're only now getting the whole story on Palin ... They really didn't vet her enough. The team should have been in Alaska before today ... Now, they're having to put out fires everywhere ... they're finding out her original position on the 527 and her close ties to Ted Stevens, Washington's current poster child for corruption ... her firing of city employees without going through the proper channels ... and the fact that her city and her state have benefitted a *lot* from the earmarks McCain is campaigning against ... they knew about Troopergate, but they didn't dig deeply enough. Or, so it would seem.
1. I'm no way near as politically as savy as you.

2. I have huge mondo respect for you :D

3. I read the "other side," of Trooper Gate and I am appaled at hoe a world class POS can impact the lives of others trying to make a positive difference in this world.

I can not fathom more, "politics as usual." No more of fringe left VS. fringe right. THERE IS NO WINNER, except the attention whores in DC :evil: :evil:

Yes, I do have a soft place for the Underdog :oops: :oops: :oops:

I am burnt out on more of the same in DC and in California :(

Posted: September 1, 2008 11:20 pm
by East Texas Parrothead
You're right, TR ... until a REAL, ORGANIZED and VIABLE third party emerges with a credible candidate with some really deep pockets ... we're screwed ... they're all hos ... I worked in their world for a long time ... but, even as a low level staffer, I would have asked more questions ... about her fringe party affliliations ... look for that to be the big news in the next few days ...

Strange ... very, very strange.