State which actions she specifically took against each member of this panel. You have made a serious charge here. Back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Printable View
State which actions she specifically took against each member of this panel. You have made a serious charge here. Back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
How can I accept that when she had the right to fire him for any reason?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Notice the report does not recommend any action against her, and it does in fact say she had the right to do as she did.
I'm wasting no more time on this because there is nothing to defend. It's all in lberal minds which is impossible for me to change.
I didn't know those Republican fellas up on that panel were libs. No wonder nobody likes me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
She still benefitted personally. Your attempt to move the goalposts doesn't make any difference. The big problem was her having her husband pressure other people in government whan all she had to do was fire the guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I have already said there will probably be no legal fallout for her -- and that goes against your claims of bias, so thanks for bringing that up.Quote:
Notice the report does not recommend any action against her, and it does in fact say she had the right to do as she did.
So in other words, you were just making up all these charges of bias and now that you were called on them, you are running away.Quote:
I'm wasting no more time on this because there is nothing to defend. It's all in lberal minds which is impossible for me to change.
UPDATE:
Alaska panel finds Palin abused power in firing
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/palin_troopergate
The statue say "any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."
Getting rid of Monegan beacasue he wouldn't fire Wooten benefitted Palin's personal interest. I agree it's a pretty lame reason, but the whole episode is ridiculously petty. If Wooten was evil incarnate like Palin claims, then the Palins should have gone through the criminal and civil system to address it like everyone else has to.
I'm actually more concerned about her husband rummaging through private files and questioning government employees. Did he hold any position on the government?
I'm excited to hear whottt weigh in....
Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Findog
He's been surprisingly missing as of late...
This isn't a real quote is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by whottt
Is it any worse than the shit he usually spews?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shastafarian
I dunno. Predicting Illinois and D.C. coming back into play is just....ok touchéQuote:
Originally Posted by Findog
It's a very lame conclusion considering to say that, they must conclude that Palin didn't have other cause to fire him. She had ligitamate reasons to fire him.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Take him through the civil system? She had no need to, and he didn't do anything illegal that of know of anyway. She was 100% withing her right to fire someone who has a position that serves at the govorners pleasure. She was not pleased with his job performance.
It's just that simple.
Then she should have just fired him without 250 pages worth of shenanigans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I'm talking about Wooten, and the Palins have indeed attempted to paint him as a menace to their family. Try to keep up.Quote:
Take him through the civil system? She had no need to, and he didn't do anything illegal that of know of anyway.
Too bad for you and Palin it isn't. She was stupid and now the headline is "Palin abuses power."Quote:
She was 100% withing her right to fire someone who has a position that serves at the govorners pleasure. She was not pleased with his job performance.
It's just that simple.
Now where is all your evidence of the actions that Palin took against easch memeber of the panel that made them all biased against her.
Or are you "done" again now that you know you have none?
So what happens now?
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by SpursFanFirst
The libtards think they finally have something on Palin!
Us "libtards" already had something on her when she couldn't answer simple questions in an interview.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
Nothing happens now. At worst she might get a slap on the wrist from the legislature.
The damage is political but since they are so far behind, even that doesn't matter much now.
Thing is, rasonable people don't agree who are the swing voters. I'm going to vote McCain?Palin anyway. I assume if you are old enough to vote, you are going to vote Obama/Biden anyway. It changes nothing, except I see the more unjustified attacks against McCain/Palin as bringing the swing voters towards them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shastafarian
Consider how little credibility there is on the attacks against her and McCain. There is at least some pretty fine facts surrounding critism against Obama and Biden.
This argument against Palin is so weak.
The unanimous decision of a majority Republican panel in her own state is a pretty fine fact against Palin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
No it isn't. She couldn't answer simple questions (supreme court case she disagreed with, newspaper she reads). She seems like she's been in Alaska for the past 20 years of her life. Oh wait...She has! She might know Alaska fairly well (though she thinks they produce 20% of the domestic supply of energy when it's actually 3.5%) but she doesn't know shit about the country and what it takes to run it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
You could have just ended the post with 'but she doesn't know shit.'Quote:
Originally Posted by Shastafarian
True but then it looks like I'm using a cop out. I wanted to at least give a few examples of how little she knows.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseline bum
I didn't read that anywhere in the report. It is laced with "I" in so many places. I thought the report was made by the investigator, Stephen Branchflower, for the panel. Please direct me to what page of 263 that validates your claim. Maybe I just haven't got that far yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Sorry, the decision to make the report public was unanimous. Apparently, none of them had a problem with it that they would want it withheld.