The 2008 Presidential Campaign: Part Three

[Primula Baggins]

The preceding thread was getting too long to be manageable for admin chores, so we are starting fresh. Enjoy!

[sauronsfinger]

Regardingthe partisan or nonpartisan or bipartisan nature of the Alaskan legislature investigation into Governor Palin:

This from ADN.com 8/14/08

Wooten was suspended over the allegations for five days in 2006 but is still on the job. Monegan refused to comment on Wooten's situation, saying he could not discuss personnel matters.

More recently, Todd Palin said, he took his concerns over the governor's safety directly to Monegan. But he said he never told anyone to fire Wooten.

Wooten has refused to comment.

Attorney General Talis Colberg's conducted an investigation and found that 14 members of the Palin administration — including Colberg himself — made calls to Department of Public Safety officials about Wooten.
In one of those calls, Frank Bailey, director boards and commissions, was tape-recorded as saying: "Todd and Sarah are scratching their heads, why on earth hasn't, why is this guy still representing the department?"

On Wednesday, Palin said none of the two dozen or so calls were made at her direction.

I have taken the liberty to underline the section mentioning the Attorney General of Alaska, Talis Colberg. Mr. Colberg got his job in appointment from the Alaska Governor on December 13, 2006. That Governor was Sarah Palin.

So this is not a partisan effort on behalf of Democrats in Alaska.

the original report from the Anchorage Daily News 7/29/08

Hired help will probe Monegan dismissal
$100,000: Legislators vote to have independent investigator look into controversial firing.

By WESLEY LOY
wloy@adn.com

Published: July 29th, 2008 01:44 AM
Last Modified: July 29th, 2008 08:34 PM

JUNEAU -- Alaska legislators on Monday voted to spend up to $100,000 to investigate Gov. Sarah Palin's controversial firing of former state Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan.

The decision came from the Legislative Council, a bipartisan panel of state senators and representatives.

The committee itself will not conduct the probe. Rather, it will hire an independent investigator to explore whether Palin, her family or members of her administration pressured Monegan to fire an Alaska state trooper involved in a rough divorce from Palin's sister.

Monegan contends he did feel such pressure, and the question for the investigator will be whether Monegan might have lost his job for failing to dismiss trooper Mike Wooten.

Palin has denied applying any pressure or otherwise abusing her power as governor.

Sharon Leighow, the governor's spokeswoman, said Palin "doesn't see a need for a formal investigation," but is willing to answer questions.

"The governor has said all along that she will fully cooperate with an investigation and her staff will cooperate as well," Leighow said.

The governor was not available for comment Monday afternoon, as she was flying from Anchorage to the capital.

Palin abruptly fired Monegan on July 11 and later explained she wanted to take the Department of Public Safety in a different, more energetic direction. She replaced him with Chuck Kopp, the former Kenai police chief. But Kopp resigned Friday over questions about a reprimand he received after a sexual harassment complaint lodged against him in Kenai.

The Legislative Council is a panel of lawmakers who tend to legislative business when lawmakers are not meeting in regular session.

On Monday, the council voted 12-0 to spend up to $100,000 "to investigate the circumstances and events surrounding the termination of former Public Safety Commissioner Monegan, and potential abuses of power and/or improper actions by members of the executive branch."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I don't think that hal was referring to the Democrats in Alaska so much as he was referring to Democrats in general hoping that the "Troopergate" investigation would create a black mark on Palin's record. hal can, of course, correct me if I am wrong.

[Primula Baggins]

Democrats in the lower 48 didn't start the investigation and are not in charge of finishing it, so I honestly don't see why there would be any "backlash" against them no matter what is or is not discovered.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

How can Bob Barr attract the Ron Paul voters?

By insulting Ron Paul and his supporters

The Bob Barr campaign has to be the worst one the LP has ever run. Bob Barr isn't libertarian, and Wayne Root is even worse. Root is such an embarassment that even Barr (who chose him) is trying to keep him hidden.

I really wish there was a libertarian on the ballot this year, I'd really like to vote for one.

[halplm]

VtF, you are correct.

Prim, you may be correct, but it is obvious that leftist blogs and leftist media is looking for this to cause Palin political harm.

Yes, it is also well documented that the republicans that started this, and are continuting it, are enemies of Palin, which lends evidence to it being politically motivated, rather than out of any other reason.

the very fact that SF keeps bring it up is proof that some want it to hurt Palin .

[Padme]

Speaking of Ron Paul

Link

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080910/ap_ ... rd_parties

Story

By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 10 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Republican Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Texas lawmaker who attracted a devoted following in the GOP primaries, said Wednesday he rejected an appeal to endorse John McCain's presidential bid.


Paul said the request came from Phil Gramm, the former McCain adviser and ex-senator whom the campaign jettisoned after he said the country was a "nation of whiners" about the economy. Gramm defeated Paul in the Republican primary for the Senate in 1984.

Speaking to reporters at a news conference, Paul said Gramm called him this week and told him, "You need to endorse McCain." The Texas congressman said he refused.

"The idea was that he would do less harm than the other candidate," Paul said.

Paul won no primaries in the Republican nomination contest but developed a strong following on the Internet.

He appeared at a news conference with three third-party candidates: independent Ralph Nader; former Georgia Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate; and Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate. Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate, was invited but said at his own news conference later that he declined because Paul didn't endorse one candidate.

"We need today, now, 55 days before this election, bold, focused, specific leadership and that is not the amorphous kind that says any of the above or none of the above," Barr said.

Barr said he had asked Paul to join him as his running mate on the Libertarian Party ticket while his current running mate, Wayne Root would step aside. "We don't anticopate that he will," Barr said.

Earlier, Paul called the presidential elections a charade and said voters are faced with the "lesser of two evils."

The majority of Americans, about 60 percent, are unhappy with their choices in the race, Paul said. He urged the three third-party candidates to bring all their supporters together to vote against the "establishment candidates."

Paul, 73, a former doctor, ran for president as the Libertarian candidate in 1988. He is unopposed in the November race for his congressional seat.

Nader derided media focus on what he called "lipstickgate," referring to the bickering between the McCain and Barack Obama campaigns over whether a phrase used by Obama was a sexist comment against Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

Nader, a consumer protection advocate, acknowledged differences among the third-party candidates such as government regulation of health and safety standards. But he added that he shares Paul's support for more opportunity in the political process for third-party candidates.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

Nader was willing to share a stage with Paul. Barr wasn't. Paul refused to endorse McCain, wich makes perfect sense after the way Paul was treated at the convention.

At least Giuliani lost. There's one tiny insignificant ray of hope from this election cycle.

[sauronsfinger]

Blaming Democrats in the other states for an unanimous bi-partisan effort among a legislative committee of elected Alaskan politicians would be Alice In Wonderland/falling down the rabbit hole politics.

The report will be out before the election unless the McCain team increases its efforts to prevent that from happening. That is why the subpoenas became necessary when the cooperation pledge made by Palin and her staff went south.

[Dave_LF]

Apparently one of the books Palin was interested in banning was "Pastor, I'm gay". The book was written by a pastor who lived near Wasilla and Wasilla AoG was actively campaigning against it at the time:

http://www.queerty.com/reporter-palin-a ... -20080910/

[N.E. Brigand]

Yes, it is also well documented that the Republicans that started this, and are continuting it, are enemies of Palin, which lends evidence to it being politically motivated, rather than out of any other reason.

I think that the investigation could help Palin's appearance as a reformer in a state where politics are generally perceived as corrupt; that the investigation is spurred by her fellow Republicans may only add to her "maverick" credentials.

[vison]

What if it turns out that everything "bad" about Sarah Palin is true? What if, faced by mountains of evidence, she admits that she did everything she is accused of?

Wouldn't that be a good thing for the people of the US?

Or would it better if wrongdoing was just covered up?

[Primula Baggins]

I've lived in the Pacific Northwest pretty much all of my life, pay attention to politics, and probably could not have told you a thing about Alaska politics, corrupt or otherwise. I suspect the rest of the country knows even less.

Incidentally, the McCain ad responding to "lipstick on a pig" has been pulled from YouTube at CBS's behest because it was misleading. Katie Couric is shown saying, “One of the great lessons of that campaign is the continued and accepted role of sexism in American life," but in the clip she is actually talking about Hillary Clinton, not Sarah Palin.

The ad is still up on McCain's website, apparently.

[halplm]

I'm not sayin anything should be covered up, vison, I just asked the question that if (well, I said when) the investigation turns up nothing, is that going to backlash against democrats who are actively promoting the investigation as evidence that Palin is "bad" or something.

[vison]

Since Mrs. Palin has not deigned to speak to anyone outside her own circle of admirers, and continues to preach only to the choir, she has only herself to blame if the media fill air time, and newsprint, with speculation.

Let her give the media something of substance, and see what happens. Let her come forward with, you know, ideas about issues?

No chance, though. Not from this campaign.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I'm not sayin anything should be covered up, vison, I just asked the question that if (well, I said when) the investigation turns up nothing, is that going to backlash against democrats who are actively promoting the investigation as evidence that Palin is "bad" or something.

hal, here is my prediction of what will happen. The investigator will "conclude" that the the evidence is "inconclusive" and therefore the final report will neither condemn Palin nor completely absolve her of wrongdoing. So there won't be any "October surprise" that damages the McCain/Palin campaign, but there also won't any "backlash" at any Democrats who have cited this investigation as evidence that Palin is "bad".

[halplm]

yeah, sounds about right, although both sides will still spin it

[sauronsfinger]

from Hal

I'm not sayin anything should be covered up, vison, I just asked the question that if (well, I said when) the investigation turns up nothing, is that going to backlash against democrats who are actively promoting the investigation as evidence that Palin is "bad" or something.

How many times does a falsehood have to be repeated before it turns into a truth?

Did you read the information I provided? The investigation was spurred by intitial inquiries by Governor Palins own appointed Attorney General. Not a Democrat.

The investigation was unanimously approved by a bi-partisan committee of the Alaskan legislature on a 12 - 0 vote of both Democrats and Republicans.

When I reprint this information for everyone here it is not for my benefit. It is to inform everyone of the facts. I know those can be a huge pain in the butt and they tend to get in the way of beliefs but I am getting a bit sick and tired of reading that Democrats are behind this when the record clearly shows that they are not to blame.

Democrats are not promoting this investigation. They are awaiting the results of it along with everyone else. Can you show me a TV ad or commercial promoting this investigation? Can you show me a speech by Obama or Biden where they are promoting this investigation?

So you want evidence that Sarah Palin is "bad or something" to use your own words. You ask and I will deliver.

Yes, we are concerned about the hypocrisy of Governor Palin on the Bridge to Nowhere claiming to be against it when she campaigned for office supporting it and kept the intitial monies sent to Alaska for it.

Yes, we are concerned abotu the hypocrisy about Governor Palin in accepting $27 million in earmarks for her tiny town and then daring to rail against earmarks.

Yes, we are concerned about her efforts to ban books at the public library in her tiny town and then portray herself as a champion of freedom.

Yes, we are concerned about her efforts to put a gag order on municipal employees of her tiny town and then portray herself as a defender of liberty.

Yes, we are concerned about her efforts to portray herself as a financial conservative while expaning the budget of her town over 50% under her tenure.

Yes, we are concerned that she portrays herself as a fiscal conservative when she billed the state for living and eating in her own home plus billing the taxpayers for trips and meals for her husband and kids who do not work for the state of Alaska.

Yes, we are concerned that she betrays her own campaign promises of fighting crime and protecting safety by cutting the budgets of both despite a state treasury awash in millions of dollars of extra revenue.

Yes, Hal, all those things concern us.

But we will wait for the investigation to give us its findings. We have enough on our plate. There is ample evidence before us regarding Sarah Palin.

Does truth count for anything ? Or is simple belief enough if one believes hard enough and with enough fervor?

[halplm]

How many times are you going to reprint that list before you realize it doesn't matter?

[yovargas]

And how many times are people going to ask you to not post stuff you've already posted before you stop doing it?