so palin abused her power - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Paq · 10-11-2008, 05:02 AM

Report stings Palin over Troopergate flap - Yahoo! News

Quote:

Alaska panel finds Palin abused power in firing

By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer 25 minutes ago

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Sarah Palin unlawfully abused her power as governor by trying to have her former brother-in-law fired as a state trooper, the chief investigator of an Alaska legislative panel concluded Friday. The politically charged inquiry imperiled her reputation as a reformer on John McCain's Republican ticket.

the article is much longer, but hey, this just shows that maybe she is ready to be VP. She takes after cheney

ratbastid · 10-11-2008, 05:07 AM

Oh, she's VERY much an executive in the Cheney mold. Never really been any doubt. Cuter, but just as vicious.

Burgerflipp · 10-11-2008, 05:38 AM

Not surprising that she abused her power...It's expected that politicians will do that.

guyy · 10-11-2008, 06:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burgerflipp

Not surprising that she abused her power...It's expected that politicians will do that.

No, you're wrong about that. The idea that executive power is supreme and transcendental is Republican. You can trace this notion of the executive back to the political theories of Carl Schmitt[1], who had something of a revival in academia in the eighties and early nineties, but in the context of contemporary US politics, Nixon is the more immediate source. Nixon's young turks (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush I...) took to it like flies to shit. As for Palin, her theory of the executive changed remarkably once she was nominated. Suddenly she was above subpoenas.

[1] There were others espousing more or less the same theories, e.g., in Japan in the 1930s, but Schmitt is best known.

Cynthetiq · 10-11-2008, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guyy

No, you're wrong about that. The idea that executive power is supreme and transcendental is Republican. You can trace this notion of the executive back to the political theories of Carl Schmitt[1], who had something of a revival in academia in the eighties and early nineties, but in the context of contemporary US politics, Nixon is the more immediate source. Nixon's young turks (Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush I...) took to it like flies to shit. As for Palin, her theory of the executive changed remarkably once she was nominated. Suddenly she was above subpoenas.

[1] There were others espousing more or less the same theories, e.g., in Japan in the 1930s, but Schmitt is best known.

Sorry, no republicans do not have a monopoly on abuse of power.

Mayor Daley of Chicago - Democrat (executive)

William Jennings Jefferson of Lousiana - Democratic

Boss Tweed of Tammany Hall NYC - Democrat

Gerry Studds - Democrat

Gary Condit - Democrat

Jim McGreevey - Democrat (executive)

Heck, I can't even list all the NJ Democrats that have abused their power.

guyy · 10-11-2008, 06:39 AM

That's not what i'm talking about, Cyn. You're talking about run-of-the-mill corruption of officials, a kind of corruption which is part and parcel of the bourgeois state. I'm talking about a particular theory of executive power.

Cynthetiq · 10-11-2008, 06:45 AM

and burgerflipp simply stated

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burgerflipp

Not surprising that she abused her power...It's expected that politicians will do that.

I don't see anything up in that quote that expounds on bourgeois state or any particular theory of executive power.

And thus, I'm in agreement that is isn't a monopoly held by the republicans, EVEN at the executive level as I cited with Mr. Daly and Mr. McGreevey.

Abuse of power is abuse of power, not if only they don't answer subpeonas. Since one could even look to Bill Clinton and see how he didn't wish to honor subpeonas as well.

ngdawg · 10-11-2008, 06:47 AM

Jim McGreevey, for one, wasn't "corrupt", he was an idiot. He used his position to get someone he had a crush on into a job for which that person didn't have a lick of knowledge.

We could add Elliot Spitzer to the list as well-he was both corrupt and power-mad, using his position as NY governor to twist arms in addition to thinking it was ok to rail against prostitution, but use it himself.
New York is fast tying with New Jersey with its growing list of corrupt, power hungry Dems.

Cynthetiq · 10-11-2008, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Jim McGreevey, for one, wasn't "corrupt", he was an idiot. He used his position to get someone he had a crush on into a job for which that person didn't have a lick of knowledge.

We could add Elliot Spitzer to the list as well-he was both corrupt and power-mad, using his position as NY governor to twist arms in addition to thinking it was ok to rail against prostitution, but use it himself.
New York is fast tying with New Jersey with its growing list of corrupt, power hungry Dems.

Nepotism is still an abuse of power.

Yes, I wasn't missing Mr. Spitzer in my list. I had actually typed him out but somehow erased him during an edit. NJ doesn't have a monopoly on corrupt politicians either.

ngdawg · 10-11-2008, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

and burgerflipp simply stated

I don't see anything up in that quote that expounds on bourgeois state or any particular theory of executive power.

And thus, I'm in agreement that is isn't a monopoly held by the republicans, EVEN at the executive level as I cited with Mr. Daly and Mr. McGreevey.

Abuse of power is abuse of power, not if only they don't answer subpeonas. Since one could even look to Bill Clinton and see how he didn't wish to honor subpeonas as well.

Ah yes, the man who gave a whole new meaning to "I'm the President...Blow me!"...

ASU2003 · 10-11-2008, 07:40 AM

I don't care. I think there was some political things going on with that report and this whole mess.

guyy · 10-11-2008, 07:42 AM

OK Cyn, i'll address the issue of run-of-the-mill corruption.

The Palin case is interesting because the McCain campaign has used the theory of executive supremacy in a case of ordinary corruption. As an ordinary governor, she abused her executive powers in a family feud. It doesn't reflect well on her, but ultimately, it's a family feud in someplace far away. However, once she became the VP candidate, the McCain campaign defended her with the theory of the supreme & transcendental executive. This idea has been propagated by Republican executives and their agents. It's on paper, in the Yoo torture memo , in Nixon's idea of executive privilege, in Carl Schmitt's books. The new development is that in Schmitt and even in the torture memos, supreme power is necessary because we're in a "state of exception", a crisis for the body politic. The crisis in Palin's case seems to be "we're doing poorly in the polls and would do worse if we got busted for this."

YaWhateva · 10-11-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ngdawg

Jim McGreevey, for one, wasn't "corrupt", he was an idiot. He used his position to get someone he had a crush on into a job for which that person didn't have a lick of knowledge.

Oh you mean like Palin did once she became governor. Except it wasn't crushes she put into power it was high school friends.

Cynthetiq · 10-11-2008, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guyy

OK Cyn, i'll address the issue of run-of-the-mill corruption.

The Palin case is interesting because the McCain campaign has used the theory of executive supremacy in a case of ordinary corruption. As an ordinary governor, she abused her executive powers in a family feud. It doesn't reflect well on her, but ultimately, it's a family feud in someplace far away. However, once she became the VP candidate, the McCain campaign defended her with the theory of the supreme & transcendental executive. This idea has been propagated by Republican executives and their agents. It's on paper, in the Yoo torture memo , in Nixon's idea of executive privilege, in Carl Schmitt's books. The new development is that in Schmitt and even in the torture memos, supreme power is necessary because we're in a "state of exception", a crisis for the body politic. The crisis in Palin's case seems to be "we're doing poorly in the polls and would do worse if we got busted for this."

So it's more interesting because someone else makes the "theory of the supreme & transcendental executive" claim and very different than executive privilege Mr. Clinton was using when he was not willing to acknowledge subpeonas from Whitewater to Ms. Lewinsky?

or can we not simply agree, that abuse of power is abuse of power, no matter the rationale or reason?

roachboy · 10-11-2008, 08:18 AM

cyn---yours is basically the republican line on the bush administration's attempts to basically refashion the relations between the executie and legislative while staying loosely within the rules. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that what addington/cheney were doing went well beyond the more routine usage of executive privilege that the clinton administration (and nearly every other president) invoked.

if the mc-cain camp tried to defend palin's actions in alaska on the grounds of a transcendent executive, it was a clumsy move. the grounds are effectively an argument for executive impunity.
there was no state of exception stripped of the context that makes the Leader desirable (for schmitt), it's nothing more than that.

i don't think the move was a theory of power so much as the campaign shucking and jiving ahead of this report, which will probably end up a small nail alongside the Much Larger Ones being pounded by the real world into the box that contains the ruins of mc-cain's presidential aspirations.

Cynthetiq · 10-11-2008, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

cyn---yours is basically the republican line on the bush administration's attempts to basically refashion the relations between the executie and legislative while staying loosely within the rules. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that what addington/cheney were doing went well beyond the more routine usage of executive privilege that the clinton administration (and nearly every other president) invoked.

if the mc-cain camp tried to defend palin's actions in alaska on the grounds of a transcendent executive, it was a clumsy move. the grounds are effectively an argument for executive impunity.
there was no state of exception stripped of the context that makes the Leader desirable (for schmitt), it's nothing more than that.

i don't think the move was a theory of power so much as the campaign shucking and jiving ahead of this report, which will probably end up a small nail alongside the Much Larger Ones being pounded by the real world into the box that contains the ruins of mc-cain's presidential aspirations.

Why do you keep adding words and thoughts to my entries?

I didn't mention bush at all, nor do I mention the republicans line on refashioning anything.

I'm taking a very simple position here. Abuse of power is abuse of power, not a republican thing, not a democrat thing, but a person in position who abuses that position.

Yet it seems that everyone seems to think that there's a partisan thing to it, when plainly and simply there is an abuse of someone's position, democrat or republican, or simply put POLITICIAN.

dc_dux · 10-11-2008, 08:28 AM

The fact is that the VP nominee of one of the major parties was found by a bi-partisan oversight committee of her state legislature that unanimously released a report (12-0, 8R and 4D) to have violated state ethics laws and the public trust.

The others are irrelevant to this discussion.

guyy · 10-11-2008, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

So it's more interesting because someone else makes the "theory of the supreme & transcendental executive" claim and very different than executive privilege Mr. Clinton was using when he was not willing to acknowledge subpeonas from Whitewater to Ms. Lewinsky?

or can we not simply agree, that abuse of power is abuse of power, no matter the rationale or reason?

Clinton argued that lawyer-client confidentiality trumped the Whitewater subpoena. His argument was essentially personal privacy, not a theory of the executives overarching supremacy. In the Lewinsky affair he first said that he was busy and that Starr was biased (which was entirely true), but eventually he testified. You may or may not buy his initial justifications for dragging his feet, but he argued with particularities and contexts rather than with a theory of the executive. But enough about that idiotic affair -- the only good to have come of it was that it made Bob Barr into an even bigger joke.

I don't think all abuse of power is the same. It sucks for Monegan to have been caught in the middle of the Palin family feud, but taking the country into war under false pretenses is far worse.

Derwood · 10-11-2008, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

The fact is that the VP nominee of one of the major parties was found by a bi-partisan oversight committee of her state legislature that unanimously released a report (12-0, 8R and 4D) to have violated state ethics laws and the public trust.

The others are irrelevant to this discussion.

and the story won't matter much since McCain/Palin are so far behind in the polls. Their detractors will say "we told you so" and their supporters will say "unfair investigation, mainstream media, blah blah blah" and the net effect will be negligible

guyy · 10-11-2008, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

and the story won't matter much since McCain/Palin are so far behind in the polls. Their detractors will say "we told you so" and their supporters will say "unfair investigation, mainstream media, blah blah blah" and the net effect will be negligible

Perhaps. It might give ammunition to the McCain & Palin's enemies in the GOP or perhaps to one faction or another of their campaign. I think McCain's campaign is split, and part of the confusion you hear in McCain is a reflection of that division. So who knows. They'll probably have to keep showing up together so he can protect her, but that's going to limit the number of places they can cover.

No doubt the Palin crowd will play the victim, which is pretty much their standard position. What would Reich say?

dc_dux · 10-11-2008, 09:16 AM

I agree that it will little impact but will add to the chaos in the McCain campaign camp.

I do find it amusing that McCain/Palin are the first ticket in US history in which both candidates were found to have violated ethics standards and the public trust.

The "character counts" candidates!

Paq · 10-11-2008, 09:29 AM

i mean, palin is definitely the victim here...how dare people look into what she's done in her life and positions in the past...

viiiictim

Derwood · 10-11-2008, 09:36 AM

if anything, this will be a negative on her record if/when she runs for president in 2012 (and don't think she won't)

Paq · 10-11-2008, 09:39 AM

much like mccain's illegitimate black child is hurting him now...err, rumors of...

people forget what happened in 2000 when looking at mccain..

Derwood · 10-11-2008, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paq

much like mccain's illegitimate black child is hurting him now...err, rumors of...

people forget what happened in 2000 when looking at mccain..

anyone with a brain knew the illegitimate child story was straight up Karl Rove attack machine. The Palin thing was a bi-partisan investigation. Huge difference.

Paq · 10-11-2008, 10:06 AM

hmm, i reread what i wrote..and i did not realize i was defending mccain...I merely meant i was shocked he'd go very low in his campaign considering what was done to him....

i honestly think the meds were kicking in...

ohhhh, it was in reference of the 'character counts' reference. Either way, this is just amazing and historic...if for nothing else than to show the future how not to run a campaign.

i still think mccain will win...

Derwood · 10-11-2008, 10:28 AM

i'd love to see the string of logic you're using to get us to a McCain win in the next 3 weeks

Rekna · 10-11-2008, 10:43 AM

The argument of abuse of power being owned by Republicans or Democrats is a distraction and should not even be discussed.

The important findings here is 1) that Palin used her position to enact revenge for a personal vendetta, 2) she doesn't believe that is wrong, and 3) Todd Palin has way to much influence/power on Sarah's job. There is no reason for him to be in the meetings and included on the emails that he was.

Tully Mars · 10-11-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

if anything, this will be a negative on her record if/when she runs for president in 2012 (and don't think she won't)

I see that coming. She and McCain aren't even on the same page now. She's slowly working to separate herself from what's quickly becoming a losing ticket. The country is in a dire conditions, regardless of who wins it's unlikely they'll make much of a turn around in one term. If the country's still in poor shape in 24 months she can start making moves for the GOP pick. I can hear it now. "If I'd have been elected would we be in better shape? You betcha!" My guess is she'll wink at the camera while she says that.
-----Added 11/10/2008 at 03 : 44 : 26-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rekna

The argument of abuse of power being owned by Republicans or Democrats is a distraction and should not even be discussed.

The important findings here is 1) that Palin used her position to enact revenge for a personal vendetta, 2) she doesn't believe that is wrong, and 3) Todd Palin has way to much influence/power on Sarah's job. There is no reason for him to be in the meetings and included on the emails that he was.

I saw a guy from the McCain camp this morning give an interview where he explained how the report vindicated her of all wrong doing. He said the report was a positive for her and the campaign.

I read through some of it, it's pretty long. My attention span is pretty short. I don't see it the same way he does, but then I didn't read the whole thing.

aceventura3 · 10-11-2008, 01:51 PM

I would have done what she did, "abuse of power" or not. Those who would not have, well consider yourselves truly exceptional and worthy of a special place in heaven (if you believe in it).

Paq · 10-11-2008, 02:30 PM

derwood: voter fraud

diebold still being a republican company 'committed to getting gwb ohio" things people forget about the 2000 and 2004 elections...

rekna: i agree wholeheartedly, todd palin wasn't elected and was WAYYY too involved for the spouse of a governor. I think i see how republicans must have felt about hillary during clinton's admin..

highthief · 10-11-2008, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aceventura3

I would have done what she did, "abuse of power" or not. Those who would not have, well consider yourselves truly exceptional and worthy of a special place in heaven (if you believe in it).

I'm a cynical person when it comes to people saying they'd do this or do that in a given situation - I think most people are fairly selfish at the end of the day. But I don't think most people would abuse their power in this manner as part of a family feud.

roachboy · 10-11-2008, 06:08 PM

wait--so the republican argument about sarah palin is that she's so much just like you that you would have done the same thing she did because, after all, you're just like her? because of course being just like her that is what you would have done and you're just like her. it's like a series of statements masquerading as questions, isn't it? what do these statements mean? is this a tautology?

murp0434 · 10-11-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

if anything, this will be a negative on her record if/when she runs for president in 2012 (and don't think she won't)

one word.....TERRIFYING

ottopilot · 10-11-2008, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by murp0434

one word.....TERRIFYING

Fear not dear friend. Hope is within our grasp... ΑΩ.

Boo · 10-12-2008, 01:04 AM

What is disappointing is that with all the "abuse of power" etc.... Wooten is still a state trooper.

I am surprised that anyone would side with a guy that threatened to kill a family member. Drinking in a police car wile armed etc... would just get the rest of us fired. Thereatening my family could get someone killed.

Todd Palin was doing the people in the state of Alaska a favor by trying to rid the force of Wooten. Unfortunately, the union favors him.

Tully Mars · 10-12-2008, 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boo

What is disappointing is that with all the "abuse of power" etc.... Wooten is still a state trooper.

I am surprised that anyone would side with a guy that threatened to kill a family member. Drinking in a police car wile armed etc... would just get the rest of us fired. Thereatening my family could get someone killed.

Todd Palin was doing the people in the state of Alaska a favor by trying to rid the force of Wooten. Unfortunately, the union favors him.

This is part of what I never understood about the situation. If this trooper did all these things and I'm not saying he didn't. Why didn't Palin et el just come out and say "Damn right I tried to protect my family from this guy. I'd have taken the same action if any other family contacted my office and alerted me that a trooper was engaging in these dangerous behaviors aimed at their family. As Governor I have to take action to protect the families of Alaska. We have to think outside the box sometimes when families are in danger." Why she first choose to partake in the investigation then refused is beyond me. Seems to me she could have put this to sleep fairly easily.

The way she went about it makes her look like just another power hungry politician. But I think she could have added to her (I can't believe I'm using this word) maverick image had she been more up front from the beginning.

ratbastid · 10-12-2008, 05:24 AM

Except it wouldn't have been "Damn right I...", it would have been "Yer darn tootin' I..."

It's political inexperience, plain and simple. Anybody who's been around a while would know how to spin it and come out clean--there are successful politicians who we currently think well of who have weathered MUCH worse.

flstf · 10-12-2008, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tully Mars

This is part of what I never understood about the situation. If this trooper did all these things and I'm not saying he didn't. Why didn't Palin et el just come out and say "Damn right I tried to protect my family from this guy. I'd have taken the same action if any other family contacted my office and alerted me that a trooper was engaging in these dangerous behaviors aimed at their family. As Governor I have to take action to protect the families of Alaska. We have to think outside the box sometimes when families are in danger." Why she first choose to partake in the investigation then refused is beyond me. Seems to me she could have put this to sleep fairly easily.

I haven't followed this story closely but I guess it is because most people are supposed to be considered innocent until proven otherwise. Divorces can get ugly and family members sometimes pick sides. After they investigated him wasn't he only suspended for shooting a moose using a permit that someone else gave him while hunting with Palin's father? Also I thought I read that his son wanted to see what a taser felt like and he used it at the lowest setting.

Tully Mars · 10-12-2008, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Except it wouldn't have been "Damn right I...", it would have been "Yer darn tootin' I..."

It's political inexperience, plain and simple. Anybody who's been around a while would know how to spin it and come out clean--there are successful politicians who we currently think well of who have weathered MUCH worse.

You're right about the lingo.

But again this was mostly done after the McCain people (many of whom have mas experience with this kind of thing) why didn't they spin this the other way? It's like the McCain camp can't figure out how to do even the most basic political move. They currently seem to be trying to move in several different direction at once. The GOP used to the guys you count on to all get on the same page and spew the same answers to ever question.
-----Added 12/10/2008 at 11 : 54 : 01-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by flstf

I haven't followed this story closely but I guess it is because most people are supposed to be considered innocent until proven otherwise. Divorces can get ugly and family members sometimes pick sides. After they investigated him wasn't he only suspended for shooting a moose using a permit that someone else gave him while hunting with Palin's father? Also I thought I read that his son wanted to see what a taser felt like and he used it at the lowest setting.

Again I haven't really followed the facts either. I don't know what actual facts are, the trooper could be completely clean here. My guess is the public will never actual know what happened and the facts are likely somewhere in the middle. I do know it damn near impossible to get a public employee fire in some states. Where I used to work we had a city officer pulled over by another officer for DUI. Think he blew a .18 at around noon. The union got involved and he was sent to treatment.

My main point isn't what did or didn't happen. My main point was why wouldn't they spin this so the average working family would be more likely to see someone trying to protect her family and the public at large against a bad cop. The way they did it more people, IMO, are going to see this as someone abusing their power and then trying to cover it up

10-11-2008, 08:18 AM	#15 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	cyn---yours is basically the republican line on the bush administration's attempts to basically refashion the relations between the executie and legislative while staying loosely within the rules. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that what addington/cheney were doing went well beyond the more routine usage of executive privilege that the clinton administration (and nearly every other president) invoked. if the mc-cain camp tried to defend palin's actions in alaska on the grounds of a transcendent executive, it was a clumsy move. the grounds are effectively an argument for executive impunity. there was no state of exception stripped of the context that makes the Leader desirable (for schmitt), it's nothing more than that. i don't think the move was a theory of power so much as the campaign shucking and jiving ahead of this report, which will probably end up a small nail alongside the Much Larger Ones being pounded by the real world into the box that contains the ruins of mc-cain's presidential aspirations. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-11-2008, 08:28 AM	#17 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	The fact is that the VP nominee of one of the major parties was found by a bi-partisan oversight committee of her state legislature that unanimously released a report (12-0, 8R and 4D) to have violated state ethics laws and the public trust. The others are irrelevant to this discussion. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 10-11-2008 at 08:30 AM..

10-11-2008, 09:16 AM	#21 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	I agree that it will little impact but will add to the chaos in the McCain campaign camp. I do find it amusing that McCain/Palin are the first ticket in US history in which both candidates were found to have violated ethics standards and the public trust. The "character counts" candidates! __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

10-11-2008, 09:29 AM	#22 (permalink)
Paq Junkie Location: South Carolina	i mean, palin is definitely the victim here...how dare people look into what she's done in her life and positions in the past... viiiictim __________________ Live. Chris

10-11-2008, 09:39 AM	#24 (permalink)
Paq Junkie Location: South Carolina	much like mccain's illegitimate black child is hurting him now...err, rumors of... people forget what happened in 2000 when looking at mccain.. __________________ Live. Chris

10-11-2008, 05:07 AM	#2 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Oh, she's VERY much an executive in the Cheney mold. Never really been any doubt. Cuter, but just as vicious.

10-11-2008, 05:38 AM	#3 (permalink)
Burgerflipp Upright	Not surprising that she abused her power...It's expected that politicians will do that.

10-11-2008, 06:39 AM	#6 (permalink)
guyy Addict Location: Cottage Grove, Wisconsin	That's not what i'm talking about, Cyn. You're talking about run-of-the-mill corruption of officials, a kind of corruption which is part and parcel of the bourgeois state. I'm talking about a particular theory of executive power.

10-11-2008, 06:47 AM	#8 (permalink)
ngdawg peekaboo Location: on the back, bitch	Jim McGreevey, for one, wasn't "corrupt", he was an idiot. He used his position to get someone he had a crush on into a job for which that person didn't have a lick of knowledge. We could add Elliot Spitzer to the list as well-he was both corrupt and power-mad, using his position as NY governor to twist arms in addition to thinking it was ok to rail against prostitution, but use it himself. New York is fast tying with New Jersey with its growing list of corrupt, power hungry Dems.

10-11-2008, 07:40 AM	#11 (permalink)
ASU2003 immoral minority Location: Back in Ohio	I don't care. I think there was some political things going on with that report and this whole mess.

10-11-2008, 07:42 AM	#12 (permalink)
guyy Addict Location: Cottage Grove, Wisconsin	OK Cyn, i'll address the issue of run-of-the-mill corruption. The Palin case is interesting because the McCain campaign has used the theory of executive supremacy in a case of ordinary corruption. As an ordinary governor, she abused her executive powers in a family feud. It doesn't reflect well on her, but ultimately, it's a family feud in someplace far away. However, once she became the VP candidate, the McCain campaign defended her with the theory of the supreme & transcendental executive. This idea has been propagated by Republican executives and their agents. It's on paper, in the Yoo torture memo , in Nixon's idea of executive privilege, in Carl Schmitt's books. The new development is that in Schmitt and even in the torture memos, supreme power is necessary because we're in a "state of exception", a crisis for the body politic. The crisis in Palin's case seems to be "we're doing poorly in the polls and would do worse if we got busted for this."

10-11-2008, 09:36 AM	#23 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	if anything, this will be a negative on her record if/when she runs for president in 2012 (and don't think she won't)

10-11-2008, 10:06 AM	#26 (permalink)
Paq Junkie Location: South Carolina	hmm, i reread what i wrote..and i did not realize i was defending mccain...I merely meant i was shocked he'd go very low in his campaign considering what was done to him.... i honestly think the meds were kicking in... ohhhh, it was in reference of the 'character counts' reference. Either way, this is just amazing and historic...if for nothing else than to show the future how not to run a campaign. i still think mccain will win... __________________ Live. Chris

10-11-2008, 10:28 AM	#27 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	i'd love to see the string of logic you're using to get us to a McCain win in the next 3 weeks

10-11-2008, 10:43 AM	#28 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	The argument of abuse of power being owned by Republicans or Democrats is a distraction and should not even be discussed. The important findings here is 1) that Palin used her position to enact revenge for a personal vendetta, 2) she doesn't believe that is wrong, and 3) Todd Palin has way to much influence/power on Sarah's job. There is no reason for him to be in the meetings and included on the emails that he was.

10-11-2008, 01:51 PM	#30 (permalink)
aceventura3 Junkie Location: Ventura County	I would have done what she did, "abuse of power" or not. Those who would not have, well consider yourselves truly exceptional and worthy of a special place in heaven (if you believe in it). __________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

10-11-2008, 02:30 PM	#31 (permalink)
Paq Junkie Location: South Carolina	derwood: voter fraud diebold still being a republican company 'committed to getting gwb ohio" things people forget about the 2000 and 2004 elections... rekna: i agree wholeheartedly, todd palin wasn't elected and was WAYYY too involved for the spouse of a governor. I think i see how republicans must have felt about hillary during clinton's admin.. __________________ Live. Chris

10-11-2008, 06:08 PM	#33 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	wait--so the republican argument about sarah palin is that she's so much just like you that you would have done the same thing she did because, after all, you're just like her? because of course being just like her that is what you would have done and you're just like her. it's like a series of statements masquerading as questions, isn't it? what do these statements mean? is this a tautology? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-12-2008, 01:04 AM	#36 (permalink)
Boo Leave me alone! Location: Alaska, USA	What is disappointing is that with all the "abuse of power" etc.... Wooten is still a state trooper. I am surprised that anyone would side with a guy that threatened to kill a family member. Drinking in a police car wile armed etc... would just get the rest of us fired. Thereatening my family could get someone killed. Todd Palin was doing the people in the state of Alaska a favor by trying to rid the force of Wooten. Unfortunately, the union favors him. __________________ Back button again, I must be getting old.

10-12-2008, 05:24 AM	#38 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Except it wouldn't have been "Damn right I...", it would have been "Yer darn tootin' I..." It's political inexperience, plain and simple. Anybody who's been around a while would know how to spin it and come out clean--there are successful politicians who we currently think well of who have weathered MUCH worse.