TenuredVulture wrote:The woman who thought Obama was an Arab, in addition to having a serious bad hair day, seemed genuinely surprised to learn from McCain that he wasn't.

Well, she has been "reading" about Obama. She didn't mention that what she read was a bunch of emails forwarded from her friends, original sender unknown. He's a secret Muslim, don't you know.


Good job by McCain to make an effort to reign in the crazies. Now I'll believe he means it when Palin doesn't come out tomorrow spewing the same old filth. If she follows his lead, demonstrating that this wasn't for show, I'll regain some of my respect for McCain.

phdave wrote:On the other hand, I might have heard someone say "terrorist" in this one:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fbpZXivv-M&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/[/youtube]

They're feeding off each other. All the things they thought to themselves, but couldn't say, are now getting a voice because McCain and Palin made it okee-dokee. But they're good Germans, errrr, Americans.

I guess we're finding out where the tipping point is. Imagine how much hatred could boil to the surface if the economic problem keeps getting worse, which it just might.

Laexile wrote:

phdave wrote:Uh oh, now I'm confused:

A legislative investigation has concluded that Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power in pushing for the firing of an Alaska state trooper who was once married to her sister.

The report by investigator Steve Branchflower was made public late this afternoon by a 12-0 vote of the Legislative Council, which authorized the investigation.

Branchflower's report contains four findings. The first concludes that Palin violated the state's executive branch ethics act, which says that "each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

The above section is true but misleading. While the investigator concluded that she abused her power that conclusion wasn't adopted by the Legislative Council. All they did was approve the report. I have yet to read any actual evidence that she did anything to violate the state's executive branch ethics act. Thinking that she did and actually producing evidence that she did are two different things.

While I certainly applaud what John McCain said about Barack Obama it sounds like a concession speech. Sadly I doubt Barack Obama would do the same about his rhetoric.

New York Times

Gov. Sarah Palin abused the powers of her office by pressuring subordinates to try to get her former brother-in-law, a state trooper, fired, an investigation by the Alaska Legislature has concluded. The inquiry found, however, that she was within her right to dismiss her public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, who was the trooper’s boss.

A 263-page report released by lawmakers in Alaska on Friday, found that Ms. Palin, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, had herself exerted pressure to get Trooper Michael Wooten dismissed, as well as allowed her husband and subordinates to press for his firing, as a result of a divorce proceeding between him and Ms. Palin’s sister in 2005.

“Such impermissible and repeated contacts,” the report states, “create conflicts of interests for subordinate employees who must choose to either please a superior or run the risk of facing that superior’s displeasure and the possible consequences of that displeasure.” The report concludes that the action was a violation of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act.

Report

Try page 8.

Laexile wrote:The above section is true but misleading. While the investigator concluded that she abused her power that conclusion wasn't adopted by the Legislative Council. All they did was approve the report. I have yet to read any actual evidence that she did anything to violate the state's executive branch ethics act. Thinking that she did and actually producing evidence that she did are two different things.

I'm not sure I understand. The section didn't say anything about the Legislative Council adopting the report. It said that they voted to release the entire report to the public. What was misleading?

Also, regarding the evidence, pages 82 through 263 of the report has all of the detail of the evidence (transcripts of testimony, emails) that the report is based on. What evidence are you looking for? What don't you think counts as evidence in the 181 pages of evidence in the report? Of course I haven't read all of those pages but if there was no evidence supporting the conclusion, wouldn't someone have objected to releasing the report?

lethal wrote:Report

Try page 8.

meatball wrote:1. He wouldn't concede anything, since he's winning
2. His rhetoric is far far far less inflammatory than the McCain camp's. In fact, he says he respects John McCain as a man and hero in pretty much every stump speech he gives. It took obvious racial and xenophobic reactions from his public for McCain to finally snatch away a microphone and do the same.

When you're winning is when you're supposed to be more inclusive and less divisive. Yes, his rhetoric is less inflammatory but negative is negative. Either it is or it isn't. I've heard him say that John McCain is a hero and then he says that John McCain doesn't understand the economy and is out of touch. Talk about faint praise. The only reason he says that McCain is a hero is that when he went negative on McCain and didn't say that he was blasted. If he had respect for McCain he wouldn't lie about his positions. Of course the same can be said for McCain lying about Obama.

Yes, lethal the report concludes that the action was a violation of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. But that's the opinion of the investigator. Opinions aren't evidence. phdave, what'd misleading is that people, other than yourself, are reading that as saying that the Legislative Council is adopting the report. I haven't read the whole report but 181 pages of testimony is not evidence of wrongdoing. In all the report summaries I've read, once she became governor she never attempted to influence anyone to fire Wooten. The report concludes that others tried to do so on her behalf, that she had to be aware of that, and that she did nothing to stop it. I don't know the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act, but it's rare to convict someone on their failure to do something rather than actually doing something.

breathtaking

Laexile wrote:

phdave wrote:Uh oh, now I'm confused:

A legislative investigation has concluded that Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power in pushing for the firing of an Alaska state trooper who was once married to her sister.

The report by investigator Steve Branchflower was made public late this afternoon by a 12-0 vote of the Legislative Council, which authorized the investigation.

Branchflower's report contains four findings. The first concludes that Palin violated the state's executive branch ethics act, which says that "each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust."

The above section is true but misleading. While the investigator concluded that she abused her power that conclusion wasn't adopted by the Legislative Council. All they did was approve the report. I have yet to read any actual evidence that she did anything to violate the state's executive branch ethics act. Thinking that she did and actually producing evidence that she did are two different things.

While I certainly applaud what John McCain said about Barack Obama it sounds like a concession speech. Sadly I doubt Barack Obama would do the same about his rhetoric.

Lax -- seriously -- would you be comfortable with Palin ascending to the White House? Are you comfortable with the circle she has inculcated herself within politically and socially? Did you read the Salon.com piece her ties to AIP etc...?? Do you really want to be defending her politically -- not as a person, not McCain's choice to appoint her -- just who and what she is? Do you think she'd be good for the country and agree with most of her stated views, and the people she owes?

We all get that you respect McCain personally and feel he's fully qualified.

Unfortunately, I don't believe he has an policies to end the war or fix the economy and despite any sincere intentions he won't surround himself with anyone innovative in those regards. At the end of the day, he's still a Republican, a hawk, and an old white rich guy. And his VP, at age 72 with cancer history -- is a former beauty pageant contestant aligned with some of the most reactionary forces anti-govt forces, gun toting, bible thumpers out there!

So you can keep trying to trip everybody up with who is running what kind of campaign, and who is holding the moral high road on all that, or you can stop side-stepping reality and tell us whether you reall support the policies and likely appointment to Supreme Court, cabinet and elsewhere that a McCain Palin White House would bring to the country? Tell us why it's good for us? And good for the now close to 10% unemplyed, stats that don't count people that have given up, or work part time, and with a threshold that doesn't take in to account the reality of life -- when it says whether you or which side of the poverty line. You think McCain will get more people health care? Better jobs? Security?

What will he do for us all?

You seem like a bright guy, can you really get behind Palin? Really?

I was watching Palin speak at a rally in PA. How can people stand to listen to her I'll never know. The whine, combined with the snideness and the accent are like nails on a chalk board. There seems to be a shift in tone from the you betcha of the debate to the way she speaks to the true believers

phdave wrote:On the other hand, I might have heard someone say "terrorist" in this one:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fbpZXivv-M&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/[/youtube]

Phillies fan at 1:08 :?

Laexile wrote:

meatball wrote:1. He wouldn't concede anything, since he's winning
2. His rhetoric is far far far less inflammatory than the McCain camp's. In fact, he says he respects John McCain as a man and hero in pretty much every stump speech he gives. It took obvious racial and xenophobic reactions from his public for McCain to finally snatch away a microphone and do the same.

When you're winning is when you're supposed to be more inclusive and less divisive. Yes, his rhetoric is less inflammatory but negative is negative. Either it is or it isn't. I've heard him say that John McCain is a hero and then he says that John McCain doesn't understand the economy and is out of touch. Talk about faint praise. The only reason he says that McCain is a hero is that when he went negative on McCain and didn't say that he was blasted. If he had respect for McCain he wouldn't lie about his positions. Of course the same can be said for McCain lying about Obama.

Yes, lethal the report concludes that the action was a violation of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act. But that's the opinion of the investigator. Opinions aren't evidence. phdave, what'd misleading is that people, other than yourself, are reading that as saying that the Legislative Council is adopting the report. I haven't read the whole report but 181 pages of testimony is not evidence of wrongdoing. In all the report summaries I've read, once she became governor she never attempted to influence anyone to fire Wooten. The report concludes that others tried to do so on her behalf, that she had to be aware of that, and that she did nothing to stop it. I don't know the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act, but it's rare to convict someone on their failure to do something rather than actually doing something.

I hope Vox locks down this thread and prohibits all further politics talk. I can't help myself but to read these types of posts (and from the left side as well) which are pure partisan drivel, and I hate myself afterwards (I'm guilty as well of course, although my posts tend to be single-issue). It reminds me of the Dave Chappelle skit where the prosecutor asks Chappelle what it would take to convict R. Kelly for peeing on an underage girl.

Please just put an end to it.

Laexile wrote:

meatball wrote:1. He wouldn't concede anything, since he's winning
2. His rhetoric is far far far less inflammatory than the McCain camp's. In fact, he says he respects John McCain as a man and hero in pretty much every stump speech he gives. It took obvious racial and xenophobic reactions from his public for McCain to finally snatch away a microphone and do the same.

When you're winning is when you're supposed to be more inclusive and less divisive. Yes, his rhetoric is less inflammatory but negative is negative. Either it is or it isn't. I've heard him say that John McCain is a hero and then he says that John McCain doesn't understand the economy and is out of touch. Talk about faint praise. The only reason he says that McCain is a hero is that when he went negative on McCain and didn't say that he was blasted. If he had respect for McCain he wouldn't lie about his positions. Of course the same can be said for McCain lying about Obama.

McCain said himself he doesn't know much about the economy. Then, recently no less, he said, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong". Seems pretty out of touch to me.

So, to you, "out of touch with the economy" = "palling around with terrorists".

Now, THAT'S out of touch.

Laexile wrote:In all the report summaries I've read, once she became governor she never attempted to influence anyone to fire Wooten. The report concludes that others tried to do so on her behalf, that she had to be aware of that, and that she did nothing to stop it. I don't know the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act, but it's rare to convict someone on their failure to do something rather than actually doing something.

"The others" you are talking about is pretty much Todd Palin. They concluded that Todd was using the fact that he was the Governor's husband to pressure her subordinates into taking revenge against his ex-brother-in-law. The perception of the people he was pressuring was that he was acting on the behalf of the Governor.

I guess you can parse this anyway you want and consider her technically innocent because she herself was not the one making phone call after phone call while she was governor (she did make some and sent emails). But this is a BIG reason to not want the Palins to be in the White House. They have a history of acting as a team to use the weight of her office to take out personal vendettas. It certainly undermines McCain's message of ethical conduct.

My friends, this thread is very un-patriotic.

meatball wrote:McCain said himself he doesn't know much about the economy. Then, recently no less, he said, "the fundamentals of our economy are strong". Seems pretty out of touch to me.

So, to you, "out of touch with the economy" = "palling around with terrorists".

Now, THAT'S out of touch.

McCain never said he doesn't know much about the economy. Two years ago he said he didn't know as much about the economy as foreign policy. I laugh at "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" quote. If you listen to Barack Obama lately that's exactly what he's been saying! Six months ago McCain said that while the economy was in the toilet the American people were the fundamentals of the economy and would pull us out. That's exactly what Obama is saying now. He's so out of touch.

The Palin report is fairly critical of Todd Palin. Of course I'm not going to paint a candidate based on the ethics of their family. [ahem... Joe Biden] Even if she is guilty of trying to get her brother-in-law fired, is it a big deal? I think there's a double standard on both sides. I don't see how anyone can defend Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko, but really will it be a big deal for how he'd be a President?

ptk, I don't care if she believes in evolution. What I care about is the job she does. She's done a good job in Alaska. I see no reason why she wouldn't do the same as President. I wouldn't agree with everything, but then the only person who I agree with on everything is me. I don't like Bush, but that doesn't mean he hasn't done some good things.

The best Presidents aren't the smartest. LBJ was no intellectual but he was a better President than Jimmy Carter, a nuclear engineer. George H.W. Bush was an intellectual, but Ronald Reagan was a better President.

I don't think Palin is ready to be President. Fortunately she won't have to be. Would she be ready if something happens? Hard to say. Harry Truman wasn't ready. LBJ was. I don't think Barack Obama is ready. I think he's a smart contemplative man who wants the best for (most of) the country. I find his approach naive and idealistic.

I'm not trying to trip anyone up on anything. I'm trying to have strong debate and hope that people will find both sides valid. My guy is running an unethical disrespectful campaign. Guilty as charged. It gets me that Barack Obama gets a free pass. Look at both the same. I see the POV from the other side and find it has merit. Few people here can do the same.

Yes, I believe that McCain will appoint better Supreme Court justices. I don't believe in legislating from the bench. If abortion should be allowed, pass a law. That's what we pay Congress for. Personally I'm not as concerned with how conservative or liberal a justice is, but more that he's good at his job. Give me a great judicial mind and I'm fine. If he legislates from the bench, well I'll have to accept it. I hope the Supreme Court represents legal points of view from all over the spectrum. Every issue should be considered and reconsidered.

I respect that people don't agree with fiscal conservatism, but I can't get that people think there's only one way to think. Yes, I think McCain's health plan is better. His jobs plan is better. I think we'll be more secure. I don't think many on here can say, "LA, I see where you're coming from. I see how that could work."

I'll decline to respond to lax. There's nothing I can say to him that he won't parse to fit his view.

Truman was a pretty good president in hindsight.

Laexile wrote: I don't think many on here can say, "LA, I see where you're coming from. "

Preach, brother

I've never been a big fan, but classy is classy:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vcB7uCqdFk[/youtube]

Saw -- well, heard -- Obama at his West Philly rally this afternoon. He's fine in the debates but much more interesting and likable when he just talks like today.

Also, Nutter got a smattering of boos...

YEEEEEE HAAAAA YEEEE EEE HAAAAA YEEEEE FUCKING HAAAAAA!!!!!!1