Palin testifies in ethics dispute
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Australia's most populated state lifts uranium mining ban
( 1 )
-
Israel blames Iran for series of blasts
( 17 )
-
Obama: Strong U.S.-China ties help rest of the world
( 4 )
-
Santorum surging in Republican presidential race
( 10 )
-
Private funeral Saturday for Whitney Houston
( 2 )
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
-
- Translator
- ZAIHON, Inc. (日本財務翻訳株式会社), Tokyo
- Salary: ¥6.0M / Year Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
25 Comments
Login to comment
0
adaydream
I hope the truth comes out also.
I have to believe that the Personnel Board will remember that Sarah will return. < :-)
0
DerekTrotter
I think she aint a bad looking sort, but she is crooked and two faced.
jeremy paxman said, she had bad ethics,she done a wrong un and she abused her power.
sounds like a sort i'd like to avoid, I've never trusted these career waoman. nah, the woman should be keeping the house nice and getting dinner ready on time innit!
0
sailwind
Boy, that little tidbit of information sure got lost in all of this the past few months. Nothing like showing your bad ethics and wanting to hide your nefarious deeds by filing a complaint agaisn't yourself.
0
SezWho2
And, in continuation...
And who is the Alaska Personnel Board?
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/03/palin.investigation/index.html
And the Legislature is partisan!
0
sailwind
****And who is the Alaska Personnel Board?
Actually Sez, since it would be a little silly for her to ask to be investigated by the personnel board in California to make folks like you happy. Let's really answer your question instead of spin for once.
The Personnel Board, also created by the Personnel Act, is an **independent agency **composed of members appointed by the Governor. The Board hears complaints of Ethics Act violations brought against Executive Branch employees and disciplinary appeals from classified employees not covered by collective bargaining, approves amendments to the Personnel Rules and acts on recommendations for extensions of the partially exempt or classified services within the Executive Branch.
http://dop.state.ak.us/directorsOffice/overview
Or maybe the personnel board should be investigated by another personnel board that was appointed by the legislature to show no bias? Sheesh......Where does the mudthrowing and sliming end on her?
Independent agency Sez......Unless you have evidence that they aren't and I mean solid evidence that they aren't, instead of sly innuedo, I suggest let them do their independent work on this.
0
PepinGalarga
she will be put back in the closet for a few years. she blew it pretty bad and the monkey background checkers for McCain deserve to get sacked a long time ago.
0
Everton2
I just can't see what all the fuss is about. I just don't think she is that cute.
0
goodDonkey
She had the chance before. I watched her duck out of an interview shortly after she was nominated when asked about the details. I saw it on the news; she just walked away from the questions. She could have called a press conference at any time to explain herself and then take questions to clarify anything that the press did not understand. So to say she "...finally have gotten the chance to tell what really happened..." is dishonest.
There is a reason special prosecutors are appointed in instances similar to this - it is called conflict of interest. No one in their right mind would call an investigation "independent" if the investigator has the person under investigation as a boss. I guess they define things differently in Alaska. Why is it that any judge or prosecutor would recuse himself in a such a conflict of interest?
An "independent" investigator would offer no assurances because it is none of the attorney's, for the one being investigated, business. The proper answer would not have been that he was working quickly but rather thoroughly to get to the truth.
Then the conservatives will condemn those who scoff at the results. By the way the committee that found her in violation of ethics rules was made up of 10 Republicans and four Democrats. And that my friends is what the Republicans were calling a smear job.
0
Sarge
"largely toothless legislative report"
Can we please stop wasting everyone's time with this?
Nah, it helps the Democrats with their efforts to get the community agonizer into the White House...
0
SuperLib
Sometimes she kind of reminds me of George Bush.
0
SezWho2
sailwind,
How does California enter into this discussion?
I'm pointing out that after this became a Republican campaign issue, Palin asked the Alaska Personnel Board (consisting of three members appointed by Republican governors, including one appointed by herself) to rule on this case instead of the Alaska Legislature.
The Personnel Board is independent of the governor's office. So is the Alaska Legislature. It is ridiculous to accuse a bipartisan legislative committee of being partisan while suggesting that three people appointed by Republicans are not. We might as well suggest that it makes absolutely no difference who the president is when the next Supreme Court nomination comes due. The name on the door may say independent, but it is no more independent of the governor than the legislature is.
You find great meaning in that she called for herself to be investigated. I find more meaning in that she only called for it after it became an issue and that she called for it to be done by a board appointed by members of her party rather than by a bipartisan legislative committee drawn from legislators selected by the people of Alaska.
0
SezWho2
Incidentally, I'd much rather talk about the real issues in the campaign. But I hate to see the concerted effort to tar Obama (or Biden) and whitewash Palin (or McCain).
0
goodDonkey
"largely toothless legislative report"
sarge said:
No we cannot stop. Toothless does not have anything to to do with accuracy of the report it has to do with repercussions. It is "toothless" because they cannot take any action against Palin.
Do we really need to explain every idiom to you sarge? This particular idiom often includes a tiger; they could have said the report was a "toothless tiger." It would have had the same meaning.
sarge try to keep this in mind the committee releasing the report had 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats on it.
0
sailwind
Cool
If the committee releasing the report had 10 Democrats and 4 Republicans and they came to the same finding only then it would be fair.
0
goodDonkey
sailwind
The "report" I was speaking of is the report that found Palin in violation of ethics laws. That is the committee that had 10 Democrats and 4 Republicans.
0
SezWho2
goodDonkey,
Don't you mean 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats?
To me the key point is that the Alaska legislature has a Republican majority in both houses, that the legislative committee investigating this affair is bi-partisan and that it even had what seems to me a rather large and disproportionate Republican representation.
Palin's claim that it would be partisan seems to me correct. However, unless she has made a lot of political enemies in her own party, it would seem to be partisan in her favor, if anything. Additionally, she cannot--legally at least--hire or fire members of the legislature.
On the other hand she can fire the Republican-appointed members of the Personnel Board. It's true that she needs cause. But she found cause for Monegan even when she didn't need it.
0
JoeBigs
Ethics ethics you say, this darn word has used often by the Republicans to mean what they want it to mean and not what it means.
Palin is just an average politician who got caught trying to create her own dictatorship. You can spin this anyway you Right Wingers but the facts are the facts.
She tried to fire an employee of the Police department because she did not like him. Wooten was his name and he was her ex-brother in law.
She first tried to get an employee of hers to do the dirty work. But that employee was ethical and did not wish to do that. Public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan was his name.
Then the unfaithful employee was then fired because he would not do her bidding. Public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan was fired because she did not trust him.
She is corrupt and there is no getting around it. She wants die hards around her that will fall on their swords to save her.
She thinks she can run a government like she ran a business and that is wrong.
For those Republicans that do not understand this, the United States of America is a Democracy. Government is suppose to be transparent and with her Government of Alaska, it was not transparent. She was and is corrupt....
0
coulrophobic
These Palin articles are a joke. She's the best thing to happen to happen to JT since the Iraq War.
Obama's campaign is illegally taking in millions from foreign donors.
The fake Greek temple columns for Obama's DNC speech cost 5 million dollars.
But yeah, we need to look at Sarah's wardrobe and the story of some bureaucrat loser who quit his job and is blaming the governor.
0
goodDonkey
SezWho2
Thank you. Yes that is what I meant. Also you spelled out the issue very well. Most often I am trying to present a logical argument. I am so consumed with covering all the bases that I don't bother to give good explanations on the details. Other times I over focus on the details. As far as I am concerned one could read your post and know the issue completely.
0
SezWho2
coulrophobic,
The issue is not the amount of money. The issue is about whose money it is, what it is being spent on, whether there is any personal benefit and whether it is consistent with the candidate.
In the case of the "fake Greek temple", the money was raised to promote the candidate, was used to promote the candidate, does not conceivably result in any personal benefit to the candidate (unless he's going to wear the temple every time he goes out to dinner) and associates the candidate with the roots of democracy.
In the case of the "Niemann-Marcus threads", the money was raised to promote the candidate, was used to promote the candidate, results in a personal benefit to the candidate if she keeps the clothing, and associates the small-town every-day hockey mom with a life-style that is out of reach with most Americans.
By the way, if you think Obama's campaign is illegally taking money from foreign donors you should do something about that.
0
Nessie
Pro, or con?
Back to top