|
Here's why he was fired...
Wooten had been in hot water before Palin became governor for illegally shooting a moose, drank beer in a patrol car while on duty, and used a Taser on his stepson. The Palins said they feared for their family's safety after Wooten made threats against them.
I believe the stepson was around 10 years old at the time.
This guy should have been fired long before. This is a bad cop.
I hope that McCain and Palin get the throne. I hope that they put the ten commandments in every courthouse, and expand the powers of the presidency. I hope that they instate prayer in schools, get genesis taught in science classes, and get people to go to Alaska to await the rapture. I hope that they ban stem cell research altogether. I hope that she hands taxpayer money to church groups, and the seperation of church and state collapses.
Then I hope that Americans reach the point where they wont tolerate this insanity anymore, impeach the freak show, and put in measures to make sure it never happens again.
I think it is a very bad idea to let a religious person control a nuclear arsenal.
Bush is dreadful enough.
It has been said that a black lesbian coke addict would find it easier to become president of the U.S than an openly atheist scientist would.
|
Here's why he was fired...
Wooten had been in hot water before Palin became governor for illegally shooting a moose, drank beer in a patrol car while on duty, and used a Taser on his stepson. The Palins said they feared for their family's safety after Wooten made threats against them.
I believe the stepson was around 10 years old at the time.
This guy should have been fired long before. This is a bad cop.
If that's all true, then yes, he should. However, that doesn't mean Palin or her husband have the right to demand his firing as representatives of the Governor's office. In their capacity as private citizens? Sure, but not as the Governor. and that's what they've been found guilty of doing, attempting to exert improper pressure on someone.
Not a massive offence in the scheme of things, I'll grant you. But rather more than sharing a dining room with someone. After all, McCain's shaken the hand of Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness and they've got far more innocent blood on their hands. But as they didn't kill any Americans, I suppose it doesn't count.
|
|
I hope that McCain and Palin get the throne. I hope that they put the ten commandments in every courthouse, and expand the powers of the presidency. I hope that they instate prayer in schools, get genesis taught in science classes, and get people to go to Alaska to await the rapture. I hope that they ban stem cell research altogether. I hope that she hands taxpayer money to church groups, and the seperation of church and state collapses.
Then I hope that Americans reach the point where they wont tolerate this insanity anymore, impeach the freak show, and put in measures to make sure it never happens again.
So in your perfect world, people of faith would be banned from higher office and maybe even from voting, huh? Probably because they are so intolerant of the viewpoint of others. :)
|
|
Here's why he was fired...
Wooten had been in hot water before Palin became governor for illegally shooting a moose, drank beer in a patrol car while on duty, and used a Taser on his stepson. The Palins said they feared for their family's safety after Wooten made threats against them.
I believe the stepson was around 10 years old at the time.
This guy should have been fired long before. This is a bad cop.
Wooten was never fired.
He is still a state trooper.
The man fired was Monegan and he was fired for insubordination. Since he served at the pleasure of the governor, she could have fired him for not tying his shoes and it would be valid. As it is, he was fired for refusing to conform to the governor's budget.
The Wooten story is a red-herring in the Monegan story and the report makes it clear that no connection can really be made between the two stories.
|
|
I hope that McCain and Palin get the throne. I hope that they put the ten commandments in every courthouse, and expand the powers of the presidency. I hope that they instate prayer in schools, get genesis taught in science classes, and get people to go to Alaska to await the rapture. I hope that they ban stem cell research altogether. I hope that she hands taxpayer money to church groups, and the seperation of church and state collapses.
Then I hope that Americans reach the point where they wont tolerate this insanity anymore, impeach the freak show, and put in measures to make sure it never happens again.
I think it is a very bad idea to let a religious person control a nuclear arsenal.
Bush is dreadful enough.
It has been said that a black lesbian coke addict would find it easier to become president of the U.S than an openly atheist scientist would.
Theocracy of the Pale(in)?
*shudder* that guy is crazy!
I hope that McCain and Palin get the throne. I hope that they put the ten commandments in every courthouse, and expand the powers of the presidency. I hope that they instate prayer in schools, get genesis taught in science classes, and get people to go to Alaska to await the rapture. I hope that they ban stem cell research altogether. I hope that she hands taxpayer money to church groups, and the seperation of church and state collapses.
Then I hope that Americans reach the point where they wont tolerate this insanity anymore, impeach the freak show, and put in measures to make sure it never happens again.
I think it is a very bad idea to let a religious person control a nuclear arsenal.
Bush is dreadful enough.
It has been said that a black lesbian coke addict would find it easier to become president of the U.S than an openly atheist scientist would.
Why doesn't it surprise me that you've taken LSD before.
|
|
Actually, 'Tal,
I see your point; I think it's a sickness of the human creature that, when the true believer/zealot walks away from his religion and finds his replacement "ion" or "ism," the zeal finds it's catalyst all the same.
OR, as in the case of Aum Shinrikyo, the blind leader (in this case, ironically enough, literally blind), finds an ample preying ground of people lost in a kafkaesque machine society with no meaning to their lives. Aum gives them the meaning.
Korresh, Manson, they were able to thrive a time, each by putting together a small warband of misfits.
Aum got guys with PHD's. Aum had industrial microwave ovens. Aum had guys factory-making AK-47's.
Aum thrived under a government that, due to it's own historical injustices, was extremely reticent to go after religious extremists.
I don't know, I know what Marx said about opiates, but I think those who need that opiate will eventually find a different poison.
Are you proud to belong to the party of hate? Because that says a lot about a person. It's one thing to be for fiscal responsibility, to be against abortion and for small government; it's another to support the hate mongering just to try and save your candidate's butt. I'd love to hear you, Gary and David decry this tactic by your candidates. That would make me feel better about you all as people. Can you do that? Can you take the TRUE high ground and criticize your candidates for the vitriol? It's getting dangerous out there, and there really should be rules and laws against that kind of tactics.
Set this bleeding heart's...
I'm so glad that my fellow Americans can discuss politics without vitriol and without applying labels to entire groups of people...
::sigh::
Right on.
I live in Texas, so I argle-bargle with Con's and Lib's all day.
The Con's think I'm a pinko, and the Lib's think I'm a Jackboot Goosestepper. I don't care. I'm a moderate.
Like McCain.
May I just say I salute you for this. I once had a friend tell me that independent voters are cowards... at the time I was a rapid supporter of everything Democratic, but these days I can't think of a more inane thing to say. Anyone who weighs the candidates against one another, regardless of party affiliation, gets lots of points in my book. Thanks for being so forthright with your opinions!
|
|
Are you proud to belong to the party of hate?Hate?
Like wishing that the vp candidate would be gang raped?
That sort of hate?
Some of us are a bit leery of Obama (to put it mildly) but nobody I knows wants him dead. We have called into question his choice of allies and associates but I doubt Obama himself would participate in terrorism.
May I ask who you heard calling for Obama to be killed at a McCain rally because I don't really believe it happened. I suspect you are exagerating anger into hate and they are not the same thing.
I haven't heard anything about the gang rape comment until you just wrote about it. I have seen footage on more than one channel where you can clearly hear the audience hurling words like "Off with his head", "kill him" and "terrorist" on more than one news broadcast towards Obama at Palin and McCain rallies. It wasn't McCain himself, it was an audience member. And the footage of the woman calling Obama an "Arab" is everywhere, just look it up.
And I'm still waiting for an answer. The fact that you throw up another scenario just proves that you don't feel the need to apologize. It's like saying, "you think that's bad? Check this out!" instead of apologizing.
Tell you what, I'll take you at your word. I take offense at any Democratic voter that would wish physical harm or rape upon Sarah Palin or John McCain. And I apologize that any member of my political party would say such a thing. I don't wish for harm upon the Republican ticket, I just want them to lose the election so we can get some real change going on.
Can you be a better man and do the same? Can you decry these tactics? Or is victory in the election so important to you that you would condone hate and violence towards another human being (an American human being to be precise). Show me that a Republican can reject the politics of fear and hate, and be a compassionate human being towards fellow Americans that don't share your worldview. Impress me.
|
|
Are you proud to belong to the party of hate? Because that says a lot about a person. It's one thing to be for fiscal responsibility, to be against abortion and for small government; it's another to support the hate mongering just to try and save your candidate's butt. I'd love to hear you, Gary and David decry this tactic by your candidates. That would make me feel better about you all as people. Can you do that? Can you take the TRUE high ground and criticize your candidates for the vitriol? It's getting dangerous out there, and there really should be rules and laws against that kind of tactics.
Set this bleeding heart's...
I'm so glad that my fellow Americans can discuss politics without vitriol and without applying labels to entire groups of people...
::sigh::
Talk to Palin about vitriol. My party is trying to discuss the economy; the Republicans have openly admitted that they want to "turn the page" on the economy and instead try to make tenuous links between Obama and David Ayres seem like the two were best buddies. Personally, I'm just taking a page from the Republican playbook. I know that you are used to milquetoast (SP?) Democrats that always "turn the other cheek" and let the Republican rhetoric run roughshod over them; I'm tired of taking it like Ned Beatty in Deliverance.
I wish that we could see the two parties go at it on the issues and not personality or false accusations of terrorist connections. But the Right doesn't want to play on that level playing field.
::sigh:: indeed
Are you proud to belong to the party of hate?Hate?
Like wishing that the vp candidate would be gang raped?
That sort of hate?
Some of us are a bit leery of Obama (to put it mildly) but nobody I knows wants him dead. We have called into question his choice of allies and associates but I doubt Obama himself would participate in terrorism.
May I ask who you heard calling for Obama to be killed at a McCain rally because I don't really believe it happened. I suspect you are exagerating anger into hate and they are not the same thing.
I haven't heard anything about the gang rape comment until you just wrote about it. I have seen footage on more than one channel where you can clearly hear the audience hurling words like "Off with his head", "kill him" and "terrorist" on more than one news broadcast towards Obama at Palin and McCain rallies. It wasn't McCain himself, it was an audience member. And the footage of the woman calling Obama an "Arab" is everywhere, just look it up.
And I'm still waiting for an answer. The fact that you throw up another scenario just proves that you don't feel the need to apologize. It's like saying, "you think that's bad? Check this out!" instead of apologizing.
Tell you what, I'll take you at your word. I take offense at any Democratic voter that would wish physical harm or rape upon Sarah Palin or John McCain. And I apologize that any member of my political party would say such a thing. I don't wish for harm upon the Republican ticket, I just want them to lose the election so we can get some real change going on.
Can you be a better man and do the same? Can you decry these tactics? Or is victory in the election so important to you that you would condone hate and violence towards another human being (an American human being to be precise). Show me that a Republican can reject the politics of fear and hate, and be a compassionate human being towards fellow Americans that don't share your worldview....
If this really did happen(I haven't watched the news in a few days, so I don't know) I apologize. Racism like that has no place in America. However, you can't blame the whole crowd for a few crazy rednecks that are there.
Are you proud to belong to the party of hate? Because that says a lot about a person. It's one thing to be for fiscal responsibility, to be against abortion and for small government; it's another to support the hate mongering just to try and save your candidate's butt. I'd love to hear you, Gary and David decry this tactic by your candidates. That would make me feel better about you all as people. Can you do that? Can you take the TRUE high ground and criticize your candidates for the vitriol? It's getting dangerous out there, and there really should be rules and laws against that kind of tactics.
Set this bleeding heart's...
I'm so glad that my fellow Americans can discuss politics without vitriol and without applying labels to entire groups of people...
::sigh::
Talk to Palin about vitriol. My party is trying to discuss the economy; the Republicans have openly admitted that they want to "turn the page" on the economy and instead try to make tenuous links between Obama and David Ayres seem like the two were best buddies. Personally, I'm just taking a page from the Republican playbook. I know that you are used to milquetoast (SP?) Democrats that always "turn the other cheek" and let the Republican rhetoric run roughshod over them; I'm tired of taking it like Ned Beatty in Deliverance.
I wish that we could see the two parties go at it on the issues and not personality or false accusations of terrorist connections. But the Right doesn't want to play on that level playing field.
::sigh:: indeed
Both parties play this game, not just the Republicans.
|
|
May I just say I salute you for this. I once had a friend tell me that independent voters are cowards... at the time I was a rapid supporter of everything Democratic, but these days I can't think of a more inane thing to say. Anyone who weighs the candidates against one another, regardless of party affiliation, gets lots of points in my book. Thanks for being so forthright with your opinions!Right on.
I live in Texas, so I argle-bargle with Con's and Lib's all day.
The Con's think I'm a pinko, and the Lib's think I'm a Jackboot Goosestepper. I don't care. I'm a moderate.
Like McCain.
My grandfather used to say that "the repub's just aren't for the working man." I have to grudgingly agree with that assessment.
Neither are the dem's, grandfather. Not any more. Not for a long long time.So, I'm left with a choice between who will do the least damage to my country. That's my viewpoint. Is it a lack of backbone? Is it wishy-washy? Is Joe Lieberman wishy-washy? I just can't fill my self with this scorn and self-loathing of all things U.S. that I see is so prevalent on the left side of the aisle lately.
Though I don't believe we need 50 political parties to get something done, I see the partisan bickering and politicizing of the Fannie Mae debacle as extremely dangerous. I think the truth of what needs to be done gets buried, in this instance, and in instances too numerous to quantify at this moment.
So, Obama wins, two years from now he's in the doghouse, and we swing back to conservative in both branches of the senate, then 2012 Palin wins(or whoever) and we swing back liberal in the senate, rinse and repeat for 50 years; BLECCH!* I wish more people would have enough backbone lack to shut up and devote themselves to a search for truth.
*this is just a hypothetical. Maybe Obama will usher in a new golden age of humankind. I kinda doubt it though.
|
|
And I just condemned AND apologized for the words of my fellow Democrats (without proof that those words were ever said for the record).Anyone who wishes death upon a candidate because of his political beliefs should be condemned.
So should candidates or pundits who threaten rape and riots.
No way, dude. I refuse to hold you accountable for the blatherings of Sandra Bernhardt.
No way, dude. I refuse to hold you accountable for the blatherings of Sandra Bernhardt.
I agree. Feel free to condemn the statements of others, but nobody else should have to apologize for someone else's statement.
|
Here's why he was fired...
Wooten had been in hot water before Palin became governor for illegally shooting a moose, drank beer in a patrol car while on duty, and used a Taser on his stepson. The Palins said they feared for their family's safety after Wooten made threats against them.
I believe the stepson was around 10 years old at the time.
This guy should have been fired long before. This is a bad cop.
You're missing some of the facts too. Those were all allegations about Wooten, allegations looked into by the police commission, who punished him with a ten day (later reduced to five) suspension.
The moose shooting was while he was with his then wife. His wife owned the permit to shoot, but she balked at shooting the moose, so she handed over the rifle to him. Real serious crime there. Source.
Regarding the tasering, not only had the lad asked for it, in order to prove his toughness (and was fine afterwards), but Wooten took plenty of precautions with it. It was stupid, sure, but when I was that age I asked for plenty of stupid things to do to prove my toughness. Besides, the issue wasn't brought up until two years later, during the divorce proceedings. The family must have thought nothing of it, surely? Source.
The drink driving accusation didn't hold up too well either, given that most of the accusations came from the family only. Further, he was in civilian clothing at the time, and was even allowed to use his state vehicle as personal transport because, guess what, he was a member of the SERT (or SWAT) team at the time.
He's far from perfect, no doubt about that. But irregardless, the Governor shouldn't have even tried to intervene with internal police matters. To do so, or to knowingly allow others in her administration to do so, is a clear abuse of power, something she's been found guilty of.
This even made evening news in the main German TV news "Tagesschau". From what was presented there, it did not cast a good light on Palin, as they said that it brought yet more trouble to the Republicans. They said that she fired him because he refused to fire her then-brother-in-law, and it sounded like a fact.
Here is the link to the German report, if somebody wants to have a look at it: Tagesschau. I have no idea how long this link will work, however.
Stefan
|
I'd love to hear you, Gary and David decry this tactic by your candidates. That would make me feel better about you all as people. Can you do that? Can you take the TRUE high ground and criticize your candidates for the vitriol? It's getting dangerous out there, and there really should be rules and laws against that kind of tactics.
Set this bleeding heart's...
Yeah, I can condemn it. I can also wish that Joe Biden was at the top of the ticket, because he has said that he would not run negative ads if he was the candidate. john McCain tried thatfor a while and then someone, somewhere dragged him down into the mud. I think that any one who tries to condemn Obama as a Muslim is both an idiot and a bigot. I also think that anyone who is turned off by the use of his middle name is an idiot. However I also feel that people who get upset at the use of his middle name needs to be more thick skinned. I mean come on, most people refer to the current president simply by his middle initial. I don't agree with a lot that the people who go to McCain rallies are doing, especially if they are threatening Sen. Obama and trying to incite violence against him. Those are exactly the type of people I do not want on television representing my party. These are people who should not be allowed into the rallies, and should not be given a forum for their hatred. However, I also agree with Hillary Clinton when she says that we have a right to debate and disagree, however personal attacks should be off limits, on both sides.
I don't agree with a lot that the people who go to McCain rallies are doing, especially if they are threatening Sen. Obama and trying to incite violence against him.
The secret service should be looking into those people. It is a crime to threaten the presidental nominees.
However, I also agree with Hillary Clinton when she says that we have a right to debate and disagree, however personal attacks should be off limits, on both sides.
The problem is, what is a "personal attack"? Is criticizing the choices of people a candidate has surrounded himself with a personal attack? Is suggest someone is too old a personal attack? A presidental candidates personality is just as much an issue, as he is the leader, as is his stated policy issues. A person who has good ideas but turns off too many people with his personality is not going to be a good leader.
|
|
So, criticising candidates for their choice of people they hang around with is fair game, hmm?
Might one bring in Todd Palin, a secessionist. Or Jerry Falwell? McCain did speak at Liberty University, after all, in an attempt to court the religious right. Or Charles Keating?
I miss the McCain of 2000. That was an honourable and brave campaign.
So, criticising candidates for their choice of people they hang around with is fair game, hmm?
That is my question. It is easy to say, "No personal attacks", but what the hell does that mean in the context of discussing someone that is suppose to be the command-in-chief. Is suggesting someone is too old a personal attack or a comment on their possible ability to fulfill the requirements of the job? Is looking at the organizations they helped to set up and finance, that are currently in legal trouble, a legitimate thing to discuss when talking about the head of the executive branch, the branch with the responsibility of enforcing the (federal) laws of the land?
|
|
So, criticising candidates for their choice of people they hang around with is fair game, hmm?
Might one bring in Todd Palin, a secessionist. Or Jerry Falwell? McCain did speak at Liberty University, after all, in an attempt to court the religious right. Or Charles Keating?
I miss the McCain of 2000. That was an honourable and brave campaign.
It depends. Saying Todd Palin is a secessionist would be out of bounds in my view. Saying that he was a member of a political party that advocated secession would be allowable though. The difference is that in the first case you are basicly putting words and thoughts into Mr. Palin's mind when there may have been other issues that drew him to that party. The second is a statement of fact.
Alternatively, it would be okay to say that Barack Obama attended a church where the preacher taught anti-American sermons would be acceptable, but saying Obama is anti-American because he attended that church would not be. You cross the line into personal attacks when you go from presenting facts about a person and his associates to applying words and motives to them that cannot be verified.
|
|
So, criticising candidates for their choice of people they hang around with is fair game, hmm?That is my question. It is easy to say, "No personal attacks", but what the hell does that mean in the context of discussing someone that is suppose to be the command-in-chief. Is suggesting someone is too old a personal attack or a comment on their possible ability to fulfill the requirements of the job? Is looking at the organizations they helped to set up and finance, that are currently in legal trouble, a legitimate thing to discuss when talking about the head of the executive branch, the branch with the responsibility of enforcing the (federal) laws of the land?
Again, saying that he is too old would be out of bounds. However, if he had some sort of disablity that would prevent him from fullfilling his duties would not be. To talk about ties to groups like ACORN or the Council For New Democracy, or what ecer the group McCain used to run with, would be okay. Saying things like I have heard about the Obama and Osama are the same because they both know people who bombed the Pentegon would not be, because that implies support and or acceptence of the behavior of the person being discussed. In short, as I stated before, a statement of fact is acceptable, a statement of opinion is not.