Irony
Palin is said to have abused her power by "failing to act" to prevent her private citizen husband from lobbying to have an Alaskan State Trooper fired, after the trooper tasered an 11-year old, threatened to kill his father, and drank on duty.
Meanwhile, not a word in the media about the "coincidence" that Obama lobbied to get his wife's hospital a $1 million dollar earmark after his wife suddenly received a 250% raise.
Keeping it real.
UPDATE: J.D. Fisher, from the excellent blog Text Savvy, links to the orginal report in the comments, confirming part of my analysis above.
3 comments:
Keeping it realer:
http://media.adn.com/smedia/2008/10/10/16/Branchflowerreport.source.prod_affiliate.7.pdf
There was good cause to fire Wooten, but once the decision was made not to fire him, the issue should have been dropped. At that point, Palin did have a responsibility to rein in her staff & husband from pressing the issue, precisely to avoid the exact brouhaha which followed. I think it is fair to call this an ethics violation, if a minor one.
That said, there seemed to be plenty of cause for both Wooten and Monegan to be fired. About the worst interpretation I can come up with is that Palin waited for them both to screw up bad enough to try to fire them for personal reasons; in both cases, it's still predicated them screwing up badly enough to warrant firing to begin with. I have a lot of trouble mustering outrage over it - this isn't about firing a whistleblower, it's about firing a screwup who protected another screwup.
Agreed George.
Here in Alaska, we are pretty burned out on the whole issue.
I use to comment on the local Anchorage Daily News boards, but have given up since their are so many lower 48'ers buzzing about.
The whole thing will blow over after the election (assuming that Obama wins).
Post a Comment