There has not been, in my memory, anything equal to the number of scurrilous attacks against an individual during a campaign than what we witnessed being leveled against Sarah Palin during 2008.
The Democrats, in an effort to sway public opinion, and with help from their Media accomplices, threw everything but the kitchen sink at Palin. The sink in question had been spoken for by liberal operatives within the McCain campaign.
So far, Palin, the tough, reform-minded Alaska governor and mother of five, has withstood all attacks.
Earlier today, the FEC dismissed a complaint filed by the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington against the purchase of $150,000 of clothing for Sarah Palin by the Republican Party during the 2008 election campaign.
The FEC ruled that party funds are not covered by the law which prohibits campaign donor money to be used for personal expenses.
Executive Director of CREW, Melanie Sloan, objected to the ruling, saying “It’s typical of the FEC to never take on anybody for anything.” She quickly contradicted herself by adding, “It seems like the kind of thing they should have come down on, but they seem to think their hands are tied.”
A quick review of CREW’s website seems to show more Republicans in their cross-hairs than Democrats. But with a name like Citizens for Responsiblity and Ethics in Washington, you’d assume their primary targets right now would be Barak Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Go figure.
The AP carried a story tonight concerning Sarah Palin and the “troopergate” probe. Of course Mrs. Palin was completely exonerated of all charges. In fact, she was not only exonerated, the state personnel board found that there was “no probable cause to believe that the governor, or any other state official, violated the Alaska Executive Ethics Act in connection with these matters.”
The Democrats should probably find another method of winning elections. The politics of personal destruction that Bill Clinton introduced may work the first few times, but eventualy the people will clue in to those tactics. They may one day find mobs armed with pitchforks at their collective doors.
Alaskan authorities ought to prosecute Stephen Branchflower for ethics violations. Branchflower is the Democratic legislator who insisted on the investigation, and was obviously paid off by the state trooper around whom this story revolves. At the very least he ought to be unseated for attempting to interfere with an election.
Tonight, all the idiots who used this as evidence of Palin’s unsuitability are eating crow. And they should be.
Read Ann Coulter’s column from this past Thursday. She’s listed all the details.
In summary, it’s hard to find something Biden said in the VP debate that was correct. Some of his new gaffes are really monumental.
What, you don’t like Ann’s acerbic wit? Her razor-sharp tongue? Get over it for a few minutes and go read the facts. This is more important than your fine sensibilities.
The AP reports today that Sarah Palin abused her power in firing Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan. The AP then reveals that the firing was amazingly not illegal. The story adds,
Monegan’s firing was lawful, the report found, but Palin let the family grudge influence her decision-making — even if it was not the sole reason Monegan was dismissed.
This is just crap. Either it’s illegal or it isn’t. If it is illegal, then she would be guilty of abuse of power. But if it isn’t illegal, then she cannot be guilty because there is nothing to be guilty of. This puts both the Legislative panel and the AP in the difficult position of having to explain how Sarah Palin can be both guilty and not guilty at the same time. Of course, anything is possible in the fantasy world that Liberals call reality.
The article does not explain how the circumstances leading to the case could possibly be handled without any reference to the “family grudge.” It’s a very convenient excuse for the panel to cover their butts for this sham of an investigation. But again, the left-media is all too eager to help “explain” the situation.
The story also says,
Investigator Stephen Branchflower, in a report to a bipartisan panel that looked into the matter, found Palin in violation of a state ethics law that prohibits public officials from using their office for personal gain.
Neither the panel nor the AP explained how Sarah Palin obtained “personal gain” by firing Monegan, a point Palin’s attorney brought up. What’s more, Mr. Branchflower is not an impartial observer of the facts in this case. He’s had an ax to grind against Palin for a long time already and should never have been allowed to serve as investigator.
Fortunately, reasonable people will be able to see this farcical attempt at Justice as a thinly veiled attempt at payback by people with an agenda. This is a non-story disguised as a scandal by people seeking to distract public attention away from Sarah Palin.
Thankfully, at least one panel member has displayed some honesty. Sen. Gary Stevens is quoted as saying,
“I think there are some problems in this report…I would encourage people to be very cautious, to look at this with a jaundiced eye.”
Yes, jaundiced enough to match the color of the journalism going on here.
Instapundit got an email this week from a reader in a newsroom. The anonymous source explains the vast difference between the treatment of stories on Sarah Palin and stories about Barak Obama.
A READER AT A MAJOR NEWSROOM EMAILS: “Off the record, every suspicion you have about MSM being in the tank for O is true. We have a team of 4 people going thru dumpsters in Alaska and 4 in arizona. Not a single one looking into Acorn, Ayers or Freddiemae. Editor refuses to publish anything that would jeopardize election for O, and betting you dollars to donuts same is true at NYT, others. People cheer when CNN or NBC run another Palin-mocking but raising any reasonable inquiry into obama is derided or flat out ignored. The fix is in, and its working.” I asked permission to reprint without attribution and it was granted.
Is there anyone who still doubts the liberal bias in the media?
MSN has a post up today, attempting to expose Sarah Palin’s use of–gasp–a private email account while governor! Oh, the horror!
These idiots have so much of nothing to say; it’s obvious they’re scraping the bottom of the barrel now. What next, she has a fine at the local library? She once jay-walked on her way home from the mayor’s office?
Mrs. Palin’s critics are desperate for anything at all that will make her look less-than-worthy in the eyes of the people. But if this is the best they can come up with, Sarah has nothing to fear.
There are several things that should stand out to you about this story:
- It alleges she used the private account to avoid transparency laws–a difficult sell when you’re talking about a proven reformer with an 89% job approval rating.
- The “evidence” that she broke transparency laws was obtained through blatantly illegal means, i.e. they hacked a private website–a federal crime–to obtain the evidence. They may also be guilty of identity theft.
- It proudly details the hack.
- It glaringly omits any reference to the egregious violation of privacy laws, usually a sacred cow for the liberals.
- It is now evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the hackers, and discredits the organization, Wikileaks, which posted it (I won’t give them a link, for personal reasons).
- The link to the “evidence” is no longer working–apparently an attempt to appear concerned about the breach of law, and to forestall the lawsuit which Mrs. Palin could rightly file. But after the FBI and the Secret Service have had their way with them, there may not be much left.
The most damning quote from Mrs. Palin they can find is a response to Lt. Governor Sean Parnell’s account of a radio talk-show interview. Mrs. Palin replies, “Arghhh! He is so inconsistent and purposefully misleading.” Yes, I know. I can hardly contain myself.
Maybe someone should write a book called “Political Espionage for Idiots.” At least the AP version of the story points out that the messages were “inconsequential,” though it does admit complicity in breaking the law.
A couple of great one liners from Sarah Palin’s speech at the Republican National Convention tonight.
“I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a “community organizer,” except that you have actual responsibilities.”
“But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion — I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country.”
“This world of threats and dangers is not just a community, and it doesn’t just need an organizer.”
“In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those…who use their careers to promote change.”
Rudy Giuliani had an awesome line as well:
“Change is not a destination…Hope is not a strategy.”
That one is going in my sig.