Politically motivated? What the....

but my feeling is a firm no. Absolutely not. I don't even have to wait for the national media to dig up dirt. The details that have already been unearthed locally tell me she's not fit to hold any office. She's a train wreck, a liar, fiscally ignorant, vindictive. There's nothing this woman wouldn't do to further her political career, even if it's at the expense of those around her. I think her insistence that she fly from Texas to Alaska while her membranes had broken because no one would let her live down having a baby in Texas is all you need to know about this woman's judgment. Sadly, Parnell is just as worthless.

Did you REALLY "See" police officers getting away with pepper spraying and tasing people for "fun"? I've been a peace officer for the State of Alaska for about 14 years, I haven't seen any of this "Fun".

But have you thought about it? There are thought police too you know! They will all pop up in this campagn.

I was similarly conflicted in the 2006 AK Gubernatorial election. The gas line was the major issue for me, and Palin was off in the weeds chasing the all-Alaskan line to Valdez (who was going to build this?). Knowles was in opinion the best governor we ever had because he did so much to rejuvenate a moribound oil industry during times of low oil prices. However, he wanted to chase all opportunities for a gas line, i.e. start over. Andrew got my vote when I heard him proclaim in a radio ad that we shouldn't toss out the Murkowski deal, but instead sit down and fix the problems. I knew a third party candidate was probably a "waste of a vote," but at least I was voting my conscience. I think I shall do the same in this year's presidential election. I can't vote for Obama and I won't vote for Palin.

Thanks for the guffaws, Yukon Jack. I needed that. You captured her inflections so well that I can hear her voice as I read it.

By the way, Andrew, can you have a techie do something about the way the comments are stripped of their paragraphs marks between preview and final submission (unless html codes are used)? These long running text blocks can be difficult to read. Thanks. You're a dear. ;-)

I loved it!!! You really nailed it ROFL!!!

Sarah has this habit of saying "BINGO" every now and then instead of yup... It's very unusual... So I would replace a few of the Sarah "yups" with BINGO, and then it reads perfectly...

Todd Palin was ORDERED by the head of the Governor’s secutity detail, Special Agent Bob Cockrell, to discuss Trooper Wooten with Walt Monegan, as Wooten presented a credible threat to the Governor’s safety. Here’s a direct quote from Special Agent Cockrell, who is now providing security for his sixth consecutive governor: “When made aware of the security concerns regarding a state trooper, I instructed the First Gentleman to contact the commissioner of Public Safety. It is standard protocol to ask every governor about any threats they perceive or have realized. I will not hesitate to set the record straight in answering these false allegations by former Commissioner Monegan.” Hello Andrew, an Australian, another who has become aware of you with the selection of Sarah. I was aware of Sarah previously, Instaupundit poll on VP choice for McCain a few weeks prior to the announcement. Sarah won that poll. Is the above quote true please? I listened to French Hollis on with CC and Monegan. Here the fact of Hollis going on radio with Monegan to discuss the guilt or otherwise of Sarah would be viewed as a major conflict of interest, and certainly Hollis’s claims to be looking for a fair outcome would be rejected. I note that in the program he threw in the possibility of criminal offences as well, which got “CC” excited. He also told WSJ that she might be impeached? Objective, again, simply wouldn’t fly here. But anyway every society is different, though I would argue that ethics have some commonality across societies, and I find Senator Hollis’s a little wobbly. But as to why Sarah’s sister waited, discussions about domestic violence and child abuse are so common here, most would have no problem with the fact of the delay between the offences of Wooten and his wife getting up the courage to bring it on. Also on the CC show his Union was quoted as making the point that tasering for, well fun, was hardly an unusual action by Alaskan troopers, and therefore it was hardly a dismissible offence. If I recall exactly Monegan concurred. We do have that problem also, police not being supportive of the victims of domestic violence and child abuse, hence reluctance to report. However tasering kids for fun would be unacceptable. I note from Wooten’s interview that he did it because the kid wanted it because he was an adrenalin junkie, this is outright child abuse, and like all child abuse the perp doesn’t get it. How can he be trusted any where near children. It would surely be possible that Sarah’s sister and Sarah fully understood the culture of the Troopers and that they would support their mate, not the victim. I thought your first post was extremely gracious and I do understand that you and Sarah Palin are political opponents. But what do you guys think you are doing, saving the world from a bad woman. You might reflect on how historic a moment this selection is, for the world, and what your place in the history of this moment will be. Senator Hollis I would dismiss as a small man with a small mind and dubious ethics, a nobody in history.

If the Trooper used a tazor on his step son, he certainly should have faced criminal charges. However, at what point is it ok for our leaders to use extensive tax payer funds and resources to pursue a personal vendetta? I'm amazed at the people I have seen commenting on the internet, and their willingness to overlook this fact. Seems like more of a "ra ra, GO TEAM" attitude to me.

I agree it is wrong to taser anyone unless it's in line of duty or a consenting adult, but we don't know the details, except that Wooten was disciplined for it. By the way, in police training classes, the trainees volunteer to get tasered, so it's not like it's super super super horrible. You know how sons and fathers are, maybe the son wanted to be (tasered), and it started as a playful thing, but still his father would have been wiser to say no. If there was a problem, Palin could have used the court system like the rest of us, instead of using Governor-power to fire someone who wouldn't fire her former brother-in-law. As an elected official,(Palin) is the employee of the taxpayers and can be scrutinized anytime.

Andrew How many times can you cover this on your blog ? It is not Trooper Wootens behavior that matters. No one is defending him although his behavior was reviewed and punished. Maybe not to the satisfaction of all. The issue is Governor Palin's behavior which appears to have been dishonest, bullying and vindictive. The investigator appointed by the Alaska State Legislature will determine if she abused her power and to many it appears that she did based on information which has already been made public. McCain has made a big mistake.

Thank you, Minor. This is succinctly put. And now that the eyes of the nation and the world are riveted to our little corner of it - it is nice to be able to refer friends who keep calling from the Lower '48 to this site to find out info about what has really gone on with Sarah and her investigation the past seven weeks. Yep - if Sarah could have let dead dogs die. But no. That is not her way. She HAS to have the final say, period. She lamblasted Mr. Monegan as soon as she got back up here (after his firing) while he was graciously being silent. It was only once she started droning on and on and on about a "new direction" for public safety as the reason for his firing - and then having the stupifying audacity to release HIS department goals and objectives as "her new direction," that he finally spoke up. I guess for Sarah it wasn't enough that she had an underling fire him without an explanation or any sort of heads up - no, then she was off to pummel him over and over in the puny press of this state just to try and divert pressure off herself. This is just one of my many concerns with Sarah Palin - she sees the world through the eyes of a competitor on a basketball court - there is always a winner and a loser in Sarah's worldview. This is the kind of outlook one needs to play ball - but not to govern, not to lead, not to be a statesman. Sarah will do whatever she thinks she has to to see herself as the "winner" - and because of her worldview, that means she's always casting someone else as the "loser." Just consider her treatment of Lyda Green or Gail Phillips. No one asked Sarah to like these two women personally (although I find there's much to appreciate and value and like about both of them). Sarah could have done herself a great service if she'd shown either of them a postcard-size bit of respect. But this is not Sarah's way. Sarah doesn't approach life from a "win/win" perspective. It is only "win/lose" in her book. And if she doesn't think you're "with" her - then watch out. Mr. Monegan had far too many scruples to serve in her administration. She and her underlings could not intimidate or bully him. Good for you, Mr. Monegan. I can't begin to imagine the pressure you're under these days to shut up or cave in. You, and others like you who will not be bullied, are in my prayers.

Thank you, Minor. This is succinctly put. And now that the eyes of the nation and the world are riveted to our little corner of it - it is nice to be able to refer friends who keep calling from the Lower '48 to this site to find out info about what has really gone on with Sarah and her investigation the past seven weeks. Yep - if Sarah could have let dead dogs die. But no. That is not her way. She HAS to have the final say, period. She lamblasted Mr. Monegan as soon as she got back up here (after his firing) while he was graciously being silent. It was only once she started droning on and on and on about a "new direction" for public safety as the reason for his firing - and then having the stupifying audacity to release HIS department goals and objectives as "her new direction," that he finally spoke up. I guess for Sarah it wasn't enough that she had an underling fire him without an explanation or any sort of heads up - no, then she was off to pummel him over and over in the puny press of this state just to try and divert pressure off herself. This is just one of my many concerns with Sarah Palin - she sees the world through the eyes of a competitor on a basketball court - there is always a winner and a loser in Sarah's worldview. This is the kind of outlook one needs to play ball - but not to govern, not to lead, not to be a statesman. Sarah will do whatever she thinks she has to to see herself as the "winner" - and because of her worldview, that means she's always casting someone else as the "loser." Just consider her treatment of Lyda Green or Gail Phillips. No one asked Sarah to like these two women personally (although I find there's much to appreciate and value and like about both of them). Sarah could have done herself a great service if she'd shown either of them a postcard-size bit of respect. But this is not Sarah's way. Sarah doesn't approach life from a "win/win" perspective. It is only "win/lose" in her book. And if she doesn't think you're "with" her - then watch out. Mr. Monegan had far too many scruples to serve in her administration. She and her underlings could not intimidate or bully him. Good for you, Mr. Monegan. I can't begin to imagine the pressure you're under these days to shut up or cave in. You, and others like you who will not be bullied, are in my prayers.