Rebranding Troopergate: A Seinfeld moment

Don't worry honey.....I can go toe to toe with any of those troopers.....at least the ones with long hair...

Double scoop of "Humble Pie" or "Crow" please. And hurry up, the process servers are pulling in!

During Obama’s tenure on the board of the charitable Chicago Woods Fund, he helped channel funds to the notorious socialist activist group, ACORN: During Obama’s time on the Woods Funds ACORN received grants of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002), and $40,000 (2002) from the Woods Fund. (Obama in the early 1990’s helped train ACORN organizers and later served as counsel in 1995 for ACORN in a “motor voter” registration lawsuit.) And ACORN certainly appreciated whatever assistance Obama afforded the radical organization over the years. No doubt Obama is very proud of his role as a “community activist” for ACORN. If ACORN were merely another whiny left-wing group that never did anything, it might be something we could all laugh off as cute. But alas, ACORN is neither cute nor laughable; it is a very determined, very powerful outfit which believes in implementing socialism, and works hard to create the right conditions to make socialism inevitable, and ineradicable Why shouldn’t every low income democrat be able to make their vote count (say 75-150 times each) that their father and financier, Barack Obama is the man to lead America in spreading the wealth around? So it is such socialist philosophy which has destroyed every culture, economy and country that has embraced it in the past. But hey, here in the USA it is “change you can believe in” if you don’t pay taxes and new direction for the economy “you can count on” if you don’t have the math skills to count. Source (Jennifer Rubin). Goodbye America dream. NEXT********** CHAPTER FOUR WAR ON SUCCESS “On fiscal policy, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton want higher taxes.… On trade, they oppose new free-trade agreements and want to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada and Mexico. “As it happens, another president embraced such policies in a time of economic slowdown and financial market turbulence. Herbert Hoover raised taxes on high earners sharply and…signed the Smoot-Hawley [trade] tariff in 1930. The results were not pretty. Until now, his example has not commended itself to Democrats.”1 —Author and U.S. News and World Report senior writer Michael Barone NDER BARACK OBAMA’S tax policy, if you work hard, invest your time and money wisely, and make a million dollars in 2009, you will get to keep $455,000 and hand over more than half (54.5 percent) of your earnings to the federal government. Then, state and local governments get to pick your pocket, too. On the other hand, if you are lucky and win a million dollars in a state-sponsored lottery, on which Americans annually spend more than $45 billion, you will also pay 54.5 percent of your winnings―or $545,000―in federal taxes.2 Does this sound fair? THE AMERICAN DREAM Each year over one million people legally become American citizens.3 One of the reasons why so many people from scores U AUDACITY OF DECEIT 48 of other nations come to the United States is because our country offers so much promise for a better life, a life free from prosecution and persecution. For over one hundred years they have come—grandparents and parents of many present-day Americans—to the land of opportunity. Deep in our common American heritage is the belief that if you work or study hard, anyone can become the next Henry Ford, Bill Gates, George Washington Carver, Alexander Graham Bell, Sally Ride, or Margaret Mead. These great men and women—and many more like them—have contributed so much to the American Dream, making our lives easier, more successful, and more fulfilling. Their successes have attracted millions of people from all over the world to America, including people who believe you can get lucky and strike it rich. Successful generations have created the world’s numberone economy—by far. Even when shades of recession struck in the spring of 2008, the gross domestic product (GDP)—the value of all goods and services produced and sold in the U.S.—was still measured at a whopping $13.8 trillion.4 No other country comes close. But, if Barack Obama is allowed to set the nation’s economic policies and priorities, he will throw a wrench into the gears of this remarkable economic machine and America will face a new war. Call it Obama’s “war on success.” To the casual observer, Obama appears to “get it,” and seems to recognize that America’s economic model has been wildly successful—even through periods of diminished economic activity. But, like so much of the candidate’s eloquent rhetoric, his comprehension seems superficial and limited to his campaign speeches. In practice, rather than seeking to protect and preserve our successful economic model, Obama seems obsessed with tearing it down and replacing it with a government-focused “solution,” one that has a well-established history of failure. We have every indication that Obama will likely punish WAR ON SUCCESS 49 success, confiscating wealth and redistributing it to those who have neither earned it nor deserved it. Quite simply, Obama will raise taxes—a lot. This will be especially so for those Americans who have the audacity to emulate the successes of their fathers, grandfathers, and forefathers. Completing a questionnaire for the Independent Voters of Illinois/Independence Precinct Organization (IVI/IPO), Obama elaborated on his left-wing views and “progressive” agenda. To the question, “Do you support (b) maintaining the current corporate/individual [tax] ratio?” Obama answered, “I strongly favor a graduated income tax for both individuals and corporations that would shift an increasing burden on corporations and individuals most able to pay.”5 In fact, Obama has outlined ten specific tax changes to which he will subject Americans. They are: 1) Increase the top individual tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. 2) Raise the capital gains tax rate from 15 percent to 28 percent. 3) Increase the stock dividends rate from 15 percent to 39.6 percent. 4) Raise the percentage of Americans who pay no federal income tax from 40 percent to 50 percent. 5) Impose a 10 percent surtax on all incomes above $250,000 per year. 6) Raise the death tax rate to 55 percent for any income past the first $1 million exemption. 7) Raise the minimum wage from $6.55 to $9.50 8) Raise social security payments by 4 percent for individuals, businesses, or anyone who makes $250,000 per year. AUDACITY OF DECEIT 50 9) Increase the top tax rate from 37.9 percent to 54.9 percent for self-employed taxpayers (who already pay ordinary income taxes as well as self-employment taxes). 10) Increase the tax rate on Subchapter Scorporations (small businesses) by up to 15.3 percent (from a top rate of 35 percent to 50.3 percent). Obama’s plan is not only confiscatory and authoritarian, but regressive. For example, in addition to all the new taxes, he would roll back the tax cuts passed by Congress during the Bush administration. Further, his plan would cost Americans far more in taxes than they paid during the Clinton administration—another Democratic regime that imposed, at the time, the nation’s largest tax hike, in 1993. Unfortunately, it should be easy for Obama to raise our taxes. Like Democrat Lyndon Johnson, Obama may well enjoy working majorities in Congress. Democrats currently hold 236 seats in the House of Representatives and expect to gain at least ten to thirty seats. In the Senate, they look to gain at least four to seven seats to add to their current majority of fifty-one senators.6 Under Johnson, individual tax rates soared to 70 percent, and the capital gains tax was an oppressive 50 percent.7 As a result, the country suffered a weak economy that was more susceptible to major and even minor disruptions. On the other hand, since Ronald Reagan lowered the top tax rate in 1986 to 28 percent, we have weathered a stock market crash in 1987; financial meltdowns in Mexico in 1994; a major economic downturn in Asia in 1997; the collapse of long-term capital management in 1998; the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; and the dot-com bust. Low tax rates gave our economy the resiliency it needed to overcome crisis. Of course, our strong economy generates trillions of dollars and produces tens of millions of jobs. Even during some WAR ON SUCCESS 51 economic weakening in early 2008, the U.S. unemployment rate stood at 5.5 percent in May 2008.8 Compare this to the high unemployment rate in the European Union (6.7 percent), and individual EU member nations such as Spain (9.6 percent), France (8.1 percent), and Germany (7.6 percent).9 THE PRICE WE WILL PAY According to an analysis by the Heritage Foundation, when Obama allows the Bush tax cuts to expire, he “will discourage investment and slow economic growth.”10 Specifically, the Foundation estimates the higher taxes on capital gains and dividends will lead to a net job loss of 270,000 job in 2011 and another 413,000 jobs in 2018. “Similar job losses continue for the next seven years of our model’s forecast horizon of 2008 through 2018.” Similarly, economic output as measured by gross domestic product (GDP) after inflation would fall by $44 billion in 2011 and $50 billion in 2012, from the levels that the economy would attain without this policy change. “These economic effects would be vividly evident in take-home pay. Personal income after taxes would decline by $113 billion after inflation in 2011 and $133 billion after inflation in 2012 when compared, again, to levels that would likely prevail without tax rates going back up.”11 Of course, to balance job losses (and pander to workers), Obama’s plan includes a hefty increase in the minimum wage—a whopping 45 percent! While it does little to help those who’ve lost their jobs, the increase will hurt every retail store, gas station, dry cleaners, grocery store, and other small businesses—as well as large ones. Certainly, Obama’s planned tax increases are nothing new from a Democrat. It’s also not new to couple these tax hikes with increases in free trade barriers—as Obama also plans. This dangerously toxic recipe, in fact, mirrors the policy AUDACITY OF DECEIT 52 failures of President Herbert Hoover’s administration. And they left a bad taste in America’s mouth. “It’s usually government actions that cause destructive economic troubles and excesses,” wrote Steve Forbes in 2008. “The Great Depression, for instance, is always cited as prima facie proof as to why we need active government involvement. To the contrary, government blundering brought on the disaster, starting with [Hoover’s] Smoot-Hawley Tariff of 1929-30, which began a devastating trade war that, in turn, dried up international trade and flows of global capital. That horrible error was compounded in the U.S. by Herbert Hoover’s massive tax increase [from a top rate of 25 percent to 63 percent] to balance the budget in 1932. Hoover thought a balanced budget would revive confidence. Instead, the deficit ballooned, as the high taxes deepened the slump.”12 The lesson of Herbert Hoover is that the ability to tax excessively is the ability to destroy the economy. Apparently, Barack Obama didn’t learn that lesson at Harvard. And Obama has another tax trick up his sleeve—raising the capital gains tax. Unfortunately, this element of his tax proposal would cost even more jobs—and worse—as it would bring capital spending to a grinding halt. Investors would lose confidence that their investments in new plants and jobs would turn a profit. With high taxes, foreign investors would look elsewhere, and flock to emerging markets outside the U.S. So the winners under Obama’s tax policies will not likely be American workers, but workers and corporations in eastern Europe, China, India, and Brazil. And, on the American side, it won’t be just labor and the “rich” who are hurt by a capital gains tax hike. Fifty percent of households earning less than $50,000 report capital gains on their income tax returns, and 79 percent of those earning $100,000 or less take a capital gains discount.13 Today, roughly half of all American households—57 million of them—are invested in the stock market.14 WAR ON SUCCESS 53 Does any of this sound like the “change” Barack Obama has planned for you? MAKING 40 PERCENT PAY FOR ALL Interestingly, Obama’s strategy would reduce some Americans’ tax burdens. No, these reductions are not for those who already pay their “fair share,” (or more than their fair share), but for those who do not. Indeed, the liberal Democrat from Illinois has talked explicitly about redistributing America’s wealth to reach the needy. Currently, 32 percent of all Americans who file a tax return pay no federal income tax but receive credits, handouts, and deductions.15 But, Obama’s plan provides $100 billion in tax credits, and the percentage of tax filers who do not pay any income tax would rise from 32 percent to roughly 40 percent of the U.S. population, absolving an additional 8 percent of American tax filers of their federal income tax responsibility.16 Obama’s tax law would provide senior citizen tax credits, college credits, childcare credits, home buyer credits, and $1,000-perfamily credits. With all that he has to offer, unfortunately, Obama’s redistributionist schemes would make our tax forms even more complex and confusing, adding insult to injury. Riding for free, nearly half of America will consume a majority of government handouts and services, while the other half foots the entire bill and covers the entire cost of government. Of course, nobody likes to pay taxes. But responsible Americans recognize that our society needs to fund a government that can provide roads and bridges, airports, a functional infrastructure, and a strong defense. Taxes are a fact of life, but all Americans should do their part, contribute an equal share, based on income, to support our country and pay for services. Not so, for Barack Obama’s “vision” of change in America. He seeks to punish our most enterprising and successful citizens—those who create AUDACITY OF DECEIT 54 companies, hire workers, and pay benefits—by making them pay for everything else, too, while 40 percent of Americans use the government’s benefits and services for free. That is certainly not fair, and it’s not the kind of principle our Founding Fathers envisioned when they created a nation in which the central government represents everyone and, hence, is supported by everyone. Furthermore, they certainly did not envision a nation divided by pandering politicians who, in their selfish bid for higher office, create disunity, pitting one group against another just to get votes. With America’s great diversity, we have always seen populations of people of greater and lesser means, greater and lesser ambition, greater and lesser success. For the most part, America is still the land of opportunity, and most Americans can still—as always—achieve their goals. But it helps if government doesn’t stand in the way. In the last century, communism was tested and it failed. In this great experiment, communist and socialist governments— not the people or the businesses themselves—determined wages, prices, fees, and taxes. The result: These countries are among the world’s poorest, because their people have no incentive to perform, excel, do well, create more, grow more, work harder or more efficiently, become better educated, or invest more. Worse, their governments remain repressive and unfair. Without oppression, communism and socialism cannot work, and it will certainly not work in America. But with heavy taxation of the “rich” and his class warfare mentality, this is the direction of Obama’s “change“ for America. “US VS. THEM” Obama has complained that congressional tax cuts have led to fewer taxes for the wealthy. In fact, his rhetoric even vilifies those in our highest tax bracket, treating “wealth” like a dirty word. This view is not only contemptuous and divisive, but destructive and misleading. The truth is that those Americans WAR ON SUCCESS 55 earning the most money have steadily paid more–not less— income tax throughout recent years. For example, the non-partisan Tax Foundation examined Internal Revenue Service tax data. According to their study: The truth is that the vast majority of federal income taxes are paid by high-income earners. According to the most recent IRS data available, the top 10 percent of households—with incomes roughly $100,000 or greater—pay roughly 70 percent of all federal income taxes. That share is up from just below 50 percent in 1980… But just because a couple’s combined salaries seem high doesn’t make them wealthy. For example, a young factory worker earning $18 an hour—or $36,700 per year—clearly falls into the statistical middle. But if she marries a man earning the same amount, their combined income of $73,400 is enough to qualify them to be in the top 20 percent of Americans.17 Further facts clearly demonstrate this: • The number of households earning $100,000 or more annually nearly doubled over the past twenty years (22.2 million households in 2006 vs. 11.6 million in 1986).18 • The number of households earning $35,000 or less has changed only marginally over the past twenty years, by 17 percent.19 • Many of those who left the $35,000 bracket moved into higher income brackets (many of them joining the $100,000 and above income bracket). • Many of those who left the $35,000 bracket were replaced by some of the 19.5 million legal immigrants who arrived in our country over the last twenty years,20 and more than 19 million Americans who graduated from high school but did not pursue a college degree.21 AUDACITY OF DECEIT 56 Most Americans feel confident and optimistic about the opportunity that this great nation affords them, believing they have plenty of potential to earn a median income. Such optimism and desire for advancement is borne out by the fact that 82 percent of Americans graduate from high school22 and 67 percent of high school graduates pursue a college degree.23 The number of Americans striving for higher education is especially striking when compared to 1960, when only 45 percent of American high school graduates pursued college.24 Also, only 65 percent of French students and 43 percent of students in Spain graduate from high school, and a paltry 46 percent and 33 percent, respectively, pursue a college degree.25 Many Americans invest in higher education because they believe they will have the opportunity to prosper financially. Despite this fundamental and pervasive belief, Barack Obama wants to take America off our Founding Fathers’ path of freedom and prosperity and lead us down a different road, one on which the federal government—widely believed to be an inept manager of the taxpayers’ money—increases its voracious monetary appetite and forces us to pay more in homage. King George III practiced exactly this kind of fiscal tyranny. Not surprisingly, most Americans oppose tax hikes. A 2007 Gallup poll found that a clear majority of Americans felt they pay “too much” in federal income taxes, while only 2 percent thought their federal income taxes were too low.26 In fact, 75 percent of Americans believe millionaires should pay no more than 30 percent of their income in federal taxes.27 Americans don’t want taxes raised on the wealthy, because they believe that they can achieve wealth in the future, and they don’t want to be punished for their hard work and success. In addition, all too many Americans remember what the federal government’s heavy hand under Presidents Johnson and Carter did to economic growth and the American standard of living. Demanding that the rich must pay their “fair share,” Obama expresses class warfare rhetoric that plays well with WAR ON SUCCESS 57 certain voters, but this demand is as dishonest as it is misguided. In fact, the wealthiest 1 percent of our population generates 19 percent of our country’s total income, but they pay 39 percent of all income taxes.28 And the top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. By contrast, the bottom half of wage earners bring in 13 percent of total income but only pay 3 percent of all income taxes.29 This group, Obama says, pays too much and deserves a bigger break. Obama’s plan will punish the most successful people in our country by confiscating their wealth and that of their companies. But even this is devious. His plan changes the provisions for Subchapter S-corporations, increasing the top tax rate to 50.3 percent. These corporations include many of America’s small businesses, and this provision will in fact raise the tax burden of almost 3.3 million small businesses in America. RAISING TAXES EASY FOR OBAMA When President Reagan cut the top tax rate from 70 to 28 percent, he initiated an impressive era of growth and wealth creation. Today, thousands of Americans could invest hard work and dedication and finally “strike it rich.,” We enjoy the American Dream because our hard work pays off. But the Dream may well turn into a nightmare if Barack Obama wins the White House, with sympathetic Democrats in both the House and Senate. With one-party control of government—the executive branch, Congress, and eventually the courts—Obama and his policies will lead America headlong into economic stagnation, double-digit inflation, government price controls, gas lines, and 10 percent unemployment. Often compared to John F. Kennedy, Barack Obama, like millions of Americans, makes no secret of his admiration for the enormously popular Democratic president. But Obama would do well to recall the following from President Kennedy’s State of the Union Address of January 14, 1963: AUDACITY OF DECEIT 58 [I]t is increasingly clear—to those in government, business, and labor who are responsible for our economy’s success—that our obsolete tax system exerts too heavy a drag on private purchasing power, profits, and employment…. It discourages extra effort and risk. It distorts the use of resources. It invites recurrent recessions, depresses our federal revenues, and causes chronic budget deficits. Despite his elegant oratory style, Barack Obama is no Jack Kennedy. Obama has never run a business, but spent most of his adult life politicking and pandering to far-left constituencies. Obama is in fact more like Herbert Hoover than Jack Kennedy; Obama will likely raise taxes, redistribute wealth, and discourage both investment and achievement. In Obama’s America, “change” is not something we want to believe in. For new, breaking information on Barack Obama since this book was published, please go to www.audacityofdeceit.com. If you have friends that would like to receive this chapter, or any of the chapters in this book, please refer them to the same Web site where they can download the chapter of their choice for free. Goodbye America Dream Hellow OBAMAnation!!!!

One suggestion....when writing a statement the length of "War and Peace" have more than one paragraph.

You'll have to ask Andrew. I had several paragraphs.

I didn't know Ted Kazinsky had computer access.

Dear Obama brainless wonder. I have three computers. Regards - Joe By the way - I am not crazy about SP either; however she was only 8 when I went by "Ted."

You have had way too much Koolaid. I'll feel sorry for you when you wake up November 5th and learn Obama is President of the United States. Eight years of stupidity and criminal activity is enough!

When I see her on TV the first thing that happens is an involuntary shudder but then the next thing is I think, Doesn't Meg Stapleton look like Commander Data from Star Trek? Sorry, I can't help it. she could be his stunt double.

Well, yes, "looks" like Cdr. Data, but certainly does not act like him. I believe he was incapable of lying.

http://www.slate.com/id/2202163/

It is True Obama is entitled to his views, free speech, courtesy and safety in our great country. At the same time, all Americans should be afforded the same free-speech rights to expose his radical views and associations so that conservatives can help to avoid the creation of an obamanation. I don't hate Barrack, I don't want him hurt or insulted. I just completely disagree with his views and policies. In my opinion, an Obamanation is an Abomination for the USA. Don’t let your vote result in an Obamanation. Did you realize that your vote for the radical-socialist Barrack H. Obama could change our culture, economy and country into a vile, shameful and detestable condition? He will help to lead our culture further to the left destroying family values, promoting death through all forms of abortion and euthanasia, destroying our economy by growing government, destroying private sector growth and innovation, redistributing your wealth, creating a new middleclass defined by low-paying jobs and poor quality health coverage and by destroying the American dream for you, your children and grandchildren. His tax policies will increase the cost of goods and services for all, destroy the ability of the private sector to create jobs, decrease capital by increasing taxes directed at the growth sector and tax the real middle class to provide tax payments to the non tax paying lower class in the United States (Obama’s new middle class). The only good that will come from the election of Barrack Obama is the subsequent elimination of rule by the Democratic party for decades after the economic desolation his presidency will bring about in the United States. Please don’t willingly turn the United States into the dismal obamanation.

What you are describing is what is going on under conservative rule. Maybe we all need to stop subscribing to being conservative or liberal but to the notion we are on the wrong track and figure out a better way for all. Because if this is being fiscally conservative then we all better find a new place to live. The taking over of banks by the people is not under a democratic president. He's Republican. I am just tired of blaming let's just fix it.

AK Conservative, you are entitled to your opinon but I respectfully disagree. I seem to recall Ronald Reagan railing against the abomination America would become...if Medicare was approved.

Andrew is not too much. (Notice there are two o's in the word too Kate) He has done a great service here by shining some light on this case of administrative stalking. The lies of the administration are just compounding on one another. That's the bad part about lying. Andrew has plenty of credibility (another spelling hint for you Kate).

Motive, Your dirty laundry you reference is about Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska who is the running mate of John McCain who is running for the President of the United States. The moment she accepted McCain's offer, her past and present professional activities, offices she has held, judgement and character while holding these positions are open to the REST of the country so they may make an informed decision when they vote Nov. 4th. Also, while I don't know Andrew, I would say that his show and blogs do very little to hurt the reputation of Alaska as compared to what Palin has done in her past professional life as well as her outright lies in her stump speeches. Further, her absolute inability to articulate any intelligent thoughts on subjects that a potential vp or pres. should be able to handle doesn't make a very good impression of your precious Alaska. Thankfully,two TV series, Northern Exposure and Men in Trees, have helped me to continue to think of Alaska in a positive light.....Maybe when McCain and Palin lose in Nov. and Palin goes home, you faithful Alaskans will do the right thing for your state and impeach the Governor. It will go a long way to restoring the respect your state so deserves.

This blog is all about loving our state. It's all about "country before party". You would prefer Alaskans be kept in the dark about what our elected leaders do with the power we grant them? Besides the Palins (who weren't forced to do their misdeeds) I place much of the blame for the current nationwide airing of our "dirty laundry" on our local media who chose not to report criticisms of Palin. Had they done their jobs properly, these issues would have been aired in-State much earlier and good citizens like Andrew would not have had to pick up the slack. Had they done their jobs properly - who knows, maybe the Palins would have learned their lesson early on and not continued their abuses. Had they done their jobs properly - McCain would have had a more complete background on Palin for an informed decision on his VP pick. Since Palin is currently a VP candidate her leadership is no longer just Alaskan's concern - it's a valid concern for the nation, too. And this blog shows readers around the world that Alaskans come in all different persuasions - we're not a State of Palin clones. This blog shows that is very possible to love Alaska and love truth at the same time. (Thanks yet again, Andrew, for keeping your fellow Alaskans informed.)

The messenger?? Self appointed. You are sick...do you ever listen to yourself? My point was...you are trying to make a name for yourself at the expense of our State's good name. The truth..yes I want the truth. I do not agree with all that has gone on. I am more offended by you exploting all this. Our State will move on after all this and be stronger. Your daily briefings that you have fed the outside will have a much longer effect on us. Get over yourself!

Trust me...I don't take myself nearly as seriously as you obviously do. After all, for those I don't agree with I simply ignore them. I don't log on to their blogs, read their postings and then complain to them. AH

Sorry Andrew..My Bad! I thought blogs were to agree to disagree. I did not know your blog was only for those who agreed with you. You wrote it only so well...that you ignore those that disagree with you. Obviously that is how you learn. You only see what you want to see. You can hand it out but you cannot take it. At 61 I do not take myself seriously. I am old enough to see both sides. Why do I now and then read your blog?? Because from the begining of this drama I was on your bandwagon. I got all my info from you and other talk radio folks. Then I started doing my own thinking. As I jumped off your bandwagon was actully ashamed of myself rather then take myself seriously. I am not happy with the Palin administration...but less with you. My comments to your readers was..we do not all see you as the light. My comments to you were to get you to see down the road when all this is over. What do we want our State to learn from this? Every day is a school day. The Palin administration has a lot to learn and time to do it. Our State will survive and be stronger. You will always have your rent a car.

Kate, I didn;t quite explain that comment properly. Blogs are to stimulate conversation and debate no matter if you agree or disagree...if you want to take me to task about what I've written ont he points that's great and I more than welcome that. If you want to attack me personally instead of my points that's a different story....I certainly have a right to post what I like and you certainly have the right not to read it.

You might think it's airing dirty laundry, I call it open and transparent government. AH

Kate...do you have any idea how silly you sound? The bipartisan report clearly states..in normal English...not the palinese...that Sarah Pain is guilty of abusing her powers. Did you bother to read the documents...or perhaps you just decided you would watch that wing nut Palin on Tv saying thankyour for finding me innocent. This is beyond the pale and only someone with no brain cells could believe she is innocent. In the next few days my darling...there will be more coming out. Oh..some little things like how the Palins got thier house built...little things like graff. Just keep your eye on the ball inn the next while and see what you think. When Palin returns to Alaska on Nov. 5...you can gush over her all you like. I dont know what will happen, as I am hearing impeachment rumblings...but if not, I will bet she only serves one term. This fine upstanding man that you take every chance you can to berate...should run for governor. Its obvious you dont like what he has to say...so stop stalking him...its kind of creepy.

My comments to Andrew are legit. They are not about Palin's guilt or inocent. They are about Andrew trying to make a name for himself as he shouts " they are blaming me". Because I am intersted in the truth I long ago started reading this blog. Not because I think Andrew has the good of the State in mind...but because I believe in reading both sides. In doing this I am sickened by the comments of those on the outside. They are not just about Palin, but Alaskans. When did we ever start caring what they thought? Other talk show hosts have let their microphones inform us. They do not use blogs to drum up listeners....from the outside. There is the ADN to keep them informed. As a senior women and long time Alaskan, I am giving Andrew some motherly advice. Get a grip! I am not happy with Palin..but I less that impressed with Andrew. He has gone from being a classy guy...to classless. Yes sweetie I get it...the difference is I am not on any ones side...except Alaska.

Kate, We all have AH to thank for bringing this to the light of day. I suppose you're still mad at Woodward and Berstein also. Those darn rats cost Nixon the Presidency. Sometimes, the truth hurts.