Fortunately, those on the left who are bringing out the long knives never learned the old line, "never bring a knife to a gun fight!"

troll with another photoshop image.

yawn.

I have to agree, she is my worst nightmare, but not in the way you think. Every time I imagine her taking over as President if something happened to McCain(if elected), I feel very very frightened. If it was the primaries for the Republican candidate, would you choose her R_T? Somehow I think that despite the enjoyment many Republicans have gotten from her old school negative speech(one speech, may I remind you, you guys should calm down a bit) towards "the enemy" Democrats, the excitement you feel will disappear pretty quickly once she reveals herself to be incapable. We don't need more redneck attitude in the Whitehouse. I know many Republicans didn't like McCain because he has been willing to go against the party. Why does this bother you so much? What is the real motivation, I can't help but wonder, is it just the desire to win and have your way at all costs, that causes a man willing to compromise to be looked down on? If McCain didn't have to kiss your a**es and placate the hate you all feel for Democrats, do you realize how much his chances of winning would have been increased? She is a full on participant in that hatred, which is why your party is all over it like flies on garbage. McCain's judgement in allowing her to be chosen (cuz yeah, I think it's his inept handlers, boy I'd be surprised if Rove was this stupid) does not show putting the country first, it was about winning an election. And then what, 4 years of a running joke, holding our breath that he could become ill or something, just watch. I have always feared voting third party with the races being as close as they are, but with McCain as the other candidate, I admit, I felt like this was a good time to resist voting on the defensive. With her as his running mate, now I'm not so sure.

Troll on, troll on, silly man...

That's a photoshopped picture. Everybody knows you don't shoot the koi in the pool, you net them before doing maintenance. Silly hillbillies.

well, I disagree on one point Rational

I don't think Hillary would have helped him

she wants the top stop and would have spent more time sabotaging him as a direct component of his ticket

also, so many Americans are so repulsed by the Clintons that it would almost be like a double negative

a racist (or is he a Muslim) and a socialist (with an associates in criminality and untruthfulness)

Obama should have picked Oprah, you know, the woman who claimed to give away a bunch of new cars on her TV show a few years back when in reality it was the car company that gave them away as an adveriting gimmick

thats all the democrats are, lies and gimmicks

now Kittyv: I would not say republicans hate democrats

we hate what they stand for, many of us are related to them you know

but, as I was saying, what democrats stand for is surrender, higher taxes, deference to the UN, except when a republican is in office and wants to work with the UN, collusion with the media, avoidance of their fair share of taxes (see Ted Chappaquiddick Kennedy, who's family money is in the southe pacific, unable to be taxed unpon inheritance) (also see Warren Buffet who has publicy said he wants to pay more taxes yet has not found the line on the 1040 allowing one to give more taxes)

but Sarah Palin is as strong and good looking as my wife and I would put her up against anyone in DC without the experiece Palin has. It's not all experience that is needed to be commander in chief and leader of the free world. It talkes courage and the ability to make a decision, something Obama has never done. Sure, she has a good speaking ability as Obama does but he has nothing in reserve.

Did you know that part way thru her speech, Palin's teleprompter broke and she adlibbed.

Pretty amazing eh ?

Now, you watch the Bill O'reilly interview, part I with his highess ?

Pretty sad, without a script he looks weak and ineffective.

Perfect posture for surrendering to Iran or maybe lowly North Korea.

He would'nt make it to 3:00am.

That's it for me. I'm not posting on another political blog or LTE until after the election. As a matter of fact I won't even read them.

To both sides I suggest cooling it before we lose someone to a heart attack.

See you all in November unless I totally lose the taste for the Auburn Journal.

Seriously? People are impressed with the speech? Helloooooo, she didn't write it people!!! The conventions are just a rally for each party to toot their own horn. Nothing of significance.

Governor Sarah Palin rocks! She is indeed a breath of fresh air, and fully capable of running the country. The state she governs has low taxes and a budget gsurplus. A lot more than can be said for Obama---who is a mere Senator of a state with appallingly high taxes, crime, and a HUGE deficit. He has done nothing for Illinois, the poor, or anyone else except himself and Michelle.

Take er easy loomisresident.

Loomisres - please don't be upset, and please don't stop posting. You are one of my favorites that comment, even when we don't agree! My post was directed more to R_T, and also I know not all Republicans hate Democrats, and vice versa (sp?). This weekend if it is too hot out during the day, I'm going to try to listen to the speeches again, out of the hoopla of the convention and without the buildup of other speakers. I feel kind of ill and weary just thinking about it, but feel like I should because I'm starting to question what I heard based on such contrary reactions. Granted, these are just speeches like Salamander said, and I agree with that, but I'm going to see if first impressions were correct. My momentary fear of voting third party has disappeared though! After going back to Ron Paul's and Ralph Nader's sites and interviews etc last night, I remembered why I want to. I'm too hasty sometimes in writing what I'm feeling at that moment.

common_sense - I disagree with what you believe Republicans/Democrats stand for. I agree that courage to make a tough decision is needed, but the thought process of the person making that decision is important, their motivations, knowledge of history, knowing the enemy upon which you are basing that decision, because getting it wrong costs lives. She is by far the weakest in that area by leaps and bounds, in my opinion. (Have you ever seen the documentary, The Fog of War? Or Why We Fight? ) No, I have not watched the Bill O'Reilly interview, I can't stand him!!! I do not watch Fox News. You should seriously consider supplementing other news sources if that is your main source of information, I feel compelled to tell you but I suspect you will ignore my advice. Since you asked though, I will watch the interview and suppress my gag reflex when I see O'Reilly (couldn't resist, really don't like him). I'll also see if I can tell at what point Palin's teleprompter broke when I watch her speech again? Where did you hear that?

Have a nice weekend everyone.

"gravi·tas (n.) Quiet reserved dignity; propriety and good taste in behavior and speech; formality and lordliness in bearing and appearance."

It's kind of hard to tell that from the photo. You can barely see her little finger.

Loomisresident, Please contact me at neighborrescue@live.com. If you know loomisresident, please forward my request to him. Thank You

With two months to go until the election I doubt any of us will stop posting. I'd bet dollars to donuts (whatever that means) that common_sense will be back. If he/she is an honest person will be under that name. Otherwise, under a different name. It's just too much fun to it up.

Some of this neocon spin is really tragic.

Sarah Palin's teleprompter failed and she adlibbed?! Oh my gosh, how talented. And all those people in the press who sat where they could both hear her speech and see her teleprompter? They all said that the "failure" was that the teleprompter sometimes scrolled a few lines past where she was. They must all be in on a giant conspiracy! Or maybe your neocon news outlet stretched and distorted a story that they hoped would resonate with those wavering on the republican loyalty.

But this is nothing new. Fact checkers from just about every walk who have combed Sarah Palin's speech have found it, shall we say, non-factual. With 60 days to go in the race, the McCain campaign will not let the press interview Palin. Why is that, do you think? Maybe they don't want them asking her why she lied in her speech, so they're going to keep her profile low until her speech is no longer a story worth talking about?

The McCain campaign fears the media. When Tucker Bounds was asked to name one thing she has done as commander-in-chief of the Alaskan national guard, and was caught unable to do so, the McCain campaign pulled McCain's interview with Larry King. Gee, were they afraid that Larry might ask a question they have no answer to? You guys are so eager to jump on Obama's appearance on O'Reilly and yet turn a blind eye that O'Reilly is an unapologetic critic of Obama, yet Obama bravely appears on his show anyway. McCain, who is apparently so very brave, chickens out of the CNN interview.

If your brave ex-POW Maverick congressman is so great at taking the high road... Why does he keep running? And why has he voted with the stated opinion of President bush 100% of the time to date in 2008?

Go ahead and deride Obama. But in the end, all you have is conjecture and the politics of fear. With McCain and Palin we have the documentation;we can attack them on the facts.

kittyv, who would want Biden as President? Wasn't he the one who called Obama too inexperienced to be President just before he was outed as a plagiarist and dropped out of the election? So much for change...

PS: Folks, this was not photo-shopped. Do an internet search and you will find it.

I just thought it was a good one.

I also got a real kick out of SallyMae's post.... How many names do you post under? I am losing track!

Joe Biden, 78th in a class of 95, a member of the "Old Guard", elected in 1973, a Catholic that supports abortion on demand...ya, that is change!

If by "this was not photo-shopped" you actually mean "this WAS photoshopped" then you are right. Do an internet search and you will find it.

Of course you know that this is a "fake" picture....yes it is a photo shop one...only her head is the real Sarah.

And it is the real Sarah that scares the Liberals.

Joyce

Well,. once a beauty queen, always a beauty queen. No matter how shapely the woman is, I have never seen a woman of her age be happy about having a pic snapped while wearing a swimsuit. But then, maybe this is her way of supporting the NRA. No wait, she supports stronger gun control. Oh heck, I don't know what that pic was about or this election either.......

hey rat_thinker... it is indeed a photoshop and you can find the original pic with the real woman with a simple search. you were fooled that easy, huh?

joyce, i wouldn't say that Palin scares liberals (or many conservatives that i know as well). that's too simplistic an accusation. it's that it concerns them about McCain's judgment in choosing politics over governing... and so much more.

and, thinker, i can assure you that i have always had only one moniker and still do today. i don't think in those terms and therefore don't suspect that in others. do you? however, like we've learned with some other posters here, there are family members that also like to contribute in these forums occasionally and my sister never mentioned to me that she had used the office computer to make a comment until i noticed this above. i had never had to re-login before. lol

You Can’t Fake Authenticity

What is it about Sarah Palin that has gotten the liberal media’s knickers in a twist? Why are they criticizing, even mocking, everything from her hair to her faith?

She is exactly what the feminists claim to want and admire in women: strong, self-assured, a working mom, a political leader. But wait, she is a conservative Republican and because of that they hate her for displaying all of the aforementioned characteristics.

They are appalled that she would keep a Down Syndrome child when she could have aborted him. They are outraged when she speaks of God as if she knows Him, when their only acquaintance with the name is as a curse word, followed by “damn.” They are even disgusted that she has five children, as they think one (or maybe two) is enough.

Sarah Palin is to the left what sunlight is to a vampire. Her high heels have knocked them back on the heels of their comfortable shoes.

She has galvanized and united the social and economic conservatives, when the left thought it saw an unbridgeable divide between the “oil and water” elements of the Republican Party.

The USA Today-Gallup Poll published Monday shows a ten point advantage for McCain-Palin among likely voters — the most important constituency. That is a remarkable turnaround when you consider Obama received an eight-point bounce from the Democratic Convention, which has now been wiped-out.

I think it has something to do with the fact that average people, who live in what the left thinks of as “flyover” country, identify with a woman who has an intact, yet imperfect family. They can visualize her pushing a grocery cart at the supermarket and shopping at Wal-Mart.

You can’t fake genuineness and if this trend continues, Obama and the entire Democratic Party — which thought it had this election in the bag — will be left to wonder over the next four years how they got their pockets picked by someone they arrogantly consider a yahoo from moose country.

This is in NEWSWEEK of all places!!!

FACTCHECK.ORG

Sliming Palin

False Internet claims and rumors fly about McCain's running mate.

Summary

We've been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain's running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn't cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.

She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She's been registered as a Republican since May 1982.

Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

We'll be looking into other charges in an e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny for a future story. For more explanation of the bullet points above, please read the Analysis.

Analysis

Since Republican presidential nominee John McCain tapped Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, information about Palin's past has been zipping around the Internet. Several claims are not true, and other rumors are misleading.

No Cut for "Special Needs" Kids

It's not true, as widely reported in mass e-mails, Web postings and at least one mainstream news source, that Palin slashed the special education budget in Alaska by 62 percent. CNN's Soledad O'Brien made the claim on Sept. 4 in an interview with Nicolle Wallace, a senior adviser to the McCain campaign:

O'Brien, Sept. 4: One are that has gotten certainly people sending to me a lot of e-mails is the question about as governor what she did with the special needs budget, which I'm sure you're aware, she cut significantly, 62 percent I think is the number from when she came into office. As a woman who is now a mother to a special needs child, and I think she actually has a nephew which is autistic as well. How much of a problem is this going to be as she tries to navigate both sides of that issue?

Such a move might have made Palin look heartless or hypocritical in view of her convention-speech pledge to be an advocate for special needs children and their families. But in fact, she increased special needs funding so dramatically that a representative of local school boards described the jump as "historic."

According to an April 2008 article in Education Week, Palin signed legislation in March 2008 that would increase public school funding considerably, including special needs funding. It would increase spending on what Alaska calls "intensive needs" students (students with high-cost special requirements) from $26,900 per student in 2008 to $73,840 per student in 2011. That almost triples the per-student spending in three fiscal years. Palin's original proposal, according to the Anchorage Daily News, would have increased funds slightly more, giving intensive needs students a $77,740 allotment by 2011.

Education Week: A second part of the measure raises spending for students with special needs to $73,840 in fiscal 2011, from the current $26,900 per student in fiscal 2008, according to the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development.

Unlike many other states, Alaska has relatively flush budget coffers, thanks to a rise in oil and gas revenues. Funding for schools will remain fairly level next year, however. Overall per-pupil funding across the state will rise by $100, to $5,480, in fiscal 2009. ...

Carl Rose, the executive director of the Association of Alaska School Boards, praised the changes in funding for rural schools and students with special needs as a "historic event," and said the finance overhaul would bring more stability to district budgets.

According to Eddy Jeans at the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, funding for special needs and intensive needs students has increased every year since Palin entered office, from a total of $203 million in 2006 to a projected $276 million in 2009.

Those who claim that Palin cut special needs funding by 62 percent are looking in the wrong place and misinterpreting what they find there. They point to an apparent drop in the Department of Education and Early Development budget for special schools. But the special schools budget, despite the similar name, isn't the special needs budget. "I don't even consider the special schools component [part of] our special needs funding," Jeans told FactCheck.org. "The special needs funding is provided through our public school funding formula. The special schools is simply a budget component where we have funding set aside for special projects," such as the Alaska School for the Deaf and the Alaska Military Youth Academy. A different budget component, the Foundation Program, governs special needs programs in the public school system.

And in any case, the decrease in funding for special schools is illusory. Palin moved the Alaska Military Youth Academy's ChalleNGe program, a residential military school program that teaches job and life skills to students under 20, out of the budget line for "special schools" and into its own line. This resulted in an apparent drop of more than $5 million in the special schools budget with no actual decrease in funding for the programs.

Not a Book Burner

One accusation claims then-Mayor Palin threatened to fire Wasilla's librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. Actually, Palin never asked that books be banned; no

books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren't even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication. The librarian was fired, but was told only that Palin felt she didn't support her. She was re-hired the next

day. The librarian never claimed that Palin threatened outright to fire her for refusing to ban books.

It's true that Palin did raise the issue with Mary Ellen Emmons, Wasilla's librarian, on at least two occasions, three in some versions. Emmons flatly stated her opposition each time. But, as the /Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman/ (Wasilla's local paper) reported at the time, Palin

asked general questions about what Emmons would say if Palin requested that a book be banned. According to Emmons, Palin "was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can't be in the library." Emmons reported that Palin pressed the issue, asking whether Emmons' position would change if residents were picketing the library. Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny,

who was at the meeting, corroborates Emmons' story, telling the Chicago Tribune that "Sarah said to Mary Ellen, 'What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?' "

Palin characterized the exchange differently, initially volunteering the episode as an example of discussions with city employees about following her administration's agenda. Palin described her questions to Emmons as "rhetorical," noting that her questions "were asked in the context of

professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city." Actually, true rhetorical questions have implied answers (e.g., "Who do you think you are?"), so Palin probably meant to describe her questions as hypothetical or theoretical. We can't read minds, so it is impossible for us to know whether or not Palin may actually have wanted to ban books from the library or whether she simply wanted to know how her new employees would respond to an instruction from their boss. It is worth noting that, in an update, the Frontiersman points out that no

book was ever banned from the library's shelves.

Palin initially requested Emmons' resignation, along with those of Wasilla's other department heads, in October 1996. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all of them (except one, whose department she was eliminating) to retain their positions. But in January 1997, Palin fired Emmons, along with the police chief. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons' firing, but said she didn't feel she had Emmons' support. The decision caused "a stir" in the small town, according to a newspaper account at the time. According to a widely circulated e-mail from Kilkenny, "city residents rallied to the

defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter."

As we've noted, Palin did not attempt to ban any library books. We don't know if Emmons' resistance to Palin's questions about possible censorship had anything to do with Emmons' firing. And we have no idea if the protests had any impact on Palin at all. There simply isn't any evidence that we can find either way. Palin did re-hire Emmons the following day, saying that she now felt she had the librarian's backing. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned.

So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken "from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board"? If it was, the library board should take up fortune telling. The list includes the first four Harry Potter books,

none of which had been published at the time of the Palin-Emmons conversations. The first wasn't published until 1998. In fact, the list is a simple cut-and-paste job, snatched (complete with typos and the occasional incorrect title) from the Florida Institute of Technology

library Web page, which presents the list as "Books banned at one time or another in the

United States."

Closet Secessionist?

Palin was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party – which calls for a vote on whether Alaska should secede from the union or remain a state – despite mistaken reports to the contrary. But her husband was a member for years, and she attended at least one party convention, as mayor of the town in which it was held.

The party's chair originally told reporters that Palin had been a member, but the official later retracted that statement. Chairwoman Lynette Clark told the New York Times that false information had been given to her by another member of the party after she first told the Times and others that Palin joined the AIP in 1994. Clark issued an apology on the AIP Web site.

The director of Alaska's Division of Elections, Gail Fenumiai, confirms that Palin registered to vote in the state for the first time in May 1982 as a Republican and hasn't changed her party affiliation since. She also told FactCheck.org that Palin's husband, Todd, was registered with AIP from October 1995 to July 2000, and again from September 2000 until July 2002. (He has since been registered as undeclared.) However, the AIP says Todd Palin "never participated in any party activities aside from attending a convention in Wasilla at one time."

There is still some dispute as to whether Sarah Palin also attended the AIP's 1994 convention, held in Wasilla. Clark and another AIP official toldABC News' Jake Tapper that both Palins were there. Palin was elected mayor of Wasilla two years later. The McCain campaign says Sarah Palin went to the 2000 AIP convention, also held in Wasilla, "as a courtesy since she was mayor." As governor, Palin sent a video message to the 2008 convention, which is available on YouTube, and the AIP says she attended in 2006 when she was campaigning.

Didn't Endorse Pat Buchanan

Claims that Palin endorsed conservative Republican Pat Buchanan for president in the 2000 campaign are false. She worked for conservative Republican Steve Forbes.

The incorrect reports stem from an Associated Press story on July 17, 1999, that said Palin was "among those sporting Buchanan buttons" at a lunch for Buchanan attended by about 85 people, during a swing he took through Fairbanks and Wasilla. Buchanan didn't help matters when he told a reporter for the liberal publication The Nation on Aug. 29: "I'm pretty sure she's a Buchananite." But in fact, she wasn't.

Soon after The AP story appeared, Palin wrote in a letter to the editor of the Anchorage Daily News that she had merely worn a Buchanan button as a courtesy to her visitor and was not endorsing him. The letter, published July 26, 1999, said:

Palin, July 26, 1999: As mayor of Wasilla, I am proud to welcome all presidential candidates to our city. This is true regardless of their party, or the latest odds of their winning. When presidential candidates visit our community, I am always happy to meet them. I'll even put on their button when handed one as a polite gesture of respect.

Though no reporter interviewed me for the Associated Press article on the recent visit by a presidential candidate (Metro, July 17), the article may have left your readers with the perception that I am endorsing this candidate, as opposed to welcoming his visit to Wasilla. As mayor, I will welcome all the candidates in Wasilla.

Palin actually worked for Forbes. Less than a month after being spotted wearing the "courtesy" button for Buchanan, she was named to the state leadership committee of the Forbes effort. The Associated Press reported on Aug. 7, 1999:

The Associated Press, Aug. 7 1999: State Sen. Mike Miller of Fairbanks will head the Alaska campaign chairman for Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes, campaign officials said. Joining the Fairbanks Republican on the leadership committee will be Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin, and former state GOP chairman Pete Hallgren, who will serve as co-chairs.

Still, after nine years, the truth has yet to catch up completely.

No Creationism in Schools

On Aug. 29, the Boston Globe reported that Palin was open to teaching creationism in public schools. That's true. She supports teaching creationism alongside evolution, though she has not actively pursued such a policy as governor.

In an Oct. 25, 2006, debate, when asked about teaching alternatives to evolution, Palin replied:

Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject – creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.

A couple of days later, Palin amended that statement in an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, saying:

Palin, Oct. 2006: I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.

After her election, Palin let the matter drop. The Associated Press reported Sept 3: "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them. ... It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans." The article was headlined, "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor." It was written by Dan Joling, who reports from Anchorage and has covered Alaska for 30 years.

AnInconvenientPost:

John McCain's election campaign last night suffered the body blow which Republicans had been bracing themselves for when his vice-presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, was found to have abused her powers in pursuit of a personal feud with her former brother-in-law.

The report thrusts a new issue into the presidential campaign at a time when the GOP ticket is trying to catch up in national polls and when Palin's reputation as a reform-minded candidate is being subjected to serious critical scrutiny.

At the end of the 10-week investigation into the so-called "Troopergate Scandal", Palin was judged to have breached the ethics rules which govern her conduct as Governor of Alaska. The findings, delivered by an investigator who had been hired by the Alaskan State Legislature before she was picked as McCain's running mate, are certain to lead to questions over his judgment, and to queries and challenges as to his and her suitability for national office.

Stephen Branchflower, a former prosecutor, found that Palin had breached the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act, which states that "each public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a violation of that trust".

Under Alaska law, it is up to the state's Personnel Board _ which is conducting its own investigation into the matter _ to decide whether to refer it to the Senate President for disciplinary action. Violations also carry a possible fine of up to $5,000."

[Sources: Boston Globe,Reuters, Houston Chronicle, New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, LA Times. San Jose Mercury, Bloomberg, AP, KTVU Anchorage.]

___

FOXNews - McCain-Palin 2008 spokeswoman Meg Stapleton issued the following statement:

“Today’s report ... illustrates what we’ve known all along: this was a partisan led inquiry run by Obama supporters, and the Palins were completely justified in their concern regarding Trooper Wooten given his violent and rogue behavior. Lacking evidence to support the original Monegan allegation, the Legislative Council seriously overreached, making a tortured argument to find fault without basis in law or fact. The Governor is looking forward to cooperating with the Personnel Board and continuing her conversation with the American people regarding the important issues facing the country.”

Stick a fork in her. She's done.