Report: Down. Palin: Yay! The report says up! http://tinyurl.com/425vte
Archive for October 14th, 2008
Here is what the state of Alaska’s legislative commission found regarding Gov. Sarah Palin’s firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, whom she allegedly fired because of his reluctance to dismiss a state trooper that Palin wanted gone for personal reasons:
- Palin did not violate any law in firing Monegan. As governor, she had the right to fire a cabinet member for pretty much any reason she wanted.
- Palin DID, however, act unethically, and she abused her power as governor.
That’s two separate findings. Did she break the law? No. Did she abuse her power and act unethically? Yes.
Now here’s Palin’s reaction to the report:
“I’m very very pleased to be cleared of any legal wrongdoing, any hint of any kind of unethical activity there.”
No, dummy. You were cleared of any legal wrongdoing, but NOT of unethical activity. Yes on one, no on the other.
REPORT: Sarah Palin acted unethically.
PALIN: I’m very pleased that the report has cleared me of acting unethically!
REPORT: Did you even read me?
PALIN: I’m so glad the report supports me! I love the report!
REPORT: I don’t support you.
PALIN: See? So much love and support.
REPORT: I don’t even know why I bother with you.
PALIN: Maverick! (winks)
It would be one thing if she said she disagrees with the report. But to say that the report says the OPPOSITE of what the report actually says — who does she think she’s fooling? As Rachel Maddow, MSNBC commentator and part-time K.D. Lang impersonator, says in this clip, that’s not a difference of interpretation. That’s just a lie.
In the comments below: people posting examples of other politicians stating the very opposite of what is true, because that makes it OK when Palin does it.
This weekend, as I was skimming through something I’d TiVoed back in April, a commercial caught my eye. Oregon’s three leading Democratic candidates for the U.S. Senator’s seat were having a debate, and the local news was pimping it as the lead story that night. What caught my attention was the fact that the candidate standing at the middle podium was substantially shorter than the other two. That made me pause my fast-forwarding. Then I saw that this shorter candidate ALSO had a hook in place of his left hand.
Why did no one tell me that one of Oregon’s senatorial candidates was a dwarf with a hook for a hand?!
His name is Steve Novick. He narrowly lost the Democratic nomination to Jeff Merkley, who now faces the Republican incumbent Gordon Smith for Oregon’s senate seat. I didn’t follow this primary very closely, and I never watch TV news (or even TV commercials, thanks to TiVo), so while I knew the name Steve Novick, I had NO IDEA he was a hook-handed dwarf.
Why was this not mentioned in every news story about the election? How could I have read (or at least skimmed) so many newspaper articles about the campaign and still never know that Steve Novick is 4’9″ and has a steel hook where his left hand should be? I probably would have voted for him on that basis alone!
Apparently Novick himself has made joking references to his unusual physicality, which is cool. All I’m saying is, he needs to do it more often. Get the word out! Let people know that a vote for Steve Novick is a vote for a tiny man who is partly made of metal!