David Letterman - Prince of Late Night Cowardice

[Pilgrim]

Oh, OK, now I understand. Thanks for clearing that up. I was wondering why you called Letterman the "Prince of Late Night Cowardice" and a "second rate clown." It's because of the double-standard media bias.

Guilty as charged. As you so aptly noticed, I don't like this guy - never have. He's not in the same league with Leno and not even in the same universe as Johnny Carson. I guess I'm guilty of mis-speaking and not choosing my words correctly, but that seems to be an understandable flaw to some around here so I'll forgo the formal apology. I suppose I should have said the double standard in media was my MAIN point and the SECONDARY POINTS were that IMHO he's a second-rate clown and a coward for taking cheap shots at teenage girls.

 

[Pilgrim]

I can't watch Kouric, shes one of the worst people who could sit in that chair and Schieffier who lied to get scoops to further his career isn't far behind Rather. CBS has been a poor example of jounalist ingrerity for a long long time.

Evidently, not very many other people can watch her either. She's got the lowest ratings that CBS has EVER had, at least since Nielsen started doing the ratings. She is absolutely insufferable, but that seems to be good enough to meet the current standards for CBS.

mediabistro.com: TVNewser

 

[tallcal101]

Diva,I'm honstly at a dead end in understanding the agenda of the conservative womans liberation movement.Who are your leaders? Obviously not NOW.Who are the authors who's writing describes the plight of the conservative /liberated woman? You talk about the struggle,but I'm afraid I don't understand exactly where your battles have been fought?
Please enlighten me.

If your tagging along on the coat tails of the womans movement as I have come to understand and support,it's pretty clearly defined by leaders who did not waiver on issues such as equal pay for equal work,a right to chose about their health issues,ALL HEALTH ISSUES ,discrimination in the work place,punching through the glass ceiling to name a few.

These issues have not been fought for by a coalition of conservative women.In fact,for many years,they were seen as out of place by many conservative wives and a threat to the men are always correct posse.

These were radical ideas 40 years ago.The battles were fought by left wing revolutionaries like Gloria Steinham.They put it on the line SO THAT ALL WOMEN ,LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE could enjoy the fruits of true liberation and equaL rights accorded under the Constitution.The battle is far from over,but you enjoy a freedom that women worked hard to forge.Left wing women,the enemy,who simply would not give in or give up..
Please correct me. I wish to be informed about the conservative/liberated womans movement.I'm simply at a loss.

 

[pelicn]

123 posts and still no common ground. Don't you think that there are more important things to discuss than what Letterman said about Palin?

 

[Tennesseahawk]

Diva,I'm honstly at a dead end in understanding the agenda of the conservative womans liberation movement.Who are your leaders? Obviously not NOW.Who are the authors who's writing describes the plight of the conservative /liberated woman? You talk about the struggle,but I'm afraid I don't understand exactly where your battles have been fought?
Please enlighten me.

If your tagging along on the coat tails of the womans movement as I have come to understand and support,it's pretty clearly defined by leaders who did not waiver on issues such as equal pay for equal work,a right to chose about their health issues,ALL HEALTH ISSUES ,discrimination in the work place,punching through the glass ceiling to name a few.

These issues have not been fought for by a coalition of conservative women.In fact,for many years,they were seen as out of place by many conservative wives and a threat to the men are always correct posse.

These were radical ideas 40 years ago.The battles were fought by left wing revolutionaries like Gloria Steinham.They put it on the line SO THAT ALL WOMEN ,LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE could enjoy the fruits of true liberation and equaL rights accorded under the Constitution.The battle is far from over,but you enjoy a freedom that women worked hard to forge.Left wing women,the enemy,who simply would not give in or give up..
Please correct me. I wish to be informed about the conservative/liberated womans movement.I'm simply at a loss.

If that garbage you just spewed about NOW were fact, where were they when Letterman did this?

The reason you're confused is that you think women's liberation is predominantly a liberal agenda. Just like you think civil rights is one, also. If you think Diva is an aberration, do you think Michael Steele is too? Do you think black conservatives are Uncle Toms? Do you call them Oreos behind their backs?

There's more to women's rights than burning bras and carrying signs. Some women don't march to the beat of Steinem's drum.

 

[dieseldiva]

Diva,I'm honstly at a dead end in understanding the agenda of the conservative womans liberation movement.Who are your leaders? Obviously not NOW.Who are the authors who's writing describes the plight of the conservative /liberated woman? You talk about the struggle,but I'm afraid I don't understand exactly where your battles have been fought?
Please enlighten me.

If your tagging along on the coat tails of the womans movement as I have come to understand and support,it's pretty clearly defined by leaders who did not waiver on issues such as equal pay for equal work,a right to chose about their health issues,ALL HEALTH ISSUES ,discrimination in the work place,punching through the glass ceiling to name a few.

These issues have not been fought for by a coalition of conservative women.In fact,for many years,they were seen as out of place by many conservative wives and a threat to the men are always correct posse.

These were radical ideas 40 years ago.The battles were fought by left wing revolutionaries like Gloria Steinham.They put it on the line SO THAT ALL WOMEN ,LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE could enjoy the fruits of true liberation and equaL rights accorded under the Constitution.The battle is far from over,but you enjoy a freedom that women worked hard to forge.Left wing women,the enemy,who simply would not give in or give up..
Please correct me. I wish to be informed about the conservative/liberated womans movement.I'm simply at a loss.

How patronizing and ridiculous. This is what I said and it is ALL that I said......

Indeed and some of us women who have fought the battle for respect for some 40 years now can't understand why these derogatory jokes against women of all ages are somehow still acceptable in so many circles.

Again you twist and turn...trying to spin the conversation off in yet another direction...one that you think you can easier deal with. You're so off subject at this point, it's unrecognizable....intentional I'm sure.

If you're so certain that you are correct, why didn't you answer this one......

Quote:
The Original Joke:
"One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez."
One awkward moment for Brad Pitt at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, his girlfriend was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.

How do you suppose that one would play?

__________________

 

[greg334]

If your tagging along on the coat tails of the womans movement as I have come to understand and support,it's pretty clearly defined by leaders who did not waiver on issues such as equal pay for equal work,a right to chose about their health issues,ALL HEALTH ISSUES ,discrimination in the work place,punching through the glass ceiling to name a few.

Hey Andy, let me tell you a something, you have no **** clue what you are talking about.

Lets take this a step at a time;

Equal pay still hasn't happened. It won't until there is a stop of this patronizing attitude from the government and the talking point parrots. You do know that the best gap reductions for pay between the genders were all done under republican administrations and those gap widen under Clinton and now starting to widen under Obama.

Discrimination? Dude you have no clue, this goes on more often than not. I know this issue first hand and I can PM you with details if you like and by the way, most of the legal obstacles I and others ran into most were caused by groups who were there to protect women in the work place. Not to mention a lot of the legal staff for the company I worked for were democrats.

The glass ceiling was not punchered by a liberal, it always has been a conservitive or libertairian who has reached the top but that doesn't matter to you because like the race issue, if they haven't followed a certian party line, they don't count.

These were radical ideas 40 years ago.The battles were fought by left wing revolutionaries like Gloria Steinham.They put it on the line SO THAT ALL WOMEN ,LIBERAL AND CONSERVATIVE could enjoy the fruits of true liberation and equaL rights accorded under the Constitution.The battle is far from over,but you enjoy a freedom that women worked hard to forge.Left wing women,the enemy,who simply would not give in or give up..
Please correct me. I wish to be informed about the conservative/liberated womans movement.I'm simply at a loss.

The sad thing is Andy that it is people like me who make the difference, we don't stand there fearing what we will lose but stand firm on the issue of equality and respect. It didn't take the GSs of the world to make a difference, it took the people who tolerated the cr*p for years to work hard to change it. NOTHING has ever been changed by protesting, that makes matters worst.

But again Andy, where was NOW and other organizations to help out the women who were sexually harrassed where I worked? We asked them to help out but they refused because of the lack of politcal capital that we had with them.

 

[Turtle]

And you carry an iron rod against your kids? Let me tell you a little something about the teenage mind... they like to rebel. If you're a stern parent, nothing short of lock and key is going to keep a strong-willed child from having sex, drinking, smoking dope, etc. My mom was a strict, but loving Catholic woman. My dad ruled with the belt. We had morals and rules out the wazoo. And all four of my sisters had children out of wedlock. There goes your theory down the crapper, bud!

Yeah, teens like to rebel. That's their job. As a parent all you can do is raise your kids the best you can, and give them solid values and morals and hope they make the right decisions with them.

If all 4 of your sisters had kids out of wedlock, it would not be out of line for one to question the morals and the soundness of the values embedded within them. One out of four, maybe even two, sure, mistakes happen, but four out of four? Your parents are batting a thousand. And it doesn't say a whole lot about the third and fourth one who got pregnant, either. You'd think that after the first, second and for sure the third, the 4th sister would have seen the light.

On the brighter side, at least a few good Hail Marry's and you're good to go.

But, no, it doesn't flush my theory down the crapper. It actually reinforces my theory of the gross hypocrisy of those who espouse their morals onto others, and condemn those who don't accept them, since clearly those morals aren't very effective.

And that's why Sarah Palin and her whole family is a veritable clinic of hypocrisy. She preaches teenage abstinence, yet failed to convince her own daughter. Why would anyone listen to her about it, if she can't convince her own daughter about it? And now her 18-yeard old is an outspoken proponent of safe sex and birth control, but she's mum on teen sex and abstinence. How funny is that?

 

[dieseldiva]

If all 4 of your sisters had kids out of wedlock, it would not be out of line for one to question the morals and the soundness of the values embedded within them. One out of four, maybe even two, sure, mistakes happen, but four out of four? Your parents are batting a thousand. And it doesn't say a whole lot about the third and fourth one who got pregnant, either. You'd think that after the first, second and for sure the third, the 4th sister would have seen the light.

On the brighter side, at least a few good Hail Marry's and you're good to go.

That has got to be one of the most tasteless, crass comments I've ever read here. You should be ashamed and should consider yourself lucky if he doesn't hunt you down and kick your a$$. You need it!

 

[Turtle]

Turtle... the reason I think this whole Letterman thing is pizzing ppl off is because Palin doesn't deserve it. You and I (and Letterman) know that jokes have some truth to them.

She probably doesn't deserve it. But her hypocrisy makes her an easy target for comedy.

Calling her a (the remarks were meant to portray her as one) was a joke based on nothing but an agenda to SHUT HER DOWN.

For one, I don't think David Letterman has much of a political agenda. When he does get political, which isn't all that often, it's usually primarily about the laughs, not to conform to an agenda.

Second, he didn't call Palin a . I'll refresh your obviously failing memory: Here is the entire list, in context

Top Ten Highlights Of Sarah Palin's Trip To New York

10. Visited New York landmarks she normally only sees from Alaska

9. Laughed at all the crazy-looking foreigners entering the U.N.

8. Made moose jerky on Rachael Ray

7. Keyed Tina Fey's car

6. After a wink and a nod, ended up with a kilo of crack

5. Made coat out of New York City rat pelts

4. Sat in for Kelly Ripa. Regis couldn't tell the difference.

3. Finally met one of those Jewish people Mel Gibson's always talking about

2. Bought makeup from Bloomingdale's to update her "slutty flight attendant" look

1. Especially enjoyed not appearing on Letterman
​

So, she bought makeup from Bloomingdale's to update her "slutty flight attendant" look.

That's just a tad different from saying, "She bought makeup from Bloomingdale's because she's a ," don't you think?

He didn't call her a . He said she has the look of a "slutty flight attendant." And what's more, her look needs updating, so she decided to do that with makeup from Bloomies.

If he was going to call anyone a , clearly it's the unwed mother who is wide open for that one.

And regardless if he meant one daughter or another, the joke was totally tasteless, being that her daughter is NOT a public figure. Just because the media put her pregnancy in the spotlight, does not make it right.

Tasteless, I agree. It's only mildly funny at best. But still, the joke was far more about the awkward moment for Palin in having A Rod knock her daughter up than it was about the daughter. The daughter wsn't the focus of the joke. I wonder how many people even know the joke in its entirety?

"One awkward moment though during the game, maybe you heard about it, maybe you saw it on one of the highlight reels. One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked-up by Alex Rodriguez."

Saying that you may have seen it on one of the highlight reels indicates that it happened right there for everyone to see, right in front of everyone, right under Sarah Palin's nose. How embarassing would that be? An awkward moment, to be sure.

If he said something about Kylie Cyrus and A-Rod, that might've been funny.

Why? Who is Kylie Cyrus? If you mean Miley Cyrus, again, why would that be funny?

None of the Palin's kids asked for this crap. Chelsea Clinton was off limits until she took a job that was payback for Clinton favors.

You're right, none of the kids asked for this crap. But it's a position the parents put them in when they decide to become public figures. When you become a public political figure, your private life and your family goes public right along with you. Right or wrong, that's how it is.

Why is it that Sarah Palin's kids can get joked about, but not Obama's.

Because Sarah Palin, and her kids, have done stuff that lend itself to comedy. Obama's kids haven't done a whole lot yet that could have jokes be made about them.

Why can we complain about her wearing an expensive dress, but if we talk about Michelle, we're racist?

I'm not sure that's true. The press went way overboard about Palin's wardrobe, especially since they conveniently left out the fact that Palin didn't pay for any of it, didn't keep any of it, and that it was all paid for by the campaign. But I did read more than a few critical articles about Michelle Obama's wardrobe on her recent trip to Europe. The fact that she got on the plane wearing one outfit, and got off the plane wearing another was hammered pretty hard. I didn't hear any charges of racism, tho.

I think a lot of this double standard is coming to a head; and I, for one, am sick of it. Letterman just happened to say the wrong thing at the wrong time. On a personal level, I'd say no biggie... he made a mistake. On a philosophical and political level, I say let him burn by the same fires that have taken down so many good conservatives for their slip of the tongue,...

I thionk the double standard is so blatant that it's laughable. It's almost al laughable as the fake outrage against Letterman and Imus. It's almost a laughable as thinking what a late night comic with bad ratings has to say even matters.

If the joke was said by a news anchor, a political figure, anybody with some kind of importance, I could almost see the outrage. But it wasn't. It was said by David Letterman for Chrissake! Since when did he become important?

Also, the many conservatives who got lambasted, who shouldn't have, just because they weren't liberal.

I agree with ya on most of the name listed, except Dan Quayle. He was a walking, talking punchline. He was and is a very smart man when it comes to finances and economics (he's Chariman of an international division of Cerebrus, among other things), but every time he opened his mouth he managed to stick his foot in there. The Murphy Brown incident, the potato/potatoe incident, when he addressed the United Negro College Fund (A mind is a terrible thing to waste) and said "You take the UNCF model that what a waste it is to lose one's mind or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is."

 

[Tennesseahawk]

Yeah, teens like to rebel. That's their job. As a parent all you can do is raise your kids the best you can, and give them solid values and morals and hope they make the right decisions with them.

But, no, it doesn't flush my theory down the crapper. It actually reinforces my theory of the gross hypocrisy of those who espouse their morals onto others, and condemn those who don't accept them, since clearly those morals aren't very effective.

And that's why Sarah Palin and her whole family is a veritable clinic of hypocrisy. She preaches teenage abstinence, yet failed to convince her own daughter. Why would anyone listen to her about it, if she can't convince her own daughter about it? And now her 18-yeard old is an outspoken proponent of safe sex and birth control, but she's mum on teen sex and abstinence. How funny is that?

So she's a hypocrite because her daughter didn't listen to her? I think being a hypocrite would've been having her daughter get an abortion, don't you? What exactly did she say to make you call her a hypocrite?

I don't understand you. First you say that you're supposed to raise your kids with solid morals and values, then bash Palin for doing just that. Why? Because she believes in abstinence, and her daughter didn't make the right decision? I just don't understand your logic. And after the crap you said about my family, I don't care either.

 

[Turtle]

Wow yourself. Have you not even bothered to READ the figgin' joke, or to watch the video of it?

Here we go......another liberal tactic....imply that the other person has not completed the liberal requirement of research in order to comment. Of course I read AND saw the "FIGGIN" joke!

I'm not a liberal, and I don't use their tactics. It is however a basic requirement of intelligence that one do at least cursory research on something before they comment on it, otherwise their comments will be nonsensical.

The reason that I questioned whether or not you read or heard the joke is that your comments about it would seem to indicate you had not, for they seem nonsensical.

When you mention things like the name of the girl in the joke, and that the joke mentions a political affiliation, since neither of those things are in the joke, the logical conclusion is that you have not read or heard the joke. Since you state emphatically that you have done both, yet still managed to make nonsensical comments about the joke, the logical conclusion is...well... let's just say that you'd be better off saying you hadn't read or heard the joke.

The "awkward moment" wasn't the kid's awkward moment, it was Sarah Palin's awkward moment. The fact is, Sarah Palin, a woman who espouses strong family values and strong morals allowed her teenage daughter to become pregnant. That's at the very least a little awkward for Sarah Palin.

God help us if our only choices for office will be those with zero skeletons in their closets....who's going to run.....YOU???

No way. Too many skeletons in my closet.

You're STILL playing with the words....twisting and turning and trying in any way that you can to defend this when the truth is....THERE IS NO DEFENSE.

Too funny. Do you often pick up the phone, dial the kettle's number, and then call it black? You're the one twisting words, making them to mean whatever you want them to mean. I'm the one taking the words as they are, not twisting them in any way and leaving them in precisely the order they were given, and letting them stand on their own. So you're right, there is no defense, becuse there is nothing to defend, other than what you and others invent.

So, tell me again, which political affiliation was mentioned in the joke? Which daughter's name was mentioned in the joke? Naaaa, never mind that, too easy. I wanna know your definition of a "real joke". You never answered that one. Maybe if you go to the mirror, stare into it intently, you'll come up with the answer.

 

[Turtle]

That has got to be one of the most tasteless, crass comments I've ever read here. You should be ashamed and should consider yourself lucky if he doesn't hunt you down and kick your a$$. You need it!

Why do I need my aѕѕ kicked? I didn't touch his sisters.

 

[Turtle]

So she's a hypocrite because her daughter didn't listen to her? I think being a hypocrite would've been having her daughter get an abortion, don't you? What exactly did she say to make you call her a hypocrite?

In many repsects, yes, absolutely. She's a hypocrite because she preaches abstinence and is against sex education of any kind in schools, "because it can more effectively be taught at home with the proper morals, where they will accept it and live by it." She reiterated that stance heavily right before her daughter got pregnant. Clearly, she's wrong on that stance, yet she continues to stick to her guns. That's hypocritical. Teenage rebellion is one thing, but failing, utterly, to instill her most basic of morals into her own daughter, and then publicly berating those who disagree with her (she made a remark that if you dissent from her, then you are not a real American), is very nearly the definition of hycocrisy.

Then, to make matters worse, she flies off the handle at Letterman making a joke about the raping of her 14 year old daughter, saying how wrong it is to do something like that, and then promptly implies that Letterman is a pedophile.

Having her daughter get an abortion would likewise make her a hypocrite. At least on that issue she's not hypocritical at all.

I don't understand you. First you say that you're supposed to raise your kids with solid morals and values, then bash Palin for doing just that. Why? Because she believes in abstinence, and her daughter didn't make the right decision? I just don't understand your logic.

That's just it. Clearly she didn't raise her kids with solid morals and values, or at least she didn't properly instill it in them like she said she did. Something went amiss, either she didn't do what she said she did, or she didn't lead by a very good example, something. Like I said, her daughter is now an outspoken proponent of safe sex, not abstinence, because, as her daughter said not too long ago on the Today Show, she was never taught much about safe sex and birth control, and it's important that if you're gonna have sex that you practice safe sex.

And after the crap you said about my family, I don't care either.

Crap? What crap? Give me one thing that I said that wasn't true, or honest.

 

[Turtle]

As you so aptly noticed, I don't like this guy - never have. He's not in the same league with Leno and not even in the same universe as Johnny Carson.

...IMHO he's a second-rate clown and a coward for taking cheap shots at teenage girls.

Well, yeah he's a clown. He's a comedian first, and taking cheap shots is what comedians do. They all do it every now and then, including Leno. And nothing is off limits when it comes to comedy, either it's funny or it's not, either it works or it doesn't. This one in particular wasn't funny nor did it work. But that's how it goes. And that's also as far as Letterman's importance in the world goes.

Clearly your dislike for Letterman has either colored your perceptions (that you think it hasn't would be the first indication that it has ), or it has stoked the fires of hatred of all things liberal, which I can certainly understand.

I can take him or leave him. He's like SNL anymore, where you have to watch a lot of boring and unfunny stuff to get to the 2 or 3 minutes of funny.

Conan is the worst, though, the absolute worst. The Cardinal Rule of late night talk show interviews, as decreed by His Majesty Johnny Carson, never interrupt the guest, especially if it's to get a cheap laugh that steals the attention from the guest. Conan does that repeatedly, to the point where he says more during an interview than his guests do. I can't recall a single guest who managed to finish a story they started.

Leno does that too, but not very often, and he usually very quickly puts the attention back onto the guest. Like Johnny, Leno is usually genuinely interested in what the guest has to say, or at least he appears to be even when he's not. Conan on the other hand, could care less. With Letterman, his interest depends solely on the guest, some he's interested in, others he clearly is not. He doesn't interrupt them that often, but he far too often steals the focus with his inane comments for cheap laughs instead of real, actual questions.

But whether it's Letterman, Conan, Obama, whoever, I try to not let my own bias color my perception of the facts. It's hard.

 

[tallcal101]

Diva,please answer the question (I've heard all the rest before from Ms. Greg,leader of the civil rights and womens liberation corps in Detroit).Please give me the name of the authors of your movement so I may learn from them.Liberated conservatives is just a new concept for me,silly old me for wanting to know more. If you made it up,thats fine,then you should write the book.

Greg,as far as I know you are a wind bag who drives a truck and never worked in an office except in your wild imagination.I work in an office every day,as Vice President,and deal with these issues daily.Our handbook clearly outlines the rules of the road for what is and is not acceptable and legal behavior.Our council is an African American woman who knows her S**t you phony creep. You have so much gall to even mention your experience in an office setting with your biggeted and racially inflamed rhetoric.It's a joke.

I don't talk about "when I worked in an office",I do it dude.The buck stops at my office door for my staff of men and women. This cr*p about the conservative womens agenda is not law,it's an excuse for trying to have it both ways,typical for the group that hang their sorry hats around this place.

I wish I could respect your opinion on this topic,but I'm afraid your spinning your wheels,literally,and have told so many tall stories about your past they are frankly difficult to believe.Stick to what you know,your a one man act and can only dream of really having to be in a position of promoting women based on their merrit.Keep dreaming Greg,maybe your dreams will come true some day.

 

[aristotle]

If Sarah Palin seeks the GOP nomination in 2012, she has my vote in the primary and general election. I wouldn't underestimate her appeal with social conservatives. We social conservatives haven't had a bonafide candidate since Reagan. However, the arithmetic still favors the liberals, as Democrats have a huge advantage in voter registration.

There is a decent chance the Obamas, either Barack or Michelle, will stumble badly and voters will grow disenchanted with the novelty of having these two in the White House. I suspect the bloom will be off the Obama rose soon. There will be significant backlash to all this runaway liberalism/socialism.

Yeah, the Dems fear Sarah Palin. They are going to extraordinary lengths to demean her and her family, right now. Every time Palin is disparaged by the liberal media, or their proxies such as Letterman, she gains in stature. The campaign for 2012 is underway.

 

[Turtle]

I don't think the Dems fear her as much as they see her as an easy target. Granted, mostly for the wrong reasons, but she's an easy target just the same. They probably should fear her, though, but most are either too smug or to ignorant to fear her. Certainly not enough Democrats, or the all-important "undecideds" would likely vote for her - at this juncture - but that could change. My beef with her isn't her family, or even her moral hypocrisy, it's her political record with some of her ethics, and it's troubling.

She waffled like crazy on the Bridge to Nowhere, then when the national spotlight hit the bridge and she had no choice, she finally killed the project, stating during the presidential campaign that she had essentially told Congress, "thanks, but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere," but kept the $450 million just the same, thank you very much.

She chaired the Alaskan Oil and Gas Conservation Commission as Ethics Supervisor for a year and a half, then resigned over a lack of ethics of her fellow Republican members, and even filed formal complaints against two of them after she resigned. As governor, in 2007 she championed and signed into law major ethics reforms for Alaskan government. So far, so good.

But then came the firing of the Public Safety Commissioner and the whole Troopergate thing. The State Legislature hired an investigator (the Branchflower Report), not to investigate whether Palin had the authority to fire the Commissioner, she definitely did have that authority, but to investigate her motives and ethics behind the firing, whether she, along with her husband, her staff, and the State Attorney General, put pressure on the Commissioner to fire the trooper, since the reason of "performance issues" did not match up with the exemplary performance reviews that the governor had been giving the Commissioner. Palin then ordered her own internal investigation, where she essentially investigated herself and her staff and others, and ended up admitting that, "pressure could have been perceived to exist, although I have only now become aware of it." That just doesn't smell right.

After getting a preview of the Branchflower Report, and right after getting picked by McCain, she asked the Legislature to cease its investigation, stating that they had no jurisdiction, and that only the State Personnel Board can rule on ethics, which is true. The State Personnel Board consists of three members, all of which are Palin appointees.

A month later the Branchflower Report was released, and it was not flattering at all to the governor's ethics. The report concluded that she did not break the law, but that she abused her power, and violated the Execute Branch Ethics Act that she herself helped to push through the Legislature. One of the violations was that she allowed her husband to use the governor's office to contact subordinate state employees to help put pressure on getting the trooper fired, which is nearly identical to one of the formal complaints that she filed against a member of the Alaskan Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, who was using the Commission office for personal and Party business while on the public's dime.

After a <cough> extensive investigation, the State Personnel Board found no probable cause, that no pressure was put on anyone to fire the trooper, and that Palin in no way violated ethics rules. It stinks like crazy, and her approval rating in the state bears that out. Two years ago it was around 90%. A year ago it was about 70%, and now it's around 50%. Something went on that's more than meets the eye.

I realize that a lot of all that was just politics as usual, and pales in comparison to what goes on inside the Beltway, but to be a champion of ethics, and then to be covered up in ethical problems, just doesn't sit well.

Still, many of her political positions I like a lot, particularly the fact that she strongly supports the right to bear arms without restriction of any kind, just like the Constitution says.

 

[dieseldiva]

Diva,please answer the question (I've heard all the rest before from Ms. Greg,leader of the civil rights and womens liberation corps in Detroit).Please give me the name of the authors of your movement so I may learn from them.Liberated conservatives is just a new concept for me,silly old me for wanting to know more. If you made it up,thats fine,then you should write the book.

I can't answer your question as I'm not the one that used the terms that you reference above. Look back through the posts and you'll see that these (the above groups) are a figment of your imagination.

That wasn't even a nice try......it was lame.

 

[greg334]

I wasn't an insulated VP in a small office setting in California where there is a lot of lollypops and candycanes but in the real large company world where it was a dog eat dog competition to climb the ladder. If you were a VP, then you set the tone for the people below you and you could never understand a thing unless you worked your way up in a hostile environment. I doubt you ever worked in any place that didn't think like you did and you went along in life thinking that only you and others like you were the one's who brought along change. Using a handbook is one aspect of office life, if you can't think beyond the handbook, it proves my point completely.

I put up with the bulls*ht artist who talked their way into the easy work (a lot like a few people here who work for FedEx - hint WG) and tolerated watching a lot of cr*p my co-workers put up with just because of their ethnic background or sexual orientation. I followed the rules, as did most others but it was only as good as the people above us. Remember I mentioned as a VP you set the tone.

I worked for the largest Pharma company in the world, my site was bought out by this large company in 1999, which meant that the legacy workers were still in charged during my tenure. This site was in the heart of Mid-West Liberal Land, another lollypop and candycane world - Ann Arbor. A lot, I MEAN A LOT of these people were the U of M style Hashbash idiots who got their degree at the U while being wasted through most of their academic career. They took advantage of the internship programs of the past which led them to a full time life employment at this company. In my reporting line, I answered to a guy in Hawaiian shirts and a pony tail who took Kava, burned incense and enjoyed pretty much the leisure lifestyle that you do. I bet you would have gotten along with him really well.

See Andy most if not all the problems were caused by the liberal mindset at this site, entrenched since the site moved out of Union land. Many of these legacy people were of the opinion that control, threats and intimidation were the way to manage people and fairness was a thing of the past. Patronage was the mainstay for advancement, and the touchy feely group hug stuff were both part of the culture.

For example you may understand this, they liked hiring Chinese workers under the H1-b visa program, it wasn't the people like me who threatened them with deportation or set them up to take the blame for some regulatory issue that was done with a purpose to cover some problem up, it was the people who believed in the liberal agenda that did all of that. I sat there in one meeting and listened to a 25 year vet of the company describe which ethnic group was the best to hire and control, the Chinese were at the top. The person doing the talking was the guy who ran one of the Gore's campaign offices in Ann Arbor for the 2000 election.

Now like I said you live in the world of lollypops and candycanes because California for all of its ills and wickedness has been progressive on these issues but it wasn't because of the liberating idiots who took to the streets but the people behind the scenes who actually changed things.

I remember that Nixon did more to enforce the discrimination laws than did Kennedy and Johnson combined. I think Reagan did a lot more than Carter and so on. Bush did more to have a more diverse cabinet than any other president.

But you know Andy all of that doesn't matter because most of us, the classic liberals, the libertairians and the conservitives alike don't like to put titles on people, like black, african-american, Chinese or Gay. We don't look at a man and judge them as a black man, but as a man. Obama is a president who happens to be a black man, not a black president. Most of that happens with the liberals simply because that is how they see people, not by the person or who they are but by what they are.