Uh-oh
Bookworm on Sep 02 2008 at 9:51 pm | Filed under: Sarah Palin
The ENQUIRER has also learned that Palin’s family is embroiled in a vicious war that is now exposing her darkest secrets, threatening to destroy her political career.
Palin’s ongoing war with her ex brother-in-law Mike Wooten, a state trooper, has caused multiple sources to come forward with shocking allegations about the governor.
I will say that, if it’s a “he said/she said,” I’m not going to get swept up in this one. That is, absent solid evidence (such as John Edward’s baby), I’ll reserve judgment, whatever the Enquirer dishes up.
Also, I’m actually curious what the “darkest secrets” and “shocking allegations” are. Incest? Been there, done that with claims about her husband. Murder? No dead bodies that we’ve heard of yet. Blood sacrifices? Unlikely, given her apparently genuine commitment to Christianity. Bestiality? Well, aside from also being unlikely, the radical Left would have us believe that that type of relationship, as long as the animal consents, is strictly between the human and the animal.
The one that would hit hardest would be solid evidence that she is, in fact, corrupt. If someone pointed to several thousand dollars of oil money in a secret offshore bank account, she would be destroyed. She’s supposed to be the anti-corruption avenger, and politically more pure than average. Hitting her here would be devastating.
Email This Post To A Friend
27 Responses to “Uh-oh”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes – if the evidence shows that Sarah Palin has been involved in some sort of corruption, the election would be over.
Right now, I am not giving any credence to the rumors. If they turn out to be true, that will be a different story but for now, I’d just like to hear her speak and learn more about what she has done as governor. By all accounts, she has had some amazing successes and that intrigues me.
Regardless of what happens, I find myself feeling very bad about how she is being treated. Her policies and personal beliefs are fair game, very fair, and if something troubling turns up, well, that’s part of the game as well. But I cannot think of a single politician whose family members, all of whom have chosen to remain outside of the political sphere, have had to weather such scrutiny. And it is just beginning.
Deana
Deana,
So Palin is innocent until proven guilty (and rightly so), but Obama is guilty until proven innocent–an impossibility, since you cannot disprove a negative (i.e., that his “association” with an unconvicted “terrorist” does not make him soft on terror). That does not make sense to me…
Bookworm,
Can we leave the National Enquirer out of all intelligent debates? I mean, what will be next? We could start citing the Book of Genesis as an authoratative source for geology and evolution. Some sources should be ignored regardless of what “proof” they might purport to present, since their reporting and fact-checking is so suspect that you cannot trust anything they say or any evidence they produce. And, anyway, I feel a need to take a shower when I hear the name of that publication, much less try to read it…
dg –
I do think Obama would tend to be soft on terror, NOT because of his admitted relationship with Ayers but because of Obama’s belief system and his tendency to see things in relative terms (witness his initial reaction to the Russian invasion of Georgia). It has not escaped many people’s notice that whenever problems in the world are being discussed, he immediately brings up America’s sins (sometimes the real ones but more often, utterly imagined ones).
And yes, I too feel like I need to take a shower with (industrial strength soap!) when I hear the words “National Enquirer.” But the problem is that that “publication,” vile as it may be, was the only one who followed up on Edwards’ affair. Other news sources didn’t, protesting vociferously that because Edwards was not a candidate at the time, what he does is not an issue. While I do feel for the Edwards family and acknowledge that his affair does not affect me, he was an adult who was a serious presidential candidate who lied. Repeatedly.
All of which makes the mainstream media’s willingness to skewer a 17 year old girl who is not a political figure so baffling. If Edwards was off-limits until the National Enquirer forced their hand, how do you explain the three front page articles on Bristol Palin on yesterday’s NYT?
Strange indeed.
Deana
I wish we could keep the Enquirer out of this. But the MSM clearly knew there was smoke in the John Edwards’ affair, and they sat on it, refusing to even let a hint of scandal emerge. And now we see, with one rabid Daily Kos posting, the MSM seize upon the story and comment on it, and comment on it, and comment on it…
I have made it a point to try to be fair to Obama. I think he is an authentic person and yet I see that in all of his associations, all of the meaningful ones are leftist. He occasionally reaches across the aisle, but there’s no heft nor commitment to it. My fear is that, if elected President, he may try to honor his pledge at cross-partisan reform, totally fail, and then govern for the rest of his term from his natural comfortable position: the far, far, far left. That is the authentic Obama. That is why he is always so careful when he speaks without a teleprompter: He cannot let his true beliefs and feelings show. His non-teleprompter interviews therefore come across as non-authentic. He’s not the only politician, on either side of the aisle, in THAT boat, to be sure!
Sarah Palin was – apparently – an earmark mayor of Wasilla, aggressively pursuing Washington money. During her losing election for Lieutenant Governor, she accepted money, about $4,500, from Alaska’s infamous Veco Corporation, the guilty party behind much of the financial scandal in Alaska these days. Her record is therefore not completely clean, and she hasn’t explained these discrepancies from her current image as a fearless reformer. I await the explanation. It seems clear to me that she changed her mind along the way, but I need to hear it from her.
I remain totally enthusiastic about her. She has the possibility of being my generation’s Ronald Reagan. (Don’t forget, he had his troubles, ie, having his meetings scheduled by his wife Nancy, to keep them in line with her astrologer’s predictions.) We’ll see whether the incredible promise of Governor Palin can be borne out.
Book, even though the media is just now noticing this is a pretty old story.
First, there is ample documentation that Trooper W is a rogue. He did taser his 12 year old step-son. He did get caught driving erratically with an open can of beer in his patrol car. He did threaten to kill Palin’s father if he arranged a lawyer for his daughter (I don’t know if he was serious, but these days who would ignore something like that?).
The removal of the (sic) Director of Public Safety seems related to Trooper W in the imagination of the Governor’s enemies. Trooper W was saved by the police union–for the time being. The firing took place after that was resolved. The Director serves at the pleasure of the Governor, so this firing is a bit of a manufactured tempest–like the Federal Prosecutors. What are “Investigators” going to say? She gave her reasons, and they are all she needs to do. BTW she offered the guy another position, which he refused.
Palin has been unconcerned about this episode. I am too. She only now hired a lawyer; probably because she is not going to be on the scene in the future.
You don’t take on corruption without making powerful enemies. I suggest that you and your readers go to http://www.AmericanThinker.com and read the posting by “CynicalAlaskan” today. As he points out, a few Alaskan Legislators have been among those indicted since the Gov took office. She has been breaking eggs and cooking omlets. The egg population is trying to hit back. Big deal.
God Bless Sarah Palin.
I think the story on Edwards was sleazy.
He did not hold elected office. He was not running for anything. They should have left it alone.
And maybe we can return to the minimal level of civility where the spouse and children of the candidates are off limits– this even includes discussing this stupid, stupid meme that teaching abstinance results in pregnancy. The explosive growth in teen pregnancy since we began sex education classes (before abstinance programs) proves what– that kids have sex and get pregnant? We can trace that back a few thousand years.
The correlation doesn’t reside with pregnancy and sex education or lack of it.
Once again we’re using anecdote to argue policy.
If Edwards was off-limits until the National Enquirer forced their hand, how do you explain the three front page articles on Bristol Palin on yesterday’s NYT? Deanna
Did the Enquirer know about Edwards when he was still in the running for President, Deanna?
In the past, President’s personal lives were off limits. But not any more.
I’m not sure when it changed, but it’s gotten old.
He did taser his 12 year old step-son- Old Flyter
I read that he tasered his son, after his son asked to be tasered.
That would make him a clueless knucklehead, perhaps, but decidely less evil than someone who seeks out to maliciously taser a child.
There are other allegations of abuse of power, as well. And questions upon questions that are just being raised.
From day one, she lied about the bridge to nowhere, which makes no sense. Why not just stay mum when something can be so easily researched?
And then there’s Ted Stevens.
For me, the bigger issues remain her lack of interest in foreign policy, along with the glaring realization that she was picked to placate the Religious Right. I also think, that despite what the McCain camp says, she wasn’t properly vetted.
But I sincerely doubt the National Enquirer even cares about any of that. They want dirt. And a hungry populace awaits.
Hi Ozzie –
I do not know when the Enquirer got wind of the rumor. From what I have read, rumors about the affair existed all the way back to 2006. John Edwards ended his candidacy in January of this year, I believe.
Part of me would love to go back to a time when people’s private lives were off limits but sadly, those days are gone.
And yet, another part of me is troubled when I see politicians (on either side) profess to be X when, indeed, they are clearly Y. John Edwards was the golden boy – the media loved to portray him and his wife, Elizabeth, in absolutely glowing terms. I distinctly recall there being much admiration in the public for how they appeared to be handling Elizabeth’s cancer recurrence. The Edwards allowed very private photos of their marriage recommitment ceremony to be published. Their marriage was painted as ideal.
But it wasn’t. And Ozzie, that is completely OK! I have always thought that the marriages of our public figures are about as perfect as . . .well. . . the marriages of us regular folks. That’s not a pretty picture!
But John Edwards was a public figure. And he chose to lie about his affair. Many of his former supporters are convinced that he is still lying. I could almost be ok with that – it’s distasteful, but it isn’t like he pulled a Clinton, what with the lying under oath and all.
Except for the problem with the media – the media knew he was lying and nothing was said. Nothing was published. And they defended their unwillingness to go after the story because this adult man, who had chosen to run for president, was now not a presidential candidate. OK. That’s fine.
Except that now, these exact same people are engaging in a feeding frenzy over a 17 year old girl who has never been a public figure.
It’s odd.
Deana
>>I do think Obama would tend to be soft on terror, NOT because of his admitted relationship with Ayers but because of Obama’s belief system>>
For me, the problem is that Obama’s belief system is _why_ he has the relationship with people such as Ayers.
Believing that Socialism isn’t a moral failing, but I find it politically unacceptable for the country I live in. Europeans seem to be happy with it, and that’s fine. But I’ll vote against it – and those who advocate it – till I die.
What bothers me especially about Obama is that he denies his socialistic bent. Now maybe he just isn’t aware that what he favors is socialism, but he’s an intelligent man, so I doubt that. I think he’s clearly aware of the nature of what he proposes, is aware that in plain speaking most US citizens would reject it, and therefore proposes it in carefully couched explanations. “A spoon full of sugar makes the medicine go down…!”
suek,
i think obama favors socialism in the same way that YOU do. you want want your highways paved, your water clean, your food free from harmful chemicals. that sort of thing.
america already employs some of the tenents of socialism, whether you know it or not. and nothing i have heard or read from obama would lead me to believe that he prefers a completely socialist system, not that this would even be realistic in a country out size; which of course obama knows. whether or not you know that is another story.
peace
And yet, another part of me is troubled when I see politicians (on either side) profess to be X when, indeed, they are clearly Y. -Deanna
Sadly, I believe that’s the norm.
“Except for the problem with the media – the media knew he was lying and nothing was said. Nothing was published.”
Do you know that for sure? And did the media know something when Edwards was running for President?
If the story had broken when Edwards was still in the runinng, don’t you think TV stations woud have been all over it? Remebering the endless loop concerning Monicagate, I certainly do.
(BIG TIME RATINGS= BIG TIME PROFITS)
Oddly enough, I just read that the Enquirer had learned about Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy and was going to break the news, which is why the MCCain camp released it right away . (Palin reportedly wanted her daughter to get married first, and break the pregnancy news afterwards)
Andrew Sullivan provided the link, reminding us that once again, the National Enquirer is driving the news :
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sarah_palin_at_war_with_her_daughter_over_pregnancy_wedding/celebrity/65370
I knew this had also been debunked but didn’t have a link till now.
I just saw this in Strata-Sphere http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5869
The Palin campaign has released an affidavit that, in the very first line, debunks that claim:
“For the record, no one ever said fire Wooten [Palin brother-in-law]. Not the Governor. Not Todd [Palin's husband]. Not anyone of the staff …”
– Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan, Anchorage Daily News, August 30, 2008
Good Lord Ozzie! You suggest that it is somehow mitigating that a kid of 12 (or 11 as sometimes reported) asked to be tasered? Do you think the kid had any idea of what he was asking for? Did the Trooper/step-father know the danger? I guess you know, for starters, that tasering has killed.
But, you open a very large can of worms. Just what else would it be acceptable for a grown man to do because his son/daughter asked for it–or allegedly did?
If it were your kid how would you react to this?
I won’t repeat here the other abuses by this OFFICER OF THE LAW.
Good Lord Ozzie! You suggest that it is somehow mitigating that a kid of 12 (or 11 as sometimes reported) asked to be tasered? – Old Flyer
That’s what I read, Old Flyer.
I dont know if it’s true or not, but I can see a 11 or 12 boy, asking “what does that feel like?”
A sane, empathetic adult woud never comply. But if this is the case, it’s not as evil as chasing a kid down to maliciously taser him.
“If it were your kid how would you react to this? I won’t repeat here the other abuses by this OFFICER OF THE LAW.” — Old Flyer
If it were my kid, I’d file a complaint.
I could be wrong, but from my understanding, he did this to his own son, after his son asked him to.
You got me curious Old Flyer and it looks as if it was his stepson, but that the stepson asked to be taserd.
From the Anchorage Daily News:
TASING THE STEPSON
One day — maybe a year or two before the investigation — Wooten showed his stepson his Taser. He had just been to Taser instructor school. Wooten told Sgt. Wall that the boy was fascinated and pleaded to be tased.
“So we went in our living room and I had him get down on his knees so he wouldn’t fall. And I taped the probes to him and turned the Taser on for like a second, turned it off. He thought that was the greatest thing in the world, wanted to do it again,” Wooten told the investigator. The boy flinched but nothing more, he said. The boy was about 11 at the time.
In his interview with troopers, the stepson said it hurt for about a second, according to Wall’s report. The boy said he wanted to be tased to show his cousin, Palin’s daughter Bristol, that he wasn’t a mama’s boy. The probe left a welt on his arm, he said. His mother was upstairs yelling at them not to do it, the boy said.
As Bristol remembered it, the jolt knocked the boy backward, the trooper report says. She said she was afraid.
http://www.adn.com/politics/story/476430.html
But if it’s true that Palin never pressured for him to be fired, does this matter anyway?
Hi Ozzie –
There were reports that Edwards was the father of Hunter’s child back in 2007 when he was a presidential candidate. Major players in the mainstream media admit that they did not follow up on the story, even when there was evidence.
See, for example:
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003838076
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/11/politics/washingtonpost/main4338457.shtml
and especially
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/opinion/10pubed.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
What is most telling is the statement made by Richard Stevenson, the man who directs the New York Times’ campaign coverage. He said, and I quote, “Edwards isn’t a player at the moment . . . There are a lot of big issues facing the country. The two candidates are compelling figures, and we have finite resources.” He said he agreed that Edwards was “fair game for journalism of this sort, but this hasn’t seemed to me to be a high priority for us at this moment.”
So there it is, Ozzie. They admit that they did not pursue the Edwards story and gave their excuses for it. And yet, somehow, their priorities have changed in less than a month and they have managed to find a way to direct those “finite resources” to investigating a 17 year old private figure.
Deana
He said, and I quote, “Edwards isn’t a player at the moment . . . There are a lot of big issues facing the country. The two candidates are compelling figures, and we have finite resources.” He said he agreed that Edwards was “fair game for journalism of this sort, but this hasn’t seemed to me to be a high priority for us at this moment.. . . Quote from Richard Stevens, of New York Times
“They admit that they did not pursue the Edwards story and gave their excuses for it. And yet, somehow, their priorities have changed in less than a month and they have managed to find a way to direct those “finite resources” to investigating a 17 year old private figure. – Deanna
Who do you mean by “they”? The entire media or the New York Times?
The New York Times has been in the propaganda business for decades, often peddling, as they did with the Bush’s administration’s drive for war, out and out fabrications.
But I dont see them droning on and on about this issue.
I’m not a subscriber, though, so maybe I’m missing something?
Deana, I’ve been saying to leave Edwards AND Palin’s kid alone, but I’m a minority of one. One question: why do you think that even Fox News didn’t tail Edwards at 3am into a hotel room? I think you need a shower… Also, you can disagree with Obama’s foreign policy, but you should tell me why we should start WWIII over the conflict in South Ossetia, which is what we would have had if the Bush Administration had had its way and brought Georgia into NATO. The ideological arguments sound nice, but they get us into trouble more often than not. Even right-winger Pat Buchanan has argued this.
Devx, the MSM also sat on the Abu Graib story, until the New Yorker broke it. You’ve gotta look at the whole picture, lest you confuse the elephant for a snake… Obama is a junior Senator and is apt, like all of them, to tow the party line. Take a look at McCain’s early voting record for a similar view.
dg –
Fox News isn’t scouring the gutter to find every single shred of dirt on a 17 year old.
Deana
here’s gov. palin’s address to the aip earlier this year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI
she was against america before she was before it it seems. alaska first is not a motto i want to be hearing from my next vice president yet it seems to sum up gov. palin’s worldview quite aptly.
peace
she was against america before she was before it it seems- dagon
The AIP stuff is bizarre. AIP says she was a member until 1994, but the McCain campaign denies it. Then it’s discovered that her husband was a member, etc.
Yet oddly enough, the same people who think that linking Obama to Ayers is right and good and honorable believe it’s despicable to bring this up.
It now emerges that two weeks ago, Gov Palin attended a sermon where a preacher was saying some very inflamatory things against Jews.
And once again, the same people who were all over Obama’s ties to Rev. Wright are suddenly silent.
Double standards abound.
but Obama is guilty until proven innocent
He was innocent until proven guilty. Which is why he is guilty.
Dagon’s been given a gift, considering how he likes to attack a woman like Book.
hey y, wondered where you’ve been.
and gender’s got nothing to do with it. i attack book because she distorts, misleads and obfuscates to make her points. i find her intellectual dishonesty repulsive particular because she seems to be such an intelligent person.
peace
i find her intellectual dishonesty repulsive particular because she seems to be such an intelligent person.
Since Palin has even more virtues than our Book, here, what will happen is obvious.
Dagon, apparently Palin was also for earmarks before she was against them. And while she received lots of applause for cancelling the bridge to nowhere and selling the jet on eBay, she also kept that money from Washington, D.C. I guess “Country First” means Alaska first in her mind. Finally, it’s not hard to show fiscal discipline in a state flush with oil money that actually enjoys negative taxes. I think California would be more supportive of off-shore drilling if it could keep the proceeds the way Alaska does.