Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
A Post-Racial President? by Thomas Sowell
What does a community organizer do? What he does not do is organize a community. What he organizes are the resentments and paranoia within a community, directing those feelings against other communities, from whom either benefits or revenge are to be gotten, using whatever rhetoric or tactics will accomplish that purpose... See this link to read the rest of the article...Thomas Sowell : A Post-Racial President? --Townhall.com
Shared via AddThis
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Obamacare
- Freedom to choose what's in your plan.
- Freedom to be rewarded for healthy living, or pay your real costs.
- Freedom to choose high deductible coverage.
- Freedom to keep your existing plan.
- Freedom to choose your doctors.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Rush Limbaugh Interview With Greta Van Sustern on Fox News
Part Three:
Friday, July 24, 2009
Another Ethics Complaint Dismissed
The Personnel Board has announced that another ethics complaint against Governor Sarah Palin has been dismissed.
The complaint, the sixth filed by Anchorage resident Andree McLeod, accused the governor of violating the Ethics Act by receiving her salary while campaigning for vice president. The accusation, lodged Monday, was dismissed as legally flawed and factually devoid of merit.
Governor Palin remained on duty, conducted state business, and communicated with her staff and her constituents. “Andree McLeod has failed to prevail on any of the ethics complaints she has filed against the governor,” said Mike Nizich, Palin’s chief of staff. “It appears her agenda is clear – she’s abusing the ethics laws to harass public officials.”
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Trustee Kristan Cole Gives This Statement In Press Conference Today:
Press Release
Kristan Cole, Trustee
The Alaska Fund Trust
July 22, 2009
Thank you for being here today. My name is Kristan Cole, Trustee to the Alaska Fund Trust. And this is the Trust's attorney in Alaska, Jon Givens.
I am here to address the unusual letter that was leaked yesterday, the contents of which are unprecedented in the history of our country, suggesting that a legal defense fund could somehow be unethical. This is particularly notable, and concerning, in light of the fact that the Trust, on my instructions, has not paid even one penny to Gov. Palin or her lawyers. I issued that instruction because I was aware the Board was reviewing this matter.
This Trust was created by a team of expert lawyers from around the country. It was thoroughly vetted for compliance with federal and state law and trust law. So far Mr. Daniel is the only lawyer in the country who has questioned a legal defense fund despite the fact that his firm has set up legal defense funds for other office holders. Because his initial review was unprecedented and contained factual errors it was my understanding that Gov. Palin's legal team, including Mr. Van Flein, were in on-going discussions with Mr. Daniel. The matter was not final.
I want to be clear on a point that has been misrepresented: The Governor is not and was not involved with the Trust. The Governor has never worked on or with the Trust. The Governor has not even accepted or requested one penny from the Trust or quite frankly anything of me. And I have never expected anything from her. Really it’s quite the contrary; as I, and many other caring folks across the country have only sought to help with this legal burden.
The first and only time I have spoken with the Governor about the Trust was yesterday to alert her that I was responding to this violation of the law and leak of preliminary and confidential materials from the complainant.
There is a loophole in Alaska law. Alaskans can file frivolous complaints against the Governor - violate the law and alert the media they are doing so, all the complaints can be dismissed and yet the Governor has to personally pay for representation. Legislators covered themselves with a law that warrants automatic dismissal of a complaint if it is leaked to the public.
It has been quite obvious to me, and to other every day citizens like me, that over the last several months that something needed to be done to help the Palins with the overwhelming crush of frivolous ethics complaints.
In their own humble way, the Palins never asked for help. The Governor never even asked anyone to contribute to this legal expense fund. This trust, and the thousands and thousands of dollars raised, were the results of hard working Americans and their outpouring of support. It is disgraceful that anyone would assume that the thousands of people who sent in $5, $10 or $50 intended to "influence" the governor's official actions in Alaska! And this in a state where a half dozen legislators have been convicted of corruption as well as the previous governor's chief of staff. Not one ethics complaint was filed against these individuals who were convicted, but this governor is harassed for having her picture taken with a fish, wearing a jacket, answering press questions and giving a speech.
A few select people have abused our ethics act. The public release of a preliminary document in violation of state law follows that pattern. The people of this state are losing hope that the ethics act has any real purpose anymore and that’s incredibly sad as ethics are so important. Mr. Daniel's preliminary assessment, unprecedented in history and harshly criticized by legal scholars, does nothing to restore credibility to this process.
Numerous individuals thought to help the Palins - not just me. But when I was asked, I was doing research of my own and determined that I would put my name on a Trust already going through an intense legal process throughout the country to ensure that this one was airtight and complied with every possible law under the sun. And this one does. It is one of the most restrictive and transparent trusts of its kind. The validity of the Trust is strong. It is unprecedented in every way imaginable... all donations must be under $150, no donations from lobbyists, and nothing accepted from foreign nationals to name a few. No trust has ever been found to be a violation of ethical standards for any governor, former president, senator, or house member, or former member of Congress. But this Trust which has more severe donation and donor limits than any trust in the history of legal defense trusts might violate ethical rules?
Some Trust funds are formed and accepted to defend politicians in true Courts of Law with regard to some very serious criminal charges. And yet, this Fund was created by others to help the Palins pay for their legal bills due to frivolous complaints - each of which has been dismissed thus far. I will let my attorney speak to the legal issues but I wanted to take this opportunity to speak to yesterday's blatant violation of the law.
You know, we have witnessed time and again the blatant abuse of process when it comes to people filing these complaints and illegally discussing them and leaking them to the press- but this latest move further crosses the line and we are all reviewing action for the reputational harm caused by Ms. Chatman based upon the leak of Tom Daniel's preliminary thinking on the matter - a product that may have ultimately been remarkably different and perhaps even dismissed. Where is the accountability for those who blatantly disregard the requirement to keep the issue confidential?
There are many questions which need to be asked following my read of what was leaked.
And, if I may digress - this is how backwards our laws are - I had to go online and read the preliminary letter about the Trust and me because Mr. Daniel and Mr. Van Flein cannot violate the confidentiality of the Ethics Act (even though it appears the complainant has)and therefore cannot even forward the preliminary letter to me. Now that I have read it, I still hope to inform Mr. Daniel of the important information that Mr. Van Flein had requested from me to be shared with Mr. Daniel.
What was the reason for my involvement? The preliminary letter suggests that perhaps I served as Trustee so I could get some job with the state. This is amazingly wrong and so incredibly hurtful. That is the last thing I want. I did this because it believed it was the right thing to do for our Governor. I love Alaska. I have lived here 40 years and I have always served the state when asked - and despite the fact that I am entitled to public monies in the form of expenses, per diem and wages - I have declined every single penny. I have served as a volunteer on others boards, and commissions (The Real Estate Commission and the Agricultural Revolving Loan Fund Board) under a previous Governor so volunteer work has been part of my life for a long time. I was approached to serve as Trustee for the legal defense fund. I did not seek out this position just as I have never sought out any other position but was willing to step up to the plate and serve when asked because that’s what we all do when asked to serve our country, our state and our communities isn’t it? We do it because it’s the right thing to do and by all of us serving where we can, we all benefit. My sons and my husband have served our country. I have served our state and our community here in the Mat Su Valley with the hope that we are making a difference where we can.
So how unfair is it that the Governor can be told she was wrong for putting together the Fund, soliciting Funds, accepting the Funds and spending the Funds when she hasn't been involved at all----And no money has been spent on her legal defense?
If the Governor only accrued the bills because she is a public figure then why is it wrong for a Trust to collect funds to defend her as a public figure? Alaska law specifically states that there is only a problem if there is "intent" to influence the Governor. How can there be intent to influence a Governor in Alaska with a $5 voluntary donation from Kansas? To date, approximately 90% of the contributions are from Outside Alaska and many are $5, $10 and $20 donations. Not one penny has been paid to any law firm or entity for the Governor's financial gain. If the Governor has not solicited or accepted personal gain, how can she be in violation of soliciting and accepting monies for personal gain?
Let’s review what has been deemed lawful. Creation of the PAC and fundraising was deemed lawful. Writing a book was deemed lawful. All other legal defense funds similar, but not as restrictive as this one, have been deemed to be lawful. The very firm who put together Senator Kerry’s legal defense fund which was deemed lawful was put together by the very law firm that Mr. Daniel is employed by. These are inconsistent conclusions and defy common sense. That is why this matter was not final and Mr. Daniel and Mr. Van Flein were discussing these issues.
Potential future gain, based upon no active solicitations, in one of the most stringent legal expense funds in the country does not merit a situation much less a violation. Mr. Daniel says that because the Trust was an "official" Trust he felt it violated the law. This overlooks the necessity of having one "official" fund. The unofficial funds are the very ones that had the potential to harm the public by unscrupulous people.
We knew that in fairness to Alaskans and Americans, this site needed to be official because of the potential scams that could arise. How ethical would it be for a pensioner in Iowa or a single mother in New Hampshire to have their donation diverted by someone who had no intention of helping the Governor and may keep the money for themselves or other equally harmful things?
But let's think through the same logic, if a foreigner wanted to set up his or her own fund, collect a handsome payoff, and accept $5 million donations from rogue groups even, as long as that person did not tell the Governor, that would be okay? That is the conclusion that is being reached here in Mr. Daniel letter and flies in the face of good logic, common sense, and the good necessity of protecting the public.
Every aspect of the Alaska Fund Trust follows the law. Precedent allows for it. The Palins haven't been involved with it. It is unfortunate that some in the media were so quick to point the finger at the Governor for something others are responsible for and have established to assist her in the fight against these outrageous attacks. And this acceptance that the law can be continually violated for pure political gain ... is wrong.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Another Ethics Complaint Filed Against the Governor
Yep, you guessed it. Yet another. We're still awaiting word on what's going on with this report. More to come.
Another Ethics Complaint Filed Against the Governor
July 20, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska – Once again, an ethics complaint has been filed and publicly released in violation of state law. This is the sixth complaint filed by Ms. McLeod. In addition, she has filed a lawsuit against the Governor's office and multiple public records act requests. All of her prior complaints that have been ruled on have been dismissed. The Ethics Act serves important state interests in ensuring ethical state government and was intended to prevent the various forms of corrupt misconduct that had plagued the Legislature in prior years and which resulted in the prosecution of legislators and others. It is unfortunate that the law has been abused and trivialized in the current manner.
Today’s complaint, filed just six days before the Governor leaves office, alleges that Governor Palin violated the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act by failing to submit complete gift disclosure forms in a timely manner, and obtained “free” services. The apparent primary goal of this complaint has been achieved, namely, an effort to keep the complainant’s name in the paper. We anticipate another dismissal of this complaint as with the complainant’s other complaints. This is the fourth ethics complaint filed against the Governor since the announcement of her resignation on July 3. In every case, the complainers violated the confidentiality provision of the Ethics Act in making their complaints public knowledge.
THOMAS VAN FLEIN—Personal Attorney for Governor Palin
In response to the article I have listed above, the following is the response from the Palin camp: (07/21/09) "The resolution of the Trust Fund is not final. I have been working with the investigator regarding supplemental information. The matter is still pending. Whatever you have seen was released in violation of law. There has been no Board finding of an ethics violation and there is a detailed legal process to follow before there is a final resolution."-Thomas Van Flein, Private Attorney for Sarah Palin
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Gov's Chief of Staff Releases Statement
July 10, 2009 Fairbanks, Alaska – Governor Sarah Palin’s chief of staff, Mike Nizich, issued the following statement today on the occasion of the 19th ethics complaint being filed against the governor or a member of her staff:
“A week ago today, the governor told Alaskans that she was about to step down as governor in large part because of the campaign of harassment against this office, in which the Executive Branch Ethics Act has been repeatedly abused. Incredibly, since then two more ethics complaints have been filed against the governor, including one today.
“Typically, the first action by these complainants has been an illegal one – to announce the filing of the complaints to the news media, in clear violation of the mandatory confidentiality in the law. Unfortunately, unlike the legislative ethics act, there is no provision in the executive ethics act for a complaint to be automatically dismissed when it is publicized prematurely. Regardless of that, it is breathtakingly hypocritical for anyone to violate the ethics law in the very act of making an allegation against the governor."
“Although the governor would not have thought it possible, the latest complaint rises to a new level of absurdity in alleging that she has been paid for interviews that she has given to the news media. It is amazing to me that anyone could think that, let alone put their name behind it and once again seek to distract state officials and needlessly increase their work load. The state is losing the value of some of its expenditures when public servants are pulled away from important assignments to deal with far-fetched and mean-spirited allegations.”
Governor Palin issued the following statement:
“The only saving grace in this recent episode is that it proves beyond any doubt the significance of the problem Alaska faces in the ‘new normal’ of political discourse. I hope this will be a wake-up call – to legislators, to commentators and to citizens generally – that we need a much more civil and respectful dialogue that focuses on the best interests of the state, rather than the petty resentments of a few.”
Of the ethics complaints against the governor or her staff, 15 have been resolved without any finding of wrongdoing, and four are now pending.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Comments Regarding The Latest Frivolous Ethics Complaint
Another meritless complaint has been filed today, returning to the same theme the Personnel Board has already addressed and ruled upon. The Board already ruled that the Ethics Act was not violated when the Governor was on the campaign trail last Fall and accompanied by staff members. It further concluded that the State obtained more benefit from staff who volunteered services to the state than it cost.
Further, the complainant misapprehends the travel authorizations. In order to avoid a potential overlap and implication of the Ethics Act, the McCain/Palin Campaign paid for the Governor’s travel and per diem expenses during the campaign, as well as expenses for key aides that accompanied the Governor. Contrary to the complaint, it is not an Ethics violation to save the state money and to avoid overlap between campaign costs and state costs. Rather, this was the more ethical and better approach, using campaign money even when state business was being accomplished remotely. The Board has essentially ruled as much.
We have no reason to believe that this complaint will not be dismissed in the same manner this complainant’s other complaints have been dismissed. This complainant is known to the Administration as a disgruntled patronage job applicant. What is further obvious is that the ethics process continues to be misused for improper purposes, the law mandating confidentiality continues to be violated, and the state will continue to spend money reviewing these types of complaints, with no public good resulting.
Thomas Van Flein - Personal Attorney for Governor Sarah Palin
Friday, July 10, 2009
All Things Sarah **UPDATED**
Out of Alaska by Matthew Continetti
July 20, 2009 Advance Copy
In early July, while most Americans were preparing for a long weekend of cheesy parades, charred meats, and noisy fireworks, Sarah Palin made some plans of her own. The Alaska governor had been the object of endless media attention and assorted calumnies since she became John McCain's vice presidential nominee last August. Now she wanted to try something new. So, on July 3, in a speech delivered from her home on Lake Lucille in Wasilla, Palin told her constituents that not only would she not seek a second term, but she would also be transferring authority to Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell on July 26, abdicating her office with about 18 months left to go. The announcement, as one might expect, received global press coverage, dominated the weekend headlines, and gave stories about the late Michael Jackson a run for their money. Meantime, the political world went into sustained convulsions. Read the rest of the story at this link...
**In addition, Sarah wrote an op-ed piece for the Washington Post today (7/14/09): The Cap and Tax Dead End
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Sarah Featured In Runner's World **UPDATED**
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Ann Coulter On 'Forgetting Sarah Palin'
To see what local one political blogger is saying about Moms 4 Sarah Palin in his latest Sun Sentinel online article, see this link.Forgetting Sarah Palinby Ann CoulterSarah Palin has deeply disappointed her enemies. People who hate her guts feel she's really let them down by resigning.
She's like the ex-girlfriend they're SO over, never want to see again, have already forgotten about -- really, it's O-ver -- but they just can't stop talking about her.
Liberal: Ha, ha ... Sarah who? She's over, she's toast, a future Trivial Pursuit answer, nothing more.
Normal person: Whatever. How about the North Korean missiles?
Liberal: Can you believe she just resigned the governorship like that? What a quitter!
Normal person: Speaking of quitting, how's work?
Liberal: Did you hear she might get a TV show? There's no way Sarah Palin's getting a TV show! No way! I can't believe stupid Sarah Palin could get her own stupid TV show now. Well, I'm sure not gonna watch it -- that's for sure!
Normal person: Have you seen all the Michael Jackson coverage on TV?
Liberal: How does she think she can run for president in 2012 if she can't finish her term as governor of a Podunk state? She's finished.
Normal person: OK, then! You won't have to vote for her.
Liberal: I was never going to vote for her! But now I'm not going to vote for her twice. And I will never watch her TV show. I am so over her... Follow this link to read the rest of the article.