No, they're just worried that Palin has stolen their thunder (if you can call it thunder), especially since they have nothing to counter with except an empty suit and a bad hair transplant.:lol:

 

At this point, I'm not sure it's the Democrats who should be worried.

 

LINK

If McCain had picked someone who was qualified and who wasn't desperately fighting an ethics investigation after just 1 1/2 years in office, maybe people would be more interested in what he has to say.

 

Frankly, his pick of Palin speaks more about McCain than it does about Palin! :lol:

 

Or your numerous attack threads on Palin speak more about you than it does about Palin. :eek:

So we can't have a substantial discussion about why she and her husband (who is not a government official) can ignore subpeonas? Everyone that is defending them would be okay if Barack and Michelle Obama ignored subpeonas? :scared:

So we can't have a substantial discussion about why she and her husband (who is not a government official) can ignore subpeonas? Everyone that is defending them would be okay if Barack and Michelle Obama ignored subpeonas? :scared:

Palin has not ignored the subpoenas - her attorney has challenged their legality and also charged that the investigation is politically motivated. The Palins and her staff are following Alaskan law and the advice of Alaska's Attorney General and the Alaskan Senate Judiciary Committee has no legal authority to enforce the subpoenas that it issued.

 

The public statements by Democratic Sen. Hollis French, an Obama supporter, and his participation in the "independent" investigation demonstrate that this process has been turned into a partisan witch hunt. Obama is finding that Chicago machine politics are not as effective as they were in his previous campaigns.

Or your numerous attack threads on Palin speak more about you than it does about Palin. :eek:

 

Only two. In ten minutes.

 

Obsession: Compulsive preoccupation with a fixed idea or an unwanted feeling or emotion, often accompanied by symptoms of anxiety.

 

A compulsive, often unreasonable idea or emotion.

 

Hmmmmm?

So we can't have a substantial discussion about why she and her husband (who is not a government official) can ignore subpeonas? Everyone that is defending them would be okay if Barack and Michelle Obama ignored subpeonas? :scared:

 

This forum has in a word become disgusting over the several months. Not that they care, but I have lost a lot of respect for quite a few people (on both sides) because of posts and threads. I just hope that this forum is not a true reflection of American society (although I'm afraid it is). All the talk by a lot of posters about how partisan our country has become and how it is hurting our country; all the talk about voters not paying attention to the true issues facing the country; all the talk about families issues should not be brought into the campaign, all the stuff posters said on here before the campaigns began has turned out to be nothing but hot air for a lot of posters.

 

I'm not saying that a discussion about Palin "ignoring" the subpeonas should be off limits. I can understand that if a person rationally concluded that the ignoring of a subpeona was tantamount to wanting to hide something or obstructing justice, such would be an important consideration in determining for whom the poster was going to vote. But its the way its discussed and the lack of willingness to listen to all the information and evidence before those conclusions are made that disappoints me.

 

This forum reminds me of the critical posts made about the KHSAA. I'd venture a guess that there isn't more than 15 members of BGP that have any real knowledge about the KHSAA. But that doesn't stop a lot of the other posters from making all kinds of accusations and baseless conclusions about the KHSAA and its decisions without knowing the facts. Sad.

Edited September 19, 200818 yr by leatherneck

Ignore subpeonas or lie under oath...

 

Once again the Republican's are being proactive and the Dems reactive...:lol:

And Sticky, God love him, just proved my point. :madman: Contrary to what he is insinuating, there are valid reasons for refusing to honor a subpeona other than to avoid lieing under oath.

Edited September 19, 200818 yr by leatherneck

HEY! I see an opportunity for a joke and I take it! At any rate, glad I could help...

You refuse to comply with a subpoena if you believe that it was issued without jurisdiction.

 

To comply with it waives your jurisdiction argument.

 

Jurisdictional issues are not something you just waive off, because it might very well set precedent.

 

This is a jurisdictional battle between executive and legislative branches that will be resolved by the judicial branch.

 

Which is the way it is supposed to work.

 

Palin is following the advice of counsel.

 

You all would do the same.

 

The comments in this thread presuming that one who remains silent must be hiding something or be guilty is very disturbing. Also disgusting.

 

However, in my practice, I have found that what goes around comes around and that many of you will be on the wrong side of a subpoena (or worse, a police interrogation) at some point in your lives, and that "I've got nothing to hide" mantra will seem very shallow and even less consoling.

 

LN, I agree with you, except I would say the country is becoming disgusting and sad, not just this forum. This is my first post in here in a week or so, and I was a "ten-post-a-day" man just a short time ago.

Or your numerous attack threads on Palin speak more about you than it does about Palin. :eek:

 

Are you kidding me? We've seen threads attacking Obama for such substantive things as when a text message was sent, his voting record on riverboat casinos, a group of his supporters in Nigeria, all manner of guilt by association claims, the two-handed Obama salute, Obama's 'celebrity' status, Obama's 'vain' speech in Berlin, his "lipstick" remark and countless others.

 

 

I have started two threads which include the word 'Palin': this one about Palin stiff-arming an ethics investigation and another noting Chuck Hagel's opinion of Palin's qualifications. I guess I shouldn't question the person who may very well inherit the nuclear launch codes over such petty things as an abuse of power investigation or qualifications. :lol: