Update: McCain Selects Gov. Sarah Palin as Running Mate

But SGG, emails exist from the governor's team advising Palin employees to use personal emails so as to avoid the potential for subpoena. This was always about subverting the rule of law and clouding transparency. You don't think this is behavior unbecoming of an elected executive? After the secrecy of the last 8 years you don't think this is kind of a big deal?

That is very different. If Palin directed her employees to use personal e-mails to cover up some impropriety, that is a serious problem. I didn't read the entire thread; I only came across e-mails saying she used her personal email account in corresponding about government business. I didn't hear anything in the press about the story either.

I think I am a "Law and Order" kind of guy, but I think this story is a non-story. If Obama used his government computer to send a personal e-mail, I wouldn't scream "misappropriation of government resources!" In other words.....there's nothing to see here folks, move along.

Why is it that we've reached the point where people jump at the tiniest opening to attack their opponent. "He lied about a BJ!" "She used her yahoo account instead of her alaska.gov account to send an e-mail!" "He said lipstick!" I call BS on all of that phony BS outrage.


This isn't about using goverment computers for conducting personal business, it's conducting goverment business via non-goverment communication line which is a problem whether it's Obama, Palin, McCain, or Biden.

That is very different. If Palin directed her employees to use personal e-mails to cover up some impropriety, that is a serious problem. I didn't read the entire thread; I only came across e-mails saying she used her personal email account in corresponding about government business. I didn't hear anything in the press about the story either.


I guess we agree then.

That is very different. If Palin directed her employees to use personal e-mails to cover up some impropriety, that is a serious problem. I didn't read the entire thread; I only came across e-mails saying she used her personal email account in corresponding about government business. I didn't hear anything in the press about the story either.

Per the recent Times expose:

While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a “personal device” like a BlackBerry “would be confidential and not subject to subpoena.”

Ms. Palin and aides use their private e-mail addresses for state business. A campaign spokesman said the governor copied e-mail messages to her state account “when there was significant state business.”

On Feb. 7, Frank Bailey, a high-level aide, wrote to Ms. Palin’s state e-mail address to discuss appointments. Another aide fired back: “Frank, this is not the governor’s personal account.”

Mr. Bailey responded: “Whoops~!”

Mr. Bailey, a former midlevel manager at Alaska Airlines who worked on Ms. Palin’s campaign, has been placed on paid leave; he has emerged as a central figure in the trooper investigation.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=4&_r=2&adxnnlx=1221588185-c0NhbTON3/fDJJQww%20P%20bQ

Per the recent Times expose:

While Ms. Palin took office promising a more open government, her administration has battled to keep information secret. Her inner circle discussed the benefit of using private e-mail addresses. An assistant told her it appeared that such e-mail messages sent to a private address on a “personal device” like a BlackBerry “would be confidential and not subject to subpoena.”

Ms. Palin and aides use their private e-mail addresses for state business. A campaign spokesman said the governor copied e-mail messages to her state account “when there was significant state business.”

On Feb. 7, Frank Bailey, a high-level aide, wrote to Ms. Palin’s state e-mail address to discuss appointments. Another aide fired back: “Frank, this is not the governor’s personal account.”

Mr. Bailey responded: “Whoops~!”

Mr. Bailey, a former midlevel manager at Alaska Airlines who worked on Ms. Palin’s campaign, has been placed on paid leave; he has emerged as a central figure in the trooper investigation.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=4&_r=2&adxnnlx=1221588185-c0NhbTON3/fDJJQww%20P%20bQ
Do you have an unbias source for this story as the times leans so far left that it often falls over.

Perhaps you should take the responsibility of sending Uncle Sam his money more seriously? Next time he just might send IRS agents to break your legs.
Heck for what they charged me for the two late days a broken leg would have been cheaper.

Heck for what they charged me for the two late days a broken leg would have been cheaper.

Let me explain something to you. When people criticize the Times for being biased, as they often do, what they mean is this: that the times fails to hold the same critical lens up to liberal politicians that it does to conservatives. While I have questioned this in the past I won't dispute that this is probably the case this election. There have been more critical stories about McCain recently than Obama. However, what critics don't say is that the Times makes things up, that they cook stories, meaning that you can't just say a times article is biased and ignore it (Jason Blaire notwithstanding, although that was certainly not a political issue).

The Wall St. Journal is the same on the right. While the editorial page leans right and the articles reflect a certain framework, a thinking person would never dismiss a WSJ article outright just because they favor conservative governance. Not without pointing out specifically what was factually inaccurate in the text. To do so would be stupid, sloppy reasoning. For the record, liberal as I am, I love the WSJ.

Anyway, is there a specific point of contention you have or do you just not read whatever papers Rush tells you not to read? Explain your position vis-a-vis the article and the use of private emails to conduct government business. How is bias clouding the conclusions of the author?

Also, here's a post article talking about the same issue - specifically the governor's failure to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request for emails related to government business. washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703304.html)

EDIT: I obviously meant to quote your previous response.

Fish love oil?

fU7MSaN6zUU

Can this guy get more insulting?

Let me explain something to you. When people criticize the Times for being biased, as they often do, what they mean is this: that the times fails to hold the same critical lens up to liberal politicians that it does to conservatives. While I have questioned this in the past I won't dispute that this is probably the case this election. There have been more critical stories about McCain recently than Obama. However, what critics don't say is that the Times makes things up, that they cook stories, meaning that you can't just say a times article is biased and ignore it (Jason Blaire notwithstanding, although that was certainly not a political issue).

The Wall St. Journal is the same on the right. While the editorial page leans right and the articles reflect a certain framework, a thinking person would never dismiss a WSJ article outright just because they favor conservative governance. Not without pointing out specifically what was factually inaccurate in the text. To do so would be stupid, sloppy reasoning. For the record, liberal as I am, I love the WSJ.

Anyway, is there a specific point of contention you have or do you just not read whatever papers Rush tells you not to read? Explain your position vis-a-vis the article and the use of private emails to conduct government business. How is bias clouding the conclusions of the author?

Also, here's a post article talking about the same issue - specifically the governor's failure to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request for emails related to government business. washingtonpost.com (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703304.html)

EDIT: I obviously meant to quote your previous response.
I read your link and that seemed like a fair report of the issue and did not draw conclusions on things they do not know as fact as the Times seemed to do. I don't get my news from Rush and I don't really ever listen to him. In the past month I would bet I have not listened to more than a 1/2 hour of his show. I do watch Fox News, but watch one of the three nightly news either NBC, CBS, ABC at 6:30 and I will also watch some CNN & MSNBC. I listen to some right wring radio but also listen to PBS. I enjoy hearing both side of an issue and find it interesting how different a story will run from one station to the next.

Fish love oil?

fU7MSaN6zUU

Can this guy get more insulting?
Thats a pretty dumb video you just showed. Whats the link between the inland oil pump and the one in the ocean? Nothing. I did notice they showed the on in the ocean leaning over but they did not show any oil leaking out but thats what they want you to think. What McCain said about fish gatherine around these oil rigs is 100% correct and they are great fishing grounds.