Started by ., Apr 15, 2010, 01:43 AM
23. If they're women -- and a lot of them are -- they all have that same look. Like they go to New Year's Eve parties looking exactly the same as when they're spending a day housecleaning. No one's ever gotten ticked for leaving late because they took too long in front of a mirror.
I know he's been divorced five times. I know he's had state troopers drive him drunk home when if *I* had done it, i'd have done jail time. I know a whole lot about him, because there is a report on him, issued by the Disciplinary board. From it, I conclude that he's a pathetic excuse for a man and a pathetic excuse for an officer of the law. Drinking, violence, abuse of power, cover ups, threats - I believe Palin because there is a whole host of complaints and reprimands outside of that incident that demonstrate that such bad behavior is consistent with his proven bad character.The incident where he flashed his badge to a tavern owner to bully him into ejecting someone Wooten didn't like demonstrates sufficiently for me that he'd be at home in a Waffen SS uniform.
Quote from: John Dias on Apr 18, 2010, 08:12 PMBy the way, anyone who wants to get information about this case should read the Memorandum of Findings issued by Col. Julia Grimes, a Director of the Alaska State Troopers, here:http://www.misandryreview.com/pdf/20080717_062016_641.pdfMmm. Yet the finding by the independent and non-partisan review on Sarah Palin, which didn't have a litany of "sustained" in it, is somehow worthless.
By the way, anyone who wants to get information about this case should read the Memorandum of Findings issued by Col. Julia Grimes, a Director of the Alaska State Troopers, here:http://www.misandryreview.com/pdf/20080717_062016_641.pdf
...the fact is the left hates [Palin] and the left is where I see most of my troubles coming from right now.
The left treats me as the evil white man who can be jerked off
Quote from: Mr. X on Apr 19, 2010, 11:25 AM...the fact is the left hates [Palin] and the left is where I see most of my troubles coming from right now.That's funny, because I thought that most of my troubles were coming from the government. If we just got Palin into office, do you think the government would suddenly transform itself into a paragon of peace, justice and freedom?
Thank you for that giant concession, Gonz. Since you place so much faith in the Memorandum of Findings, I assume that you now embrace the premise that on the various charges that were deemed unsubstantiated, they must therefore be considered meritless. I myself place no such weight on that document, and I value it only as a source of context, because it seemed to attempt to convey the perspective of both sides (not just Molly's side).
Also, why is it that ideological loyalty to Your Girl trumps your respect for the concept of innocent until proven guilty? Wooten was never criminally charged, and yet you're ready and willing to pronounce him guilty merely because he has been accused (or merely because a show of objective neutrality on Wooten's innocence reflects poorly on Sarah Palin's presidential prospects, since she supported some of the claims against him even though she wasn't a firsthand eyewitness). In the memorandum, Wooten outright denied most of the charges against him; why then does that carry less weight with you than the accusations do? Wasn't your life ruined at one point because of bogus allegations?
It seems to me that your political loyalty is driving your responses here. What drives my responses is respect for the concept of innocent until PROVEN guilty (i.e. by jury trial). Also, on the idea that Wooten is guilty because he had previous marriages, how does this constitute proof of his guilt?
John,Mr Wooten has been proven guilty. This is a case of administrative law. In any civil service sector job this is what they do when preparing a case for termination.
I sense that a lot of this is some animosity you have with Mrs Palin wimply because she is a woman.
First, it's not Johnny, it's Mike.Second, multiple marriages can indicate various things, not necessarily a pattern of "questionable behavior" (I infer that you mean abusive behavior). One constant is Mike himself -- that is true -- but the problem with those marriages going south may also have been in the type of women to whom he is attracted.
Unless you were there you don't know what kind of dynamic existed between them.
I'll say this, however. For Mike Wooten's ex wife, Molly, to fuss in her petition to a family court about how Mike complained about a $5.00 fee says a lot more about her than it does about him.
And like I said earlier, in collusion with Molly, Sarah and Todd Palin have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at Mike in an attempt to demonize and vilify him, supporting Molly's unproven charges reflexively. "Always believe the victim," says the feminist mantra (and, apparently, also Sarah Palin).
Third, I find the memorandum relevant to establishing context, but only a guilty verdict by jury relevant to establishing criminal guilt. You, however, have made up your mind about culpability, absent a jury verdict. As far as the criteria by which political candidates are evaluated (and Sarah Palin almost certainly will be a presidential candidate; I'd bet money on it), I think that your tolerance for imperfection should plummet in comparison to that which you have shown to Wooten.
Barack Hussein Soweto didn't have 31 journalists fly to Chicago to dig up dirt for a smear job vet him.
Blood is thicker than water says the HUMAN mantra, and I expect it. I expect sisters to take sister's sides, brother's to take sister's sides, sisters to take brother's sides, brother's to take brother's sides, and family to side with family except where the behavior is so infamous and scandalous that decency forfends. That isn't feminist or masculist or anything. It's blood.
[...] NONE vetted the two books WRITTEN BY THE PRESIDENT. If anybody should be vetted its THE PRESIDENT not some minor league player.