Sarah Palin Flunks Government 101 Again
For entry number 114 in my ongoing 2,000 part series of baseless and despicable attacks on Sarah Palin and her family, I draw your attention to the fallout from disgraced Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) receiving his get out of jail free card. The Anchorage Daily News fills in the blanks for us.
Gov. Sarah Palin and the head of the Alaska Republican Party said Thursday that Sen. Mark Begich should give his Senate seat up to a special election now that prosecutors have abandoned their case against Ted Stevens. “Alaskans deserve to have a fair election not tainted by some announcement that one of the candidates was convicted fairly of seven felonies, when in fact it wasn’t a fair conviction,” Palin said in a Thursday interview with the Daily News.
The governor said she does not want to “split hairs” on whether Begich should resign or not but agrees with the Republican Party’s call for a special election.
Let’s review. An election was held in the normal course of events. One of the candidates was under investigation and put on trial for corruption charges. He was found guilty on seven felony counts. Everyone with enough room temperature brain cells to read a newspaper knew that there was an appeal process to come and several outcomes were possible. The voters decided to go with the other guy.
And now that the losing candidate has been “cleared” of the charges, Palin finds this just cause to call for the winner to step down and hold a special election?
When do we look for elected officials to step down? Typically, it’s when the office holder has done something wrong. We might also look for a new election if evidence exists of massive voter fraud. Neither is the case here. Begich won the election and was seated. He has not, to my knowledge, been accused of any wrongdoing. Even if some of the voters may now have a sense of buyer’s remorse over their choice, the choice was still made. There will be another election according to the usual schedule and if they no longer wish to be represented by Senator Begich, they can make a new choice at that time.
Governor Palin has once again demonstrated a shocking lack of any grasp of how elections are handled and how government works. And this woman wants to be the President of the United States? Perhaps if the “fundamentals of the economy” really do turn out to be “strong” she will declare that McCain actually should have won the election so Obama should step down.
Alaskans are well rid of Stevens in any event and even some Republicans recognize that. As Allah Pundit at Hot Air notes,
Like the boss says, Stevens was a pork-guzzling corruptocrat even if his corruption didn’t rise to the level of a criminal offense. Aren’t we better off rid of him?
I’m somewhat tempted to apply for a job as Sarah Palin’s campaign manager and political coordinator. Were I to take that position, my first standing order would be to shoot anyone who comes withing ten yards of the Governor with a microphone. She can’t open her mouth without embarassing herself and her state.
UPDATE: Some of Palin’s always vocal supporters choose to chime in via the comments section, with some displaying the same level of legal acumen that the Governor herself shows.
By coming out in favor of a new election, the position of the state GOP, she shores up her support among Alaskan republicans, something she needs to do if she wants to run for reelection in 2010.
I believe in states rights. I believe it is the right of every state to recall a senator or representative if they so wish.
First, if Palin wants to shore anything up, she should probably impress them with her knowledge of the law. And I also believe that states have the right to recall elected officials if they wish. So do the people of Alaska, as shown in Title 15, Sec. 15.45 of the Alaskan legal code. First, you can contest an election if it meets certain grounds.
Sec. 15.20.540. Grounds for election contest.
A defeated candidate or 10 qualified voters may contest the nomination or election of any person or the approval or rejection of any question or proposition upon one or more of the following grounds: (1) malconduct, fraud, or corruption on the part of an election official sufficient to change the result of the election; (2) when the person certified as elected or nominated is not qualified as required by law; (3) any corrupt practice as defined by law sufficient to change the results of the election.
Or, you can demand a recall of an elected official, but again only if they meet certain criteria.
Sec. 15.45.510. Grounds for recall.
The grounds for recall are (1) lack of fitness, (2) incompetence, (3) neglect of duties, or (4) corruption.
Do any of those sound like they apply to the current situation with the Senator? No? Then anyone in high office who wants to “call for another election” is demonstrating that they either don’t understand the law or are sore losers who want a do-over until the kid from their dodge ball team wins. Either way, not a flattering image to portray to those who you want to vote for you.
UPDATE: For lots of blog reaction on this story GO HERE.
Share This
Related Posts
-
Candid Obama Says ‘Hand Wringing’ After Debate Will Ebb
Posted on Oct 10, 2012
-
Mexico’s Forgotten Frontier (La Jornada, Mexico)
Posted on Jul 10, 2012
-
For These Women, ‘Scourge of Rape, Rare Justice’
Posted on May 23, 2012
-
Obama: No Retreat, No Surrender
Posted on Jan 25, 2012
Actually, Stevens' corruption DID rise to the level of a criminal offense – he is just no longer a convicted embezzler. A murderer who gets his conviction thrown out for prosecutorial misconduct cannot be re-tried due to double jeopardy. However, that means neither he didn't commit the murder, nor was he acquitted of the offense. It just means he cannot be found guilty a second time.
There is a huge difference between culpability for actions, and being found legally responsible. One of my favorite legal sayings is, “That which is just is often not legal, and that which is legal is often not just.”
This moronic post is just putting your Palin Derangement Syndrome on display. That condition is treatable you know, meds and maybe shock treatments will do the trick.
If you bothered to do some actual thinking, or even research you would have found out a few things.
Stevens is extremely popular in Alaska, the ONLY reason he lost by a handful of votes BTW, is that most were under the impression that he was going to jail.
Stevens is extremely popular in the Alaskan Republican Party, a group that Palin has a lot of trouble with since she ousted a sitting Republican governor in 2006, and got other republicans jailed for corruption.
By coming out in favor of a new election, the position of the state GOP, she shores up her support among Alaskan republicans, something she needs to do if she wants to run for reelection in 2010. It also sticks her finger in the eye of the democratic party which has, since September, been conducting open warfare against her out of loyalty to 0bama.
gahanson, as an alaskan, before you label others as moronic, please give me your list of “republicans jailed for corruption” by Palin.
Actually, one of Palin's best moves is when she filed ethics charges against herself.
Luckily, each one of Palin's recent steps, appointing WAR who is being opposed by the Native Alaskan population; rejecting the stimulus monies for special needs children, education, & poverty causing protests; asking for a new election for senate seat prematurely before the judge has even ruled; and now trying to overrule senate democrats rejection of her fisherman Tim appointment….. all this happened just this week!….. is alienating a lot of Alaskans. We Alaskans are just shaking our heads & counting the days. You betcha!
Politics within a state are all essentially political. Duh.
I believe in states rights. I believe it is the right of every state to recall a senator or representative if they so wish. Right or wrong its none of my bidness.
Braindead: “I believe in states rights. I believe it is the right of every state to recall a senator or representative if they so wish. Right or wrong its none of my bidness.”
Uh….. The only reason as far as I can tell that Palin wants to “recall” Begich is a Democrat. Since you believe in these states' rights…. If Tedisco wins in NY, maybe Gov. Paterson in NY will issues orders to his Sec. of State declaring that Tedisco's votes not be certified and give the NY 20 seat to Democrat Murphy. After all it's states' rights and it doesn't matter how voters vote…. the Gov. can override. And, after all, the Murphy/Tedisco race was close…. Nothing personal, just politics.
Jazz is right… Elected officials should remain elected officials unless there is sufficient reason to oust them. A governor just can't call for a special election because that governor doesn't like the outcome of an election. While I don't know the rules and laws of Alaska I would imagine that if enough Alaskans were unhappy with Begish's performance then they can have a special election…. In other words Begich probably doesn't have to be a criminal or under investigation for doing anything wrong… just plain incompetent.
At any rate what Palin proposes is strictly political…. She doesn't like Begich because he's a Dem. That's not enough reason to call for a special election. If that happens then the Republicans and Democrats in other states who are sore losers can call for special elections….
Don't we have enough problems to deal with than having to now put up with whiney politicians who call for special elections (or take whatever other actions) to overturn legitimate elections just because they don't like the results.
But I suppose all of us anti-Palin fans should support Palin in this endeavor. I'd love to see her campaign for president and talk about reaching across the aisle to the other party with this hanging over her. Actions speak louder than words and Palin would not receive much support from the much needed independent voters with this on her record. So my advice to Palin if it makes her happy is: “Go for it!”
This is one of the reasons I don't like Palin (well two reasons). One, she is partisan and two, she only thinks short term. If she is interested in running for president (and she is- she has that SarahPAC formed to raise money and advise her on her presidential aspirations) she would not do stunts like this. But she's only a short term thinker. She can't formulate a long-term strategy and we don't need someone like that in the White House.
“While I don't know the rules and laws of Alaska I would imagine that if enough Alaskans were unhappy with Begish's performance then they can have a special election.“
let me help you out, Stockboy. I just updated the post with the applicable sections of Alaska's election laws. Palin might want to read them herself.
Somebody buy this lady a civics class.
Stevens is smarter then Palin is and won´´t be making any waves…everyone knows all Palin does is blather anyway. It´s either a lie, or a brownie point, whatever the situation calls for at the moment.
Saying she supports a special election is, OF COURSE, ridiculous, but look where it came from.
Maybe the dear lady should just show up for one of those speeches people keep mistakingly slating her for.
Jazz, thanks for the update!
Appears to this simple brainded folkster that in the future if the opposing party wants to win in a state where they aint got a freakin chance they just start slinging out accusations and make up a bunch of chit on the senator. Lie, cheat and steal and violate the constitution over and over and voilla you have a new seat to add to your fold. Then you say “ah gee were sorry and we will be dropping the charges now.”
This is nothing more then a perpetual “Journolisting of Sarah Palin” because the democrats and those who just for whatever reason dont like her seem to fear her the most because they realize how much a clueless politican with lots of charisma can accomplish.
They can become president.
Braindead, “Appears to this simple brainded folkster that in the future if the opposing party wants to win in a state where they aint got a freakin chance they just start slinging out accusations and make up a bunch of chit on the senator. Lie, cheat and steal and violate the constitution over and over and voilla you have a new seat to add to your fold. Then you say “ah gee were sorry and we will be dropping the charges now.”'
I'm not entirely sure what your point is here but it was George Bush's own FBI and IRS that investigated Stevens and Alaska which prosecuted him. Also McCain called for Stevens to step down. Also the Republicans announced they were throwing him out of the Senate Republican Caucus, regardless of the election results. This isn't (wasn't) a Democratic witch hunt to gain a Senate seat.
What I find interesting, which I haven't seen anyone comment on (though I haven't read a whole lot on this development) is that it was Obama's Dept. of Justice which decided to drop the charges. I wonder what would have happened under the hyperpartisan Bush Dept. of Justice if this had been a Democratic Senator.
Mah point is simple. Im a libertarian who hadnt voted for a democrat or publicun for years.
Tha point is simple really. It matters not who did what to who. People in politics watch and learn. They see something that works and now we have a new Idear.
Need a seat? Lets make stuff up and when its over. Apologize, drop the charges and voilla.
Thats mah point in this entire mess which is why I say there be no messing with the states rights on these issues.
Palin herself called for Uncle Ted to step down! Now she's calling on Mark to step down. Of course, Mark Begich is not going anywhere, thank goodness. And some Alaskans are thinkin' old Ted Stevens should just run for Governor in 2010. Hey- the oldest seated Gov! That would get rid of our winkin', non'thinkin' gal. You betcha. Then you all Outside can have her wandering from state to state stump speeching for a few years & we alaskans won't have to listen to her dribble anymore.