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.