The real issue is that libs will pursue full-throated denouncement of conservative illegalities no matter how obscure, while indulging in their own with little to no comment when caught, much less be investigated. If you think that's fair, fine.

We expect the rules of practical politics to apply equally across the board, which in this case would mean Palin is right. No rules were broken and/or if they were, it doesn't matter.

You can't have it both ways, bubba.

Nice straw man, Shooter. First of all, this wasn't a "liberal" investigation. It was put on by the moose shooting party in Alaska when they thought no one outside of a few curious Seattlites outside their little empire would even notice it was happening.

Second, it's not "obscure." A respected law enforcement officer was summarily fired and a lot of people were curious as to why. Those of us who knew Palin was one of the darkhorse candidates for Veep when this broke immediately thought, after the emails were revealed, "well, cross that one off the list." When McCain picked her without doing even a cursory vetting process, it became nationally relevant because it says something about her judgment, and there's not a whole lot else to rate her judgment on.

Third, saying that no liberal ever said anything negative about any liberal scandal is one of those little bullshit talking points you folks indulge yourself in. It's similar to Palin complaining that no one is talking about Ayers or Reverend Wright or whatever b.s. they've cooked up against Obama this week. "No one" seems to be the equivalent of "everyone but I don't like the conclusion they draw." Check out the politics of the people who brought down Kwame Kilpatrick. I don't think they tend to listen to the same radio stations you do.

Finally, you raised an interesting point earlier about why was this such a big deal, because all she wanted to do was protect her sister against this guy. Well, then why lie about it? Why say that Wooten didn't have anything to do with her firing of Monegan if the reason was so palatable? Why come up so many different cover stories for why she fired him? Heck, if she'd said, "the guy made me autograph a photograph of a man I absolutely fear and hate and I didn't want to see him in cabinet meetings anymore," that would probably have ended the damn thing. It's the coverup, not the act itself, that gets people into trouble.

and Henry II only said, "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"

Take everything that's been said about Wooten and magnify it ten times, it won't make a bit of difference.

All the incidents that mattered occurred before Monegan took office. They were all settled by an administrative action that could not be reopened. The troopers are covered by a union contract that doesn't allow them to strike, in return for which all grievances are subject to binding arbitration. That puts the state in a very difficult position in seeking to impose discipline. You can argue with the legislative policy all you like (though, again, the Legislature has been dominated by Republicans for years who haven't changed it, so don't cry on me), but that's the situation Monegan faced.

To have disciplined Wooten any further would have been illegal. Anyone who claims differently is deluded.

So he tells that to the myriad folks who come up and give the same exact song and dance to him: Todd, Sarah, the chief of staff, the director of administration (who deals with personnel issues, including that very same union contract), the attorney general (who might know something about the law, though I'm not sure it's an actual qualification for the job). None of them disagree with Monegan's conclusion. No one says, "yes we can." Instead, they each just go off and meekly agree with him. But somehow, random people in the administration keep this issue up forever, including one flack calling a cop in Ketchikan, way outside the chain of command (Ketchikan, site of the abortive bridge to nowhere, is on an island in the far south of Alaska; according to Google maps, to get from there to Palmer, where Wooten was stationed, is a drive of 1625 miles, including a 100 mile ferry ride south to Prince Rupert, British Columbia, and then north and west through Yukon Territory back into Alaska and southwest to Palmer--1 day, 12 hours).

Then we have the "new" complaints, which all turn out to be (a) a hill of beans (he dared to pick up his kids in a marked patrol car! Call Oprah!); or (b) an untrue assumption (his doctor told him he could ride the snow machine).

At some point, whether you like it or not, whether you think that someone is a danger to your family or not (belied by the way they reduced the security detail and belied by the direct answer to the question of whether anyone was a threat to them), you have to stop knocking on the locked door. I don't really care whether what they did violated Alaska law or not. But it sure as hell reflects on Sarah Palin's judgment, which is exactly what is at issue when she asks us to vote for her for vice president.

*** I've been wondering, didn't Todd P break some laws in his assumption of (co-)executive powers?? ***

More hair-splitting and straw grasping. The investigator said nothing.

That's simply untrue. He didn't "say nothing." He said, on pages 67-68 of the report, that since Todd Palin was not an employee of the Executive Branch, and the scope of his engagement was to investigate employees of the Executive Branch, "I make no finding as to Mr. Palin's conduct."