Alaska legislature: Palin abused power, did not break law

Wow I didn't know about that.

https://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html

It seems that it's not necessarily illegal, but the FEC has an "advisory opinion" not to spend campaign dollars on "personal use."

$150,000 on clothing and makeup, just for Palin! Oh, and her family.

$150,000. While Palin berates some AIG executives for going on a $70,000 business junket.

Yeah, let's vote for McCain and Palin. Mavericks who defy the law and ignore ethics. "Poor judgment" and "abuse of power." Yeesh.

To draw a parallel to the corporate world -

It's not illegal for me to fudge my expense claims to cover travel expenses for my wife and children if they travel with me.

It's not illegal for me to use my position to pressure managers below me to dismiss staff.

However, they are unethical, and if my employer discovered that I had done these things (and I stress this is purely hypothetical, I have not), they would be well within their rights to fire me. It is an abuse of my position.

Palin has been discovered to have done both things above. Perhaps not illegal, but most certainly unethical and deserving of condemnation.

Does it matter?

I think it does.And if she didn't break the law ,it shouldn't be such a big deal ,right?

It's not a big deal if I cheat on my girlfriend, right? It's legal.

It's not a big deal if I charge my kids' hotel rooms and flights to my corporate card, right? It's legal.

It's not a big deal to sleep on the job and then demand a promotion for it, right? It's legal.

It's not a big deal if I hand over company secrets to Chinese competitors, right? It's legal.

It's not a big deal if I amend expense reports to lie about why my kids traveled around the country with me on my corporate card, right? It's legal.

Unethical acts are not all illegal. The fact that something is not legal (and we're not even sure if what she did was legal or not) does not make it right. Something doesn't need to be a crime for it to be a "big deal."

I think you are blowing the whole thing out of proportion.Just give it a few days and we will all find out about all the other politicians that travel with their kids ,buy clothing and makeup , and so forth.You know the Rep party will find crap like that everywhere.Like I said before.It's not a big deal.Besides ,your girlfriend isn't going to cheat on you anyway ,right?

So it's not a big deal because everyone does that.

Not so maverick then, I suppose. More of the same.

I'll try to remember this thread on election day. I'll PM you to ask you what sort of similar unethical spending the Obama campaign has done.


Oh, I also expect we'll find out about Obama and Biden both getting officially reprimanded for poor judgment or abuse of power. Cause everyone does that.

Right?

I wonder what "Joe Six-Pack" and "Joe the Plumber" think of "Sarah the Shopper"

Figure out the break down of what was spent per child per trip.

21012.00 (total cost) divided by 76 (individual trips) = 276.47

276.47 (individual trips) divided 3 (daughters) = 92.15

Unethical for her to do so - sure, but at least she found cheap airfare.




The only thing that matters here is the "advisory OPINION", they chose to ignore the FEC's opinion and let her spent campaign money on clothes.

Money that more than likely would have gone for more negative ads - I would rather not see the damn ads so I am glad money was spent elsewhere.

Yawn

Unethical but legal.
It isn't a big deal to me.
Honestly, they live to post nonsense.
It is to meet quotas as to not lose sponsorship, and to stir the s*** for more responses.







It isn't a big deal. They just love to claim it is!



'Unethical spending Obama has done'. f***ing hilarious!!!!!

Abusing your power to get a state official dismissed because you want to strengthen your sisters child custody case against him really is a big deal.

I'd rather not have someone in the Whitehouse with a history of using positions of influence to further their personal agendas.

And yes, I'm aware that virtually all politicians are guilty of this at some point or other. That's why in every election since I was old enough to understand the concept, I would have voted 'none of the above'. Both in my home country and here.

I do not believe that the public of any nation is ever presented with a selection of the best qualified candidates for the job.

We'll probably be talking about ACORN then.

abuse of power is enough for impeachment