Palin obliquely her illegal fund to the completely legal Clinton and Kerry funds

[karynnj]

Here is her page, that has been quoted extensively by the MSM and the right. http://www.sarahpalinlegaldefensefund.org/about.php

Here is what she says:

"Now, Sarah Palin's enemies have scored a limited victory in their vicious campaign to smear, bankrupt, and force this dedicated public servant and conservative leader out of politics. They have successfully questioned her prior legal defense fund--a fund that mirrored John Kerry's fund and Bill Clinton's fund. So a new fund was necessary to make sure Sarah Palin can continue to speak the truth to Americans."

The fact is her fund violated ALASKA law, something that Clinton and Kerry were not subject to - no one ever said the Clinton fund was illegal. While Kerry set up a fund, I don't think he ever raised money for it or used it - and it was clearly legal. Here is a 2005 article - the fund was set up when the man who made Stolen Honor sued Kerry - http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/business/media/27kerry.html (The case had no merit - all I can see is that the liars used it to raise money )

[wisteria]

1. She is a real liar, but like Limbaugh, those who support her could care less about

any and all allegations against her. As a Republican, she is not held to the same higher standards that Democrats are.

[sandnsea]

2. Do you know what law she broke?

I really hate spending a second of time on the dingbat, but you know, I've got a couple of family members who swoon over her. Not family in MY house mind you, I would feel like a complete failure if my children admired her, lol. If you already know, it would save me the reading time. :)

[karynnj]

3. It actually seems no big deal

"The Alaska Fund Trust inappropriately used the word "official" on its website, wrongly implying that it was endorsed by Palin in her role as governor, State Personnel Board investigator Timothy Petumenos said Thursday.

But Petumenos also found that Palin - the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee - acted in good faith and relied on a team of attorneys, all but one from outside the state, to make sure the fund was lawful and complied with the Alaska Executive Branch Act.

Palin's attorney, Thomas Van Flein of Anchorage, said he recommended that the fund's status be vetted by state attorneys before it was established, but that advice was not taken. "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/25/AR2010062501209.html

Here, rather than just explain that it was found that she acted in good faith and the problem was that the word "official" could be misunderstood, she (or her people) jumped to a "they did it too" defense. This is silly, because it makes it seem that there was something wrong in all three. The only thing that she could be faulted for was not taking the advice to have the state attorney vet it. Her inept response here leads to most people hearing it was not legal and not knowing why.

As to Clinton's and Kerry's, I don't think either said "official" - and as that was the only problem - copying them was not the source of the problem.

[Inuca]

4. "dedicated public servant"?!?!?!

:rofl: As Olbermann says "that woman is an idiot" (a poisonous and disgusting one)

[karynnj]

5. Yep, a dedicated public servant who quits mid term as the state experiences ecomonic difficulties

Had she stayed and tried to run things with her small government philosophy, I would have no problem calling her a "dedicated public servant". But, she would be one whose philosophy I completely disagree with. It does look, from her biography, that she has been in a public servant - as mayor of Wasilla and on town council before that since 1992.

I do think the QUALITY of her public service and her philosophy are very questionable, but I think both sides go too far in questioning the motives of the other side. It is not that they don't have values, but that we strongly disagree with them.