I rather like how the article only specifically referred to "allegations" that Wooten had tasered his stepson and illegally shot a moose, thus creating a patina that Wooten wasn't all that bad, and so any expressed comments of concern by the Palins could be seen as pettiness. In reality, of course, Wooten had (no mere "allegation," but actually fact), among other things, tasered his stepson, been caught drinking in a patrol car, and threatened to have his father-in-law "eat a <expletive> lead bullet" if he helped his daughter in the divorce. And, of course, all of this was known when he was punished with a 5 day suspension (reduced from 10 days after the troopers' union complained). Now, I don't know about other people, but while the tasering and drinking might only warrant suspension (though for more than 10 days), I'm rather disturbed that a state trooper making death threats would be treated so cavalierly by the powers that be.
Oh, and I can't help but notice that you didn't mention that the tape recording showing Bailey asking about Wooten (after Palin had denied any officials were involved) had been released by Palin herself, after an investigation she had launched into the matter, and the release was part of an apololgy on her part for being mistaken in her earlier denials (she had been unaware of the actions of others when she made her first statement).
But if you reported any that, it wouldn't leave the impression of a petty, vindictive woman ready to abuse her power, and you wouldn't want to do that, would you?









Discuss