Sarah in 2012 will put an end to the dems once and for all. On Dec 13, 10:50 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > maybe you should give that love to something or someone who feels the > same way about you . instead of sniffing after strangers ! > > On Dec 13, 9:37 am, NavyBrat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > :-) I do love all kinds of dogs! > > > On Dec 13, 7:26 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > " and they called it puppy loveeeeeeeeeeeeeee! " > > > > On Dec 13, 9:25 am, NavyBrat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I Am your master! Owned! > > > > > On Dec 13, 7:21 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > go home puppy your master is calling you ! > > > > > > On Dec 13, 9:17 am, NavyBrat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Except when you wnat to curtail the free speech of others. How > > > > > > noble! > > > > > > > On Dec 13, 5:57 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > hey just doing my part to keep America free ! > > > > > > > > On Dec 13, 7:53 am, mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > come on murky, you are either a sarah stalker, but judging by > > > > > > > > all your > > > > > > > > anti female posts, I would guess you are a limp wrister which > > > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > you do not stalk women . so that leaves fear, and you fools > > > > > > > > know that > > > > > > > > she would kick your boy out of the black house if she ran > > > > > > > > against > > > > > > > > him. so we will be afforded the opportunity to see you post > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > lies and innuendos for the next 4 yrs. > > > > > > > > > On Dec 13, 3:19 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > poor marky ! there is nothing to fear from Palin she is and > > > > > > > > > was just > > > > > > > > > a distraction but i do intend to keep on posting the facts > > > > > > > > > about her > > > > > > > > > as they come up until she is out of office and forced to stay > > > > > > > > > out of > > > > > > > > > any other office . she is corrupt and unfit for public office > > > > > > > > > ! > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 5:48 pm, mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > the liberal retards such as murky and his ilk will continue > > > > > > > > > > to attack > > > > > > > > > > sarah for the next 4 yrs, because of all the conservative > > > > > > > > > > republicans > > > > > > > > > > out there, they fear her the most. > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 5:25 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Which advisor on Obama inner circle talked with the > > > > > > > > > > > Illinois > > > > > > > > > > > governor??? Are they corrupt??? If they knew about a > > > > > > > > > > > pay to play > > > > > > > > > > > scheme and did nothing are they corrupt??? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 11:46 am, mike 532 <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not about the election it is about a corrupt > > > > > > > > > > > > politician who is > > > > > > > > > > > > unfit for office any office ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 9:48 am, Kamakazee <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sweet Jesus, when will you and Letterman realize the > > > > > > > > > > > > > election is over? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And ya realize your CIC Elect is having a bit of > > > > > > > > > > > > > difficulty explaining > > > > > > > > > > > > > that whole mess in IL right? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 12, 7:26 am, mike 532 > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin used these nonofficial accounts for official > > > > > > > > > > > > > > business, in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > violation of Alaska state open records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rules,http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/12/11290_palin_emai... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Would You Pay $10,000 for Sarah Palin's Emails? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How > > > > > > > > > > > > > > much would you pay for access to the emails Sarah > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin has sent and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > received as governor of Alaska? Would you part with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > $10,000 for them? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's basically what her office is asking. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > During the general election, I filed an open > > > > > > > > > > > > > > records act request for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all emails that had gone to and from Palin in her > > > > > > > > > > > > > > official capacity. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And Alaska citizen watchdog Andrée McLeod, who had > > > > > > > > > > > > > > long been > > > > > > > > > > > > > > peppering > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office with similar requests, did the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At a time when > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin was on the hot seat as Senator John McCain's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > vice presidential > > > > > > > > > > > > > > running mate, her office replied that it would cost > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over $65,000 to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > round up all of Palin's emails and that Mother > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jones would have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cover this cost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem: Palin had used at least two > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nonofficial email accounts > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (such as a Yahoo account) to conduct her state > > > > > > > > > > > > > > business. Given that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the governor's office did not have access to those > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accounts, its > > > > > > > > > > > > > > information specialists had concluded that the only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > way to gather all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > her emails would be to search the state email > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accounts for about 70 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > people who worked within the executive offices of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the governor and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > look for emails to and from Palin's nonofficial > > > > > > > > > > > > > > email accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office estimated it would cost almost a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thousand dollars for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > each search of these 70 or so official accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seemed absurd and unfair for Palin's office to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pass the cost of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this search on to those who had requested Palin's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > emails. After all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > she should have been using her state email account > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for state > > > > > > > > > > > > > > business. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a letter to her office, I maintained that > > > > > > > > > > > > > > requesters should not be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > forced to pay for Palin's inappropriate use of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nonofficial accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office eventually agreed, deciding it would > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not charge fees > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for the extensive search operation that would be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > necessary to compile > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's emails. In early October, it informed me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that it would begin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reviewing Palin's official emails and gather the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > emails related to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > state business that were sent to and from her > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nonofficial accounts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All for no charge. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But there was a rub: this whole process could be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > expected to take > > > > > > > > > > > > > > weeks. That meant that none of her emails (from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > either official or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nonofficial accounts) would become public prior to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the November 4 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > election. Because Palin had used these nonofficial > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accounts for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > official business, arguably in violation of Alaska > > > > > > > > > > > > > > state open records > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rules, she had managed (wittingly or not) to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > orchestrate the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > functional equivalent of a cover-up--at least, a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temporary one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On December 5, Linda Perez, Palin's administrative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > director, sent me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > letter noting that Alaska's Department of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Administration had > > > > > > > > > > > > > > completed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the job of assembling Palin's emails into a single > > > > > > > > > > > > > > account. "The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > account is now available for records production > > > > > > > > > > > > > > purposes," she wrote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In all, there are approximately 25,700 emails in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this account, the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > letter reported. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But they are not yet ready for release, and now > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here come the real > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fees. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Each email, Perez wrote, has to be opened and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > printed separately in a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "fairly time-consuming" process. The cost for doing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this: $3,955.23. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The calculations: a staffer paid $15.39 an hour > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could review about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 100 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > emails per hour. And Perez said that Mother Jones > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and McLeod would > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have to pay for this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The process, though, would not end there. Once > > > > > > > > > > > > > > these emails are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > printed out, the records would then be sent to the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > state's Department > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Law (which is headed by a Palin appointee) for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "privilege review." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That is, individual emails could be withheld on the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > basis of various > > > > > > > > > > > > > > exemptions. (When the Palin administration > > > > > > > > > > > > > > responded to an earlier > > > > > > > > > > > > > > email request from McLeod regarding two Palin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > staffers, it withheld > > > > > > > > > > > > > > over 1100 emails, relying on questionable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > exemptions.) So there's no > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guaranteeing how many of these emails will be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > released. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And there's more. Once the legal review is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > finished, the emails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deemed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > appropriate for release will have to be copied, and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Palin's office > > > > > > > > > > > > > > will charge a duplication fee. In earlier > > > > > > > > > > > > > > correspondences, Palin's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > office indicated the fee could be over 25 cents a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > page. If about > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 25,000 emails (a page each) are cleared for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > release, the copying fee > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could top $6,000. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ten thousand dollars to see Palin emails reviewed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > by Palin's legal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > department? Is it worth it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Other media outfits have submitted requests for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some of Palin's > > > > > > > > > > > > > > emails > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (based on subjects). It may be possible to create a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > consortium of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > groups to share the costs. I will be talking to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > representatives of > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
