Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Trooper Mike Wooten:  What a Guy!

by Charles W. Fairbanks

Alaska State Trooper Mike Wooten should have been fired a long time ago for multiple disciplinary problems.  The Wooten controversy has now winded its way into national politics.  As we learn more about this rogue trooper, we should be asking ourselves:  Why is Trooper Wooten still a trooper, and why hasn’t he been indicted?

Democrats in Washington, their allies in the newsmedia and their leader, Barack H. Obama just don’t seem to care with whom they associate.  There is unrepentant terrorist William Ayres.  There is “God D--- America” Rev. Wright.  There is ACORN.  Now there is Alaska State Trooper Mike Wooten, whose sordid history invited departmental disciplinary proceedings and sanctions against him, then caused a partisan “ethics” investigation against Governor Sarah Palin.  The investigation factually cleared Governor Palin.  Lost in the partisan report and in the media “coverage” of the case is the history of this rogue trooper.

The person in all this who has repeatedly transgressed good ethics is Wooten himself!

From what little we know about Wooten’’s employment history, he has a series of reprimands as a state trooper.  The most shocking of these is one to which he confessed:  Electrocuting his eleven year old step son with a taser (see photo above), allegedly to teach him a lesson.  Well, let’s think about that one a little more.  A taser is a weapon designed to shock grown men.  A taser is the first cousin of a cattle prod, which is used to manage large mammals such as cattle and horses.  Law enforcement officers use the taser to pacify criminal suspects by delivering electricity into the body of the subject.  Those subjects are almost always grown men, almost always dangerous, and almost always resisting a police officer lawfully performing his or her duty.

A taser is considered a dangerous weapon.  When one uses a taser on another human being for purposes other than those approved by law, one is committing not only an assualt, but an aggravated assualt.  In most jurisdictions, aggravated assault is a felony punishable by a state prison sentence. 
Many commentators have asked why is Wooten still a trooper.  Well, I am asking not only that, but why is Trooper Wooten not making license plates in the Alaska State Prison system?

But wait, there’s more!

By assaulting a minor in his care with a dangerous weapon, Trooper Wooten may also have also the criminal offense of Endangering the Welfare of a Minor.  In most jurisdictions, Endangering is a felony punishable by a prison sentence.  It is very common under such circumstances for the child welfare authorities to become involved in a family, and either remove the child from the home (on some occasions) or seek a court order removing the offending adult from the home.  If the Alaska child welfare authorities did not become involved, then why not?  Would it be because of Trooper Wooten’s status as an Alaska State Trooper?

I am not done here.  Finally, if Trooper Wooten possessed the taser outside of his employment as a state trooper, then he might have been guilty of unlawful possession of a weapon or possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose.  And yes, these might carry prison time.

That preliminary analysis comes out of only one allegation of an ethical lapse by Trooper Wooten.  There may well be answers to the questions of why he was not charged with crimes and why the Alaska child welfare authorities did not investigate him, and we must remember that the scant public information about Wooten are only allegations.  While Wooten has apparently admitted to the taser incident, there are further allegations of transsgressons.

There are allegations that (1) he drank alcohol on the job as an trooper; (2) he killed a moose illegally; and (3) that he threatened to kill Sarah Palin’s father, a retired school teacher.  Trooper Wooten denies each of these three allegations, so to be fair, we should give him the same “benefit of the doubt” that Mr. Branchflower and the news media have given Sarah Palin, why don’t we?

We don’t have to give Trooper Wooten the same benefit of the doubt relative to a five day suspension given to him in 2006, summarized as follows:  “The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable, an at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession,” Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in a March 1, 2006 letter suspending Wooten for 10 days.  After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days.”

Sarah Palin is a hero, a maverick and a reformer.  She is the real deal who toppled the old boys network in Alaska, and will do so again in Washington either in 2009 or 2013.  I am reminded of the classic Dylan folk song, Ballad of Ruben Hurricane Carter.  Dylan rightfully painted Carter’s accusers as small and corrupt people trying to cover their own illegal activities.  Ruben Carter was of course a gifted and accomplished boxer.  Dylan asks lyrically:  “How can the life of such a man be in the palm of some fool’s hand?” To paraphrase the poet, how can America let its future, even for a very short time, pass through the hands of a Trooper Wooten?

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Obama and ACORN:  Perfect together

by TheTruthSquad

ACORN is partially responsible for the subprime mortgage meltdown.  They are almost wholly responsible for a nationwide voter fraud consipiracy that will benefit the campaign of one Barack H. Obama.  The ties between Obama and ACORN are substantial.  The Republican National Committee has published the following list of connections between ACORN and Obama.  If Sarah Palin had the same type of ties to the Ku Klux Klan, what would American be saying?  Since she doesn’t we will never know.  Governor Palin has taken the wood to Obama and ACORN, demanding that he rein them in before they destroy our voting rights.

Listen to Sarah.  She knows the following:

Obama Directed Project Vote And Later Taught Classes For “Future Leaders Identified By ACORN And The Centers For New Horizons.” “He [Obama] says he is drawn to politics, despite its superficialities, as a means to advance his real passion and calling: community organization. ... In 1992 Obama took time off to direct Project Vote, the most successful grass-roots voter- registration campaign in recent city history. Credited with helping elect Carol Moseley-Braun to the U.S. Senate, the registration drive, aimed primarily at African-Americans, added an estimated 125,000 voters to the voter rolls—even more than were registered during Harold Washington’s mayoral campaigns. ‘It’s a power thing,’ said the brochures and radio commercials. ... Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.” (Hank De Zutter, Op-Ed, “What Makes Obama Run?” ChicagoReader, 12/8/95)

Obama Was Part Of Team Of Lawyers Who Represented ACORN In A Suit Against The State Of Illinois. “Obama was part of a team of attorneys who represented the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois in 1995 for failing to implement a federal law designed to make it easier for the poor and others to register as voters.” (Mike Robinson, “Obama Got Start In Civil Rights Practice,” The Associated Press, 2/20/07)

ACORN’s Political Action Committee Endorsed Obama. “[A]CORN’s political action committee endorsed Barack Obama for President. ... The endorsement reflects a belief that Obama—who worked as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago—understands that change must come from the ground-up, as part of a working coalition, rather than from position papers.” (Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Op-Ed, “ACORN: Obama Gets It,” The Nation, 2/23/08)

Obama’s Campaign Paid Over $800,000 To ACORN For Get-Out-The-Vote Efforts, But “Mistakenly Misrepresented” Their Work To The FEC:

Obama’s Campaign “Paid More Than $800,000” To ACORN For Get-Out-The Vote Efforts; The Campaign Originally “Misrepresented” The Group’s Work To The FEC. “U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign paid more than $800,000 to an offshoot of the liberal Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now for services the Democrat’s campaign says it mistakenly misrepresented in federal reports. An Obama spokesman said Federal Election Commission reports would be amended to show Citizens Services Inc.—a subsidiary of ACORN—worked in ‘get-out-the-vote’ projects, instead of activities such as polling, advance work and staging major events as stated in FEC finance reports filed during the primary.” (David M. Brown, “Obama To Amend Report On $800,000 In Spending,” Pittsburgh Tribune Review, 8/22/08)

While Serving On The Board Of Directors Of The Woods Fund, ACORN Received Thousands Of Dollars Of Grants From The Organization:

The Chicago ACORN Received Grants Of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002), And $40,000 (2002) From The Woods Fund. (Donors Forum Website, ifs.donorsforum.org, Accessed 6/10/08)—NOTE: From 1993 To 2002, Barack Obama Served On The Board Of Directors For The Woods Fund. (Tim Novak and Fran Spielman, “Obama Helped Ex-Boss Get $1 Mil. From Charity,” Chicago Sun-Times, 11/29/07) WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO HIDE?

Monday, October 13, 2008

A modern-day Robin Hood who robs from the rich, and well, anyone he can get his hands on

by TheTruthSquad

He robs from the rich and gives to the poor, just like the mythical Middle English figure, Robin Hood.  I’m not so romantic about Robin Hood.  He stole from the rich because there was no one else to steal from in 12th Century England.  This is America, where prosperity abounds.  Make no mistake, Robin Hood is going to take from anyone he can get his hands on.  Barack H. Obama says he’s going to tax the rich and spread the proceeds around to the middle class.  But the fact is that he is going to rob from everyone making over $25K.

In her landmark work Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand opined that one of the most destructive myths in history is the myth of Robin Hood.  I would tend to agree.  The original legend of Robin Hood was of a man who fought the oppressive and incompetent King John, who mis-ruled England while his more glamorous brother, King Richard the Lion Hearted was fighting Islamic facism in the Middle East.  Robin was a legendary figure who fought despotism.  He was also an Anglo-Saxon who was fighting against a Norman French elite.

Over the centuries, Robin Hood morphed into a romantic hero who robbed from the rich and gave to the poor.

Modern liberals and European Socialists have always posed as modern-day Robin Hoods to gain power.  Tax the Rich!  Soak the Rich!  Tax the Oil Companies!  Break the evil industialists!  Barack H. Obama is no different.  Yesterday he finally admitted that his intention is to share the wealth.  His quote is as follows:  “It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

BHO claims to have a plan in which he will tax the rich (those earning over 250K) and give to the middle class.  And if you believe that we’ve got some shares in the Brooklyn Bridge for you.  If elected, Obama will raise the marginal tax rate on everyone who earns between 25K and 80K.  That is because he will allow the 2002 middle class tax cuts to expire. 

If elected, Obama will blow the lid off the self-employment tax so that everyone who makes over 87K will pay an additional 7.5 per cent.

These are hard facts measurable in easy to understand numbers.  So why isn’t Big Mac hammering Obama and Biden with these easily verifiable numbers?  Look, I don’t know why Big Mac isn’t doing it, but why not let our Sarah take a shot at Robin Hood?