Skip to comments.Why did Palin name a pro-choice judge to the Alaska Supreme Court?[DU-like anti-Palin source]
Posted on 02/19/2011 10:14:16 AM PST by Ol' SparkyEdited on 02/19/2011 1:04:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
At least one mystery from Sarah Palin's short reign as governor of Alaska appears to have been cleared up by claims made in a manuscript for a book proposed by former Palin aide and confident Frank Bailey.
Many have wondered why Palin, who professes to be pro-life, named to the Alaska Supreme Court Morgan Christen, who is pro-choice. The move took both conservatives and liberals by surprise in 2009.
(Excerpt) Read more at alaskadispatch.com ...
McCain made her do it right?
Unhhh, maybe because that isn’t the one and only litmus test applied when appointing a judge?
The creep forgot this part of the story.
SUPREME COURT PICK
Bailey suggests in the book that one of Palins picks for the Supreme Court was colored by her animosity against Wooten. He wrote that District Court Judge Morgan Christen ruled in favor of Palins sister in her custody dispute with Wooten, and that Todd Palin raved about how Christen raked Wooten over the coals.
Christen later applied for the state Supreme Court and was picked by the Alaska Judicial Council as one of the two candidates for Palin to consider appointing. Bailey wrote that he warned Palin it would be a conflict of interest, but she wasnt interested.
But a spokeswoman for the Alaska Court System said Bailey got his facts wrong. Christen was never the assigned judge in the Wooten custody case, didnt make any rulings in favor of either party, and played a very limited role, according to Christine Johnson, administrative director for the court system.
Johnson said prior to applying for the Supreme Court Christen conducted a conference in the case, where both sides agreed to a settlement. Wooten and Palins sister later had a dispute over what theyd agreed upon in the settlement and asked Christen to resolve it, Johnson said. But Christen sent it to another judge because shed applied to the Supreme Court and had a conflict.
Why did Palin name a pro-choice judge to the Alaska Supreme Court?
Asked and answered. In before the Aw Jeez guy.
Which was the case.
Sarah, according to Bailey, refused to listen to his or Van Flein's advice.
Hell hath no fury like an advisor ignored ... who later wants to sell his book.
With reagrds to this piece of democrat agenda:
isn’t it interesting how they’re pulling out all the stops to try and attack Palin now?
When they say “she has no chance against buma”!
Buma is finished. The American people do not want this kind of president. Pretty much whoever we run in 2012 wins. Unless it’s a democrat like McCain or Romney. You can’t out-democrat a democrat.
ok...here we go again...i am ready to be flamed..
there is this pesky little thingie called the constitution...in it is the pesky little thingie called the 10th amendment...last time I checked abortion, along with a host of other things, is not a power specifically granted to the feds, therefore, should be a state issue. Now, if this were true, then the appointment of, or election of, an abortion backing judge or governor, would be a major issue. However, since the feds have been allowed to remove this power from the states, what difference does it make what a state judge or governors stand is on the issue????? the feds will render any decision moot if it does not agree with the trumping of the constitution they have achieved......so tell me, what differnce does the stand of a judge or governor make??? answer is none...wanna change things??? start with your local state representative and senate candidate..they can force a governor to stand up to the fed... unless this happens, the point is moot..
Don’t expect the PDS folks to give a damn about the facts here.
I read the words ‘reign as governor’ and stopped. Only in the fused circuits of liberal/progressive heads are executives of US states also heads of state. Hint to liberals and trolls: kings reign, governors govern. See the difference? Really simple isn’t it?
The creep is Craig Medred.
When you go back home to the DU, take this tidbit with you.
Palin, as governor, also vetoed a strong “conservative” measure to deny same-sex partners government health benefits - because the bill directly violated the Alaskan constitution.
She must be a odd politician. Imagine nominating a judge based on merit or vetoing a bill on constitutionality..... Now wouldn’t that be something different in Washington?
It’s got me “concerned.”
At the least, this proves that she is not a theocrat.
I suggest the author look into how judge nominations are chosen/appointed in AK. Possible candidates are chosen buy the Alacka Judicial Council. The Governor must choose fromt that list. They must not have sent her a pro-life candidate. What was she to do? Ignore the law?
A simple Google search reveals Craig Medred is a grade-A hack. But I guess in your hurry to post this hit piece on Palin, you couldn’t be bothered to see if the author is a credible source.
Info on Devon, if you don't already know;
There were only 2 choices presented to her by the Commission. Alaska has that “Missouri Plan” nonsense. Palin picked the least bad of the two. The other one was an across the board leftist wacko.
I'm sick and tired of idiots like you attacking anyone that questions whether is the best candidate for the job.
Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann are both INFINITELY BETTER candidates with a better chance of winning.
It's past time you stopped throwing around insults in order to stifle legitimate debate on who the best CONSERVATIVE AND PRO-LIFER is for the job.
Palin isn't even pro-life enough to support the concept that human life begins at conception. She has no problem with the morning-after pill being legal, for example.
Because it’s politics. You have two choices: learn to live with people you vehemently disagree with, or go to civil war.
If she loses social conservatives as her base, what has she got left in primary?
I respect your opinion as you should respect opinions on folks that like Palin and want to vote for her. Why should she not step in the arena as others should and will. We will see who wins. Can we not leave it to that. Why are we chewing up and spitting out our own before they even run?
Sorry, I like them both, but congresscritters and business people with no governing experience simply don't win their party's nomination let alone the presidency.
Your statement seems kind of empty with no reasoning behind it.
We did this back in 2009.
1. Judge Morgan Christen was the most qualified candidate
2. This was the alternative Palin chose against
And yes you can judge by appearences. Back then FR survey said he was a freakin' moonbat.
LOL LOL LOL
Hey PDSer troll! So you know that this allege book by Bailey was written by a Huffington Post writer and a known Alaska lib (Mudflats) and was leaked by the loon Joe McGinness....the guy that moved next door to Sarah and her family to write a hit-piece book. But that doesnt matter to you and since the guy has been backtracking on what he wrote Sarah said by saying that the book was subject to change.....but alas it doesn’t matter to you libs
I doubt that single-issue politics will be the deciding factor in the anti-Obama vote. There’s a lot of evil that must be stopped; Abortion is just one facet.
Have you read “Going Rogue” yet? From what I’ve read and observed I’m confident that if she sits in the White House she will apply the corrective measures in time.
Sure. No aide ever gets done working for a controversial politician and then writes lying claptrap about their time on the staff. Don Regan really was pushed out by Nancy Reagan because she hated him from day one, Richard Clarke really was the wonderful hero of the pre-9/11 intelligence community and could have stopped it all if they had just listened to him, yada, yada, yada.
Can you give us any examples of Palin speaking out against the process in Alaska and demanding it be changed?
Read the comments on this thread. You posted a pantload, dude.
Bachmann has spent more time in the House than Palin did as governor. And, not being corrupted by special interests most politicians are corrupted by might just be a good thing.
Palin is going to be attacked as a quitter that didn't finish her term so she could make a buck.
Oh, that's special. You post pure liberal claptrap and then whine about being attacked? Guess what - if you post crap like this, you DESERVE to get attacked.
Again, what principled conservative doesn’t step up and try to reform a process that leaves her with two liberal choices for the Supreme Court? Is there any evidence Palin did that?
The House doesn't give one executive experience.
I said it on another thread: If you really believe Governor Palin was up to no good and everybody managed to keep it quiet through the last two and a half years of Palin media obsession until this idiot released his book, I want a chance to try to sell Little Diomede Island to you. Because if you really believe that, you’re probably stupid enough to give me good money for it.
Try reading up on this subject a bit more: http://community.adn.com/node/140438#
Just ask president Hunter about that, he got beat by "unsure" in several primaries, and never polled above 1% in any republican primary. He was a lot more experienced and qualified than Bachmann. You might want to think about that, but judging from your responses on this thread, that's going to be hard for you.
Why are you carrying water for the enemy?
Are you a “I like Sarah but...”er?
And as an unabashed conservative, a conception-to-natural-death pro-lifer and definitely NOT a member of the Church of Palin, I say it's way past time Palin's detractors stop posting obvious lies trumped up by obvious flaming liberals and then following it up with histrionic whining.
You don't think she's the right candidate Great. Make your case like a conservative instead of posting liberal claptrap any 8th grader would find suspicious.
No, complaining about being accused of being a Troll when I support candidates like Cain and Bachmann.
Certain people like you don't seem to get the fact that many conservatives favor more principled conservatives that have a better chance of winning than Palin.
Attacking the Queen is not the equivalent of not being conservative or being a troll.