Since I got a comment from an interested reader on the subject (see here), I decided to look into “Troopergate”. What is it about?
As usual, the ”Troopergate” story is scattered hither and thither. The Wall Street Journal has what it considers the bare details here. The Washington Post has supposedly incriminating emails from Governor Palin here, and CNN has an interview with Mike Wooten, the trooper in “Troopergate” here. More important, however, is the fact that this “Troopergate” is a longstanding affair.
For the past several years, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, has been embroiled in a bitter family feud that has drawn in the state police, the attorney general, the governor’s office and the state legislature.
A bipartisan state legislative panel has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate whether Palin improperly brought the family fight into the governor’s office. The investigation is focusing on whether she and her aides pressured and ultimately fired the public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, for not removing Palin’s ex-brother-in-law from the state police force. (from here)
Obviously, when McCain’s staff vetted Palin, they had ample opportunity to find out about “Troopergate” (For example, there was this story and this story.). Apparently, McCain’s people did not see ”Troopergate” as a huge problem. Why not? Well, consider this excerpt.
The trouble between Wooten and the governor’s sister broke into the open after an alleged incident in February 2005. Palin told an internal affairs investigator that she overheard on a speakerphone Wooten arguing with her sister and threatening to kill their father. Fearful for her family members’ lives, Palin said she drove to her sister’s house and watched the argument through a window.
“Wooten’s words were, ‘I will kill him. He’ll eat a [expletive] lead bullet, I’ll shoot him,’ if our father got the attorney to help Molly,” Palin said in an e-mail she wrote in August 2005 to the chief of the state police. “I heard this death threat, my 16-year-old son heard it (Track Palin), Molly heard it, as did their small children. Wooten spoke with his Trooper gun on his hip in an extremely intimidating fashion, leaving no doubt he is serious about taking someone’s life who disagrees with him.” (from here)
When the governor of a state cannot fire a trooper who has threatened her father’s life, we certainly have a problem. Yet instead of firing the misbehaving trooper, the legislature is worried about whether the governor has exercised undue influence. Have people lost their minds?
Let’s put this matter into perspective. Whenever a politician first achieves national prominence, the news media immediately starts looking for anything that even remotely looks like dirt — particularly if they are of the opposite political persuasion….. Of course, every story a reporter writes must be ”important” and must be read. There is no money in a story nobody reads. So reporters tend to make every story as juicy and “relevant” as possible. Dirt plus moisture? That is just plain mud.
In child custody fights, don’t automatically trust the words of either side.
Can a governor say, “I heard that bad man say he would kill my dad, fire him. Don’t be inhibited by giving that bad man due process. After all I am your governor, and I have spoken.”
Have we fallen so in love with the Governor of Alaska that we want to give her the power to be judge, jury and executioner?
There is a point at which we have to trust our leaders. Palin did not even know Wooten had been suspended as a result of the investigation she paid for.
We trust policemen to discipline their own, but we do not even trust the governor to know what is going on. That is idiotic legalism.
In addition, any jerk that tasers a child needs to be charged with child abuse.
1. “…overheard on a speakerphone…”
Sounds more like an illegal wiretap. How does one overhear an alleged argument via a speakerphone when you are the Governor, located in another house, in another part of town?
This reminds me of a classic set-up where someone who is “wired” provokes an argument in hopes of getting the opponent to say something rash.
2. “Palin said she drove to her sister’s house and watched the argument through a window.”
So she admits to the illegal wire-tapping, she also admits to being a voyeur. If she was really worried, why did she not call the police, like any normal citizen?
What this situation demonstrates is that Palin and her cronies have the Nixonian mindset that they are above the law. It is disgusting to see her look directly into the camera and lie that she had nothing to do with the attempts to fire Trooper Wooten, then to see her backpeddle like a mad hatter as witnesses and phone records reveal that she was clearly abusing her position as Governor.
I am a Republican and I want to limit the power of government, exactly to prevent people like the snotty, vindictive Sarah Palins of this world from using the power of the State to settle personal scores and for their own political gain.
McCain screwed-up. He should bounce Palin’s butt back to Alaska and put Mitt Romney on the ticket.
J. Tyler Ballance – Wiretap? Cell phones are ubiquitous and sisters love to call each other. No one eagerly calls the police on a family member.
While your questions may be appropriate, your conclusions you have obviously reached with insufficient information.
The people of Alaska are not stupid, and Sarah Palin is highly popular in Alaska. While that fact does not make her some sort of saint, it does suggest Palin has a decent reputation. Instead of jumping to rash conclusions, I suggest you ask the news media why their stories are incomplete.
Dear Citizen Tom,
I’m glad I checked in today.
I agree with you completely. “There is a point at which we have to trust our leaders.”
My point is that this is certainly not such a time. Gov Palin was responding to a child custody suit.
Often people in such situations will agressively seek every possible complaint . At such times, such people have no desire to tell of extenuating circustances.
The list of allegations was long, but contrived with a purpose.
Why 35 allegations and only 5 days suspension?
Why such a gentle consequence, and why has the trooper since received a promotion.
I believe that the investigators realized that Trooper Wooten was a decent guy under an indecent attack.
The judge ordered the Governor to stop harassing the step-dad, and added that she was close to commiting child abuse by acting in ways that would alienate child and step-father.
The judge told the family that he would award custody to the father if the harassment didn’t stop.
Often people in such situations will agressively seek every possible complaint . At such times, such people have no desire to tell of extenuating circustances.
It is not Governor Palin’s responsibility to point out that the boy asked to have that experience.
Or that it was not an act of agression on the part of Trooper Wooten.
It is not Governor Palin’s job to tell us that the boy was laughing and asked his step-dad to do it again.
As a science teacher, I assure you that the boy benefitted from the experience. He now understands something through personal experience that he could never learn from books. (I have many years of teaching 11 year olds.)
Also as a counselor, I see beauty in knowing that that was one of those moments between child and-step-dad that they both might remember with a smile.
Except for the fact that, now, in every town and hamlet, people speak of the trooper-villian who tasered his steps-son. And now I doubt that smiles will come easily.
Imagine how the child feels, now, years later , when he hears his step-dad being denigrated for taking the time to do as the boy had asked.
As someone who recently lost his father, I give testimony to the value of memories. Each one has value.
Honestly, Citizen Tom, I see Gov. Palin’s complaints as did the judge. By bringing this case to further attention after she became governor, she defied the judges instruction.
And she hurt others with benefit to no one.
Michael Rottman – That was one fine bit of rationalization. We are suppose to feel sorry Wooten? Yes! We should be in great sorrow. Wooten won’t get the chance to taser his stepson again. What a terrible shame!
I don’t pretend to have the full story, but the argument for a lack of consequences works both ways. If Palin got away without ANY consequences, then she obviously did not do ANYTHING wrong.
Your explanation of the taser incident is absurd. The boy benefitted from the experience? What induces a child to want to be shocked? Was this the only way the boy could get the attention of his step father?
Police officers are supposed to treat their weapons with respect. There are no exceptions for nonlethal weapons. A nonlethal weapon is still a weapon, not a toy for ten year olds and over aged children to use in science experiments.
So weave whatever fairytale you want. The fact remains that the casual use of a weapon on a ten year old teaches the child exactly the wrong lesson. For the sake of your students, I do hope you do not make a practice of doing everything an 11 year old suggests.
Dear Citizen Tom,
Your question, “What induces a child to want to be shocked? ” is an interesting question. It seems to be closely related to the question: “What makes a boy a boy?”
Some possible answers to your question include: 1) Hearing that it is part of the experience of some Troopers in training; 2)Seeing people on TV playing with tasers, getting shocked, and laughing about it; 3) Curiosity; 4) Thrill seeking.
Citizen, I understood that my comment is incendiary. But back in the ’60′s an 80 year old friend of our family took my brother, and sisters, and me to Disneyland. There, in the Davy Crockett Penny Arcade, was a shocking machine.
Drop in a couple of pennies and try to see if you can hold on to the metal handles as the shock increases. We all wanted to try.
The joke was, as the shock intensified, you reached a point where you couldn’t let go , even if you wanted to.
We all shared the experience, including the 80 year old. We all laughed to the point of tears. A happy memory for 44 years.
By the way, Trooper Wooten, did not go without a consequence. He accepted the decision of the hearing, apologized, and didn’t complain .
But your use of the “casual use of a weapon” argument may be unfair. If he let his step-son beat on a pillow with his baton, that would certainly be the “casual use of a weapon.” What consequence would you recommend.
Wooten describes having the boy lie on the floor, surrounded by pillows, and using the “low setting. Then carefully attaching clips to the boys shirt, not shooting the kid. Perhaps inappropriate, but “casual” may not be a fair description.
And this was after Wooten had been trained in the safe use of the taser.
Concerning Gov. Palin, troopergate has not yet been adjudicated. She is trying to stop the senate investigation. If she succeeds, she will certainly avoid a consequence.
No one has suggested that the boy was ever in danger of harm.
This is a battle over child custody. Governor Palin plays hard ball. She understands that the words “tasered a boy” creates a picture of an angry person shooting two mettle hooks into a child’s skin and watching him fall to the ground.
That didn’t convince the director of public safety, Walk Monegan, to fire Trooper Wooten, even after Governor Palin, her husband Todd, and numerous people in her office pressured him to do so.
She then fired Monegan. She is being investigated for abuse of power? Perhaps Monegan had the responsibility to his office to defend Trooper Wooten’s right to due process
If she is unable to quash the investigation, she may be in trouble. It helps her case if the public sees Wooten as a threat to her family.
For her career and for her campaign, she has to paint Trooper Wooten as a bad, bad man.
And, in your case, Citizen Tom, it sounds as if she has succeeded.
Michael Rottman – You make an interesting case for sadomasochism. So long as we avoid thinking about the harm that has been done, we can delude ourselves.
Any self respecting adult avoids pain. We risk injury and pain out of necessity, not in idle amusement. We do not deliberately suffer pain for fun.
Consider this example. Military personnel engage in rigorous training. Sometimes the toil and rigor of this training can be risky and involve pain. In fact, to understand what they might experience as a POW, military personnel will submit to mild torture. There is certainly nothing fun about that.
Men who train rigorously together often form strong bonds of friendship. Why? It is not because of the pain they experience together; it is because of what they learn of each other’s character.
However carefully you may think he did it, when Wooten tasered his son, he did it without serving any useful purpose. He did it for his amusement. IMHO, any father who deliberately tasers his child lacks something in his character.
Nonetheless, you need not worry yourself for the sake of Wooten’s reputation. The news media will work overtime to make certain his side of the story gets a public hearing.
BTW – Here is what the judge ordered.
From now on, if you want to state “facts” relevant to the case, please provide references.
Pingback: MEDIA MISLEADING « Citizen Tom
Dear Tom,
I accept your correction, concerning references.
‘TROOPERGATE’
“Warned by the Court
A judge repeatedly told Palin and family not to badmouth her sister’s ex”
By Mark Hosenball | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Sep 9, 2008 | Updated: 7:36 p.m. ET Sep 9, 200
Please consider the following:
The judge was trying to stop “disparaging.”
This is more horrible than it sounds. The result can be Parent Alienation Syndrome:
Parental alienation syndrome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
Richard Gardner: Richard Alan Gardner, M.D. (April 28, 1931 – May 25, 2003) was a clinical professor of psychiatry in the Division of Child Psychiatry at Columbia University from 1963 until his death in 2003. He was known for coining the term Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) in 1985.
Gardner states that Parental Alienation Syndrome can result from alienation that occurs when a parent criticizes the other parent or stepparent directly to a child or in front of the children. The effect is to produce a disturbance in the child’s relationship with the other parent.[4][5]
Gardner proposed that children have been taught by an alienating parent to hate the targeted parent, to the point of wanting to eliminate the targeted parent from their lives. He considered this psychological abuse and a form of psychological abuse that has clear-cut unmistakable signs and symptoms.
Gardner was a consistent advocate for fathers in custody battles, particularly fathers accused of child abuse. His most recent book, the Parental Alienation Syndrome, describes in detail the stages (i.e., mild, moderate, severe) of destructive impact on a child of one parent’s alienation of another parent, and fully describes the three types of alienator parent (i.e., naive, active, obsessed). [See http://www.paskids.com/ and ‘The Parental Alienation Syndrome (1992) ISBN 0-933812-42-
Tom, children can be robbed of their birthright. Within a few months, children can lose the desire and ability to have a relationship with a parent. This can last a life time.
What the judge was trying to inform the family was how profoundly hurtful, to the point of child abuse, it is to trash talk the dad; not necessarily to the children, but even to each other, in front of the children.
Did you see above: “Gardner was a consistent advocate for fathers in custody battles, particularly fathers accused of child abuse.”
Why advocate for “particularly” for fathers accused of child abuse in custody battles?
Gardner didn’t advocate for such fathers because he thought that they had a right to occasionally abuse their children. Rather, he did it because he saw a syndrome occur in clients.
Children lost the ability to remain in the same room with a parent or stepparent, they came to hate their fathers for the rest of their lives, until the day their father died. On that day, memories return of those many little things that remind them that they were loved by someone who they rejected. With therapy they come to realize that they shouldn’t feel guilty, because they had no choice in that rejection. That is the horror of the infliction of Parent Alienation Syndrome.
Concerning troopergate, Governor Palin fired Monegan. He was the collateral damage of Ms. Palin’s desire to punish Trooper Wooten.
And the child is collateral damage of the same passion on Ms. Palin’s part.
Tom, I know that you want the best. If I could play a part in motivating your rethinking of this issue, I would be much pleased.
I am not defending the use of the taser on children. But neither the boy or his stepfather were looking for pain. The judge said that he would give custody to the step-dad if the family wouldn’t stop talking him down. Why?
Child custody judges believe that PAS can’t be allowed. Trooper Wooten’s “crime” deserved a strict repremand for doing something stupid. A five day suspension was deemed appropriate.
But the judge is obligated to defend the child who, himself, has done nothing wrong. The child’s birthright is to have Officer Wooten in his life, if he wants him there.
Tom, for the sake of the child, consider what I have said. And please keep in mind the words of a wise man:
A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right-Thomas Paine
Remember Tom, I see that the trooper did something wrong and so does the Trooper. As citizen’s we do no service to our country, or to Ms. Palin herself, if we don’t correct her; while we remember that like Trooper Wooten, we all make mistakes; and like Trooper Wooten, Ms. Palin may have made her mistake not realizing the pain that she was inflicting.
What do you think, Tom?
Michael Rottman – I am sick of this. What are you trying to do, convict Palin and every one of her relatives of child abuse? Wooten’s former wife, not Palin, bad mouthed Wooten in front a HER child.
Was Molly McCann wise to disparage Wooten in front of HER child? Sometimes judges are full of it. Sometimes a family is too broken to put back together. When a step father abuses the child he is suppose to protect, what is the mother suppose to do? I think the mother ought to tell HER kid to stay away from that jerk. End of story.
If you want to debate the matter further, I suggest you debate the fellow who wrote this article (see here).
OK