Palin Forced Staff To Resign In Loyalty Test

Palin Forced Staff To Resign In Loyalty Test

www.washingtonindependent.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Mod Edit: Breaking News Forum Submission Guidelines – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 2/9/2008 by Mirthful Me]

This is something the hard right has never been able to understand... when you take an oath of office you are swearing allegience to the law, to the constitution, to the bylaws etc. You are not swearing allegience to an individual... in short loyalty to the commonweal is far more important than any loyality to the individual. bush minor has done the same sort of thing and the resultant cronyism has all but made the government disfunctional.

www.washingtonindependent.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Uh oh!

There is something wrong with the whole thing. Loyalty test?



This is America for heavens sakes.....

That is the whole point. We are supposed to be loyal to the nation, to the rule of law, to the constituition, not to an individual.

Per usual the hard right is nothing short of clueless.

This is quite scary. If McCain wins, we had better hope and pray for his good health. How would we like to have a president who makes us all sign "loyalty oaths"???

"resign as a test of loyalty"?

I don't get it. If they stay then they would have no job. If they resign then they'd have no job. Damned if you do and damned if you don't?

Does anyone have a copy of one of these alleged letters?

I'd like to read what exactly they supposedly said.

I have read that Oprah Winfrey uses them.
Huffington Post reports that California uses them as well.

That was just a quick google.
If more time was spent, more would come up I'm sure.
Seems they are still around.
Odd.

Yeah, but at least you'd prove your loyalty!

I'm looking for the letters and more information.

Fear and Retribution: Palin's Pattern of Government



Seriously, this lady is scary. I'll post more as I find it.

Dems don't seem to have much of a clue about the different branches of government. The Chief Executive is like the CEO of a corporation. He or she is elected by shareholders, and then must fill the positions in a company. This is the essence of "the buck stops here" attitude.

The Chief Executive is RESPONSIBLE for making sure that all positions in the corporate structure are filled with the most qualified people to accomplish what the EXECUTIVE was elected to do.

It's the same with a Mayor or Governor. There is an obligation to fill each spot with the person the Mayor or Governor believes is the best person for the job.

Rather than be a negative, making sure employees were loyal might be a prime consideration for a Chief Executive.

In all honesty, this is such a reminder to me of how Castro ran things, and still runs things.

You have to declare yourself a true LOYAL to Castro and a true Communist or you dont get to eat. Not to hijack the thread or anything, but its such a reminder!!!!!

This is a ridiculous comparison.

The U.S. government is based on three branches. Of course the Chief Executive of the executive branch is not only free to hire whoever he or she wants, he or she is RESPONSIBLE for their actions. The Chief Executive does not have authority to cross over into other areas and fire a Senator, for example.

Castro took over total control of the government, and by extension, the people of Cuba.

No, this is not a ridiculous comparison. It's an idiotic comparison. Surely if you would actually spend a few seconds contemplating things you will see this.

Jamie,

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but idiotic come backs dont ever hurt me.

It was just a thought. Suddenly, the word, "Loyalty" triggered something in me that i lived thru.

Dont laugh unless you've walked in my shoes.

Now move on.

Just ignore that troll, in his eyes anything republicans do is all love and sunshine. He's the type of person who would still support Bush if he went around lynching people who disagree with him.

Anyone that has run a large organization would NEVER require "loyalty Oaths", or place personal fears or fear of someone standing up to power above the needs of the organization. In fact standing up to power is the one trait that tends to seperate true leaders. A true Leader fills positions under them with people that are not afraid to tell the truth and stand up to their boss, and let the chips fall where they may.

Placing loyalty to an individual above qualifications for the job itself, is incredibly shortsighted and assures collapse of the organization. This is Business 101 and insight to the true Nature of an individual,
someone that that fears truth and being wrong is mildly paranoid and indicative of skeletons in the closet.

I really dont understand Senator McCain nominating Gov Palin to this position. There is no net gain outside of the religious right wing of the GOP, which they had already. This will be interesting to watch play out.

[edit on 3-9-2008 by Hallberg Rassy]

reply to post by FlyersFan

---

Oprah is a private individual... a mayor or a governor is a public servant... big dif. The loyalty is to the constituition not to an individual. When you make loyalty to an individual you are saying in effect that they and not the public weal is of primary importance.