<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[Sarah Palin Information Blog]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://sarahpalininformation.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Ron Devito]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://sarahpalininformation.wordpress.com/author/devitor/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Sarah Palin: The Ethos of&nbsp;Ethics]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>Following is the complete transcript of Thomas Van Flein&#8217;s post on Governor Palin&#8217;s Facebook Notes page pertaining to frivolous ethics complaints:</p>
<p></p>
<blockquote><p>
When the Governor announced her decision to resign on July 3, she<br />
pointed out the then 15 frivolous ethics complaints that had been filed<br />
against her and dismissed. It was intended to explain, in part, her<br />
decision to resign as well to educate the public about the abuse of the<br />
Alaska Ethics Act through a repetitive stream of baseless partisan<br />
accusations, each one seemingly more pointless and frivolous than the<br />
next. The Governor’s message was not intended as an invitation to run<br />
off half-cocked and file more baseless ethics complaints, but not<br />
everyone understood that message—or wanted to understand. In August<br />
2009, largely in response to the abuse of Alaska’s Ethics Act by<br />
partisan shills and low level lackeys, the Attorney General issued an<br />
opinion recommending changes to the Ethics Act ”to prevent another<br />
potential harm—abuse of the process. Some Alaskans have argued that the<br />
Ethics Act has been used inappropriately in some circumstances to<br />
politically damage the subject of the complaint.” (August 5, 2009<br />
Attorney General Opinion). That argument was asserted by the Anchorage<br />
Daily News. “Our View: Abuse of Ethics Complaints Turns Good Law Into<br />
Bad Politics,” Anchorage Daily News, May 3, 2009. The Attorney General<br />
further recommended “another safeguard to discourage habitual complaint<br />
filers who use the Ethics Act process to harass executive branch<br />
employees. Statutory amendments could provide authority to the<br />
personnel board to decline to process further complaints filed by a<br />
person who has abused the Act in this way.” Though it is encouraging to<br />
see an impartial evaluation of the problem, it is ultimately up to the<br />
Legislature to implement any of these recommended changes. Governor<br />
Palin has been subjected to 24 ethics complaints, several lawsuits, and<br />
dozens and dozens of public information act requests, few of which<br />
raised even a scintilla of a good faith issue, and most of which were<br />
simply done to garner a headline or promote opposition research for<br />
political gain (Van Flein, 2009, ¶1). </p>
<p>Recently we learned that two more ethics complaints against Governor Palin have been dismissed—complaints that were filed <i>after</i><br />
the Governor announced her plans to step down. One complaint asserted<br />
that it was unethical for the state to follow its own per diem<br />
regulations and pay per diem to the Governor as set forth by law. Of<br />
course, the complainant conveniently overlooked that the Governor and<br />
her family received less per diem than they were entitled to under<br />
State law—why let such details stand in the way of an ethics complaint?<br />
The other complaint that was dismissed asserted that the Governor,<br />
through me, supposedly violated the constitution because we informed a<br />
person who falsely implied that the Governor was “under investigation”<br />
by the FBI, that such statements are defamatory. It is notable to watch<br />
those who agitate on all things Palin—locally and even across the<br />
Atlantic—as they Huff and puff falsehoods about Sarah Palin under the<br />
guise of free speech, which brings us to a teachable moment. All too<br />
often we hear about constitutional rights—as we should—but many forget<br />
about constitutional responsibilities. As citizens we have both rights<br />
and responsibilities. Though we have the right to exercise free speech,<br />
we have the responsibility to exercise that right without defaming<br />
people. I like the way our Alaska Constitution describes it: “Every<br />
person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being<br />
responsible for the abuse of that right.” Ak. Const. Art. I, Sec. 5.<br />
The irony of filing an ethics complaint because of a reminder about the<br />
constitutional parameters of free speech is no doubt lost on those<br />
consumed by irrationality when it comes to Sarah Palin; but one does<br />
not need an ethics law to know that positive political discourse<br />
depends on a robust debate about facts and the policy implications<br />
stemming from such facts. The nation is not helped by calumnious <i>ad hominem</i> attacks against Sarah Palin, matrilineal conspiracy theories, and aberrant notions of ethics (Van Flein, 2009, ¶2). </p>
<p>&#8211; Thomas Van Flein, Personal Attorney for Sarah Palin
</p></blockquote>
<p></p>
<div style="text-align:center;">
<b>References:</b></div>
<p></p>
<div style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.5in;">
Van Flein, T. (2009, December 3). The ethos of ethics. <i>Facebook, Sarah Palin</i>. Retrieved December 3, 2009 from: <a href="http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin#/notes/sarah-palin/the-ethos-of-ethics/188537988434">http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin#/notes/sarah-palin/the-ethos-of-ethics/188537988434</a></div>
]]></html></oembed>