Mike Paul, "Republican Consultant" on HARDBALL now..is a total idiot

[BrklynLiberal]

Sorry, but any African American who can argue for McSame, the way he is, must be mentally ill.

[GOPNotForMe]

1. He sure has mastered the Patented Republican Indignation.

[WeDidIt]

2. HE outright LIED about Obama

claimed Obama called McCain "unhinged".

Tweety couldn't believe this guy made that accusation.

[Genevieve]

5. Mike Paul is "unhinged". eom

[C_U_L8R]

11. Maybe it was a Freudian slip

this GOP tool may have just revealed that McCain is indeed unhinged.

In fact the hinges seem to be coming off the whole freekin' GOP.
They are in a panic !

[Hamlette]

20. at least Tweety called him on it, he didn't have the facts but basically said I don't believe you.

[AirmensMom]

3. A rude one at that.

He talks over everyone, so we can't hear what any of them are saying.

[GrizzlyMan]

4. MLK and Bobby Kennedy must be rolling over in their graves

And so are all the civil rights organizers who risked, and in some cases, lost their lives during the 60s.

[Erin Elizabeth]

6. Husband came in here, turned it onto that, and I didn't even notice

until that guy started talking.

Husband left the room (don't freaking ask me why he does that!) so I turned it off. Husband comes back in and asked me why and I said "there was some huge asshole on there talking all over the other woman and acting like Obama is a terrorist."

Husband didn't blame me for turning it off. Who needs to listen to an asshole?

[ClarkUSA]

7. The phrase "Uncle Tom" comes to mind.

I've seen the sucker before and he's turning Republican tricks for a paycheck.

[elkston]

8. "Turning Republican tricks" ... LOL. Nice way to put it. (eom)

[jenmito]

9. What do you call a musical band of Black Republicans?

A House Band.

[demo dutch]

10. Chris mentioned the Sheriff in FL's intro, is that actually legal while in uniform??

[BrklynLiberal]

12. Good question. I know military follks cannot do that in uniform.

[demo dutch]

13. I just researched he might be in violation of the Hatch Act! so what's next?

[BrklynLiberal]

14. I think that might apply only to Federal employees.

I guess there would have to be some state or local law against what he did.

There is part of the Hatch Act that applies to State and Local Employees.
The question is the definition of "covered employees"


Covered state and local employees may not-

* be candidates for public office in a partisan election
* use official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the results of an election or nomination
* directly or indirectly coerce contributions from subordinates in support of a political party or candidate

BUT it also says!!!

Permitted Activities

Covered state and local employees may-

* run for public office in nonpartisan elections
* campaign for and hold office in political clubs and organizations
* actively campaign for candidates for public office in partisan and nonpartisan elections
* contribute money to political organizations and attend political fundraising functions

[demo dutch]

16. no there are state laws, he is actually in violation of Florida Statutes

which prohibits the political activity of municipal officers and employees for the purpose of influencing an election.
This is an ethics violation

Quote:
Florida Statutes state that it is illegal to misuse one's public position. No public officer, employee of an agency or local government attorney shall corruptly use or attempt to use his or her official position or any property or resource which may be within his or her trust, or perform his or her officials duties, to secure a special privilege, benefit, or exemption for himself, herself or others.

http://www.ethics.state.fl.us/

Abyway I emailed de ethics dept with the complaint

[BrklynLiberal]

17. EXCELLENT!!! I will do the same.

[NotThisTime]

18. What is the email address? I can only find the phone number?

[demo dutch]

21. I emailed my Dem rep and the office of the Gov.

[BrklynLiberal]

15. This might be of some value

http://pogoblog.typepad.com/pogo/2008/08/dont-you-have-e.html

The legal underpinnings of this conflict are complicated and we do not pretend to be able to sort through them decisively. We can however raise one very pertinent question: is this really a good use of federal resources, to pounce upon the goings-on in sheriffs’ offices in small-town Florida?

The action begins with letters from the Office of Special Counsel, an independent agency charged with enforcing the Hatch Act that forbids politicking in federal offices, to employees of local sheriffs’ offices in Florida, warning them that they could not retain their jobs while running as candidates for the office of sheriff. On July 14th, a letter was sent to Kevin Rambosk, who had been Undersheriff in Collier County. When Rambosk decided to run to replace the retiring Sheriff, Don Hunter, Hunter moved Rambosk to the position of Executive Officer in order to avoid offending the Hatch Act. Despite this measure, the OSC letter sternly warns that Rambosk that he is still in violation of the law, largely because the Sheriff’s Office receives a number of federal grants from both the Justice and Homeland Security Departments.

As the letter, signed by Attorney Nicole Elredge of the OSC Hatch Act Unit, states: “The Hatch Act, 5 U.S.C. 1501-1508, restricts the political activity of individuals principally employed by state, county, or municipal executive agencies in connection with programs financed in whole or in part by loans or grants made by the United States or a federal agency.” To that sentence is appended the following footnote: “We have reviewed the Florida State Constitution, state statutes, and case law and concluded that sheriffs’ offices in Florida are executive branch agencies for purposes of the Hatch Act.”

The Florida Sheriffs Association and its attorneys and supporters jumped on that footnote, asserting strongly that in fact Florida sheriffs are members of the judicial, not the executive, branch. Citing Florida statutes, as well as rulings of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) that hears cases brought by OSC to support that conclusion, they argued that the Hatch Act does not apply to them.

The OSC letter, however, seems to lean more heavily on the federal funding argument: “It has long been established that an officer or employee of a state or local agency is subject to the Hatch Act if, as a normal and foreseeable incident of his principal position or job, he performs duties in connection with an activity financed in whole or in part by federal funds.” In the case of Rambosk, OSC wrote, as Undersheriff he had “overall budget authority, supervisory authority over employees who handle federal grants, and supervisory authority over employees whose salaries were federally funded.” Thus, OSC concluded, he had “duties in connection with federally funded programs and covered by the provisons of the Hatch Act.” Moving him from that position to Executive Officer was clearly “a temporary maneuver” and did not change the overall situation.

As we noodle around on OSC’s site, we find this is not the first time it has objected to campaigning on the part of some obscure local official in some tiny Smalltown USA. OSC may even be right about the law. But if the law supposes that, to quote Charles Dickens, then the law is a ass and probably should be changed.

[Tutonic]

19. Met him before, he has some hygiene issues.

N/T