Sarah Palin's supreme disqualification should be alarming, persuading people to vote against GOP.

Opponent: "This comes down to whether or not Palin will be impeached or fired. On the first one, I would like to point out that an impeachment does not need the President's signature, so the Dems don't need to be veto proof. All they need in the House is a majority, and in the Senate, the 60 seats. That's enough." My opponent insists on debating a point which is not debatable. A 2/3 vote is needed to get an impeachment. Here is a an excerpt from wikipedia.com (http://en.wikipedia.org...): "....in order to convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required. Conviction automatically removes the defendant from office. Following conviction, the Senate may vote to further punish the individual by barring them from holding future federal office (either elected or appointed). Despite a conviction by the Senate, the defendant remains liable to criminal prosecution. It is possible to impeach someone even after the accused has vacated their office in order to disqualify the person from future office or from certain emoluments of their prior office (such as a pension). If there is no charge for which a two-thirds majority of the senators present vote "Guilty", the defendant is acquitted and no punishment is imposed. After a person has been accused, they are not allowed to return." Once again, Dems are in position to increase their seats in the senate to 60 not 67. They do not hold a large enough majority, specifically 2/3 majority, to ensure an impeachment against Sarah Palin. Also "veto proof" is a 2/3 majority in the senate. These definitions are not debatable they are the law as it exits today. Opponent: "On firing, I would like to point out that some political analysts (can provide names if you would like) have speculated that McCain will fire Sarah Palin after he is elected, because doing it now would be suicide, but as he will likely be a one-term president, and he knows that Palin is incompetent, he may do the smart thing and fire her." My opponent agrees Palin is incompetent. His argument is that Palin will likely be fired based on a "political analyst's" speculation, and because my opponent claims that McCain knows Palin is incompetent. To this I say, "Huh?". If McCain knows Palin is incompetent but still willing to have her elected to VP, he is not "Putting Country First". This behavior is grossly immoral and unethical. It shows that McCain is willing to put America at risk to win an election. If McCain really thought this way, this is what he would be saying: "Vote for me for President. Ignore Sarah Palin, I know she's incompetent thats why I plan to fire her after i get into office." That argument does not help prove his point. It supports my argument that people should vote down the GOP ticket to keep "incompetent" Palin from reaching the VP. Why wait till tomorrow, when you can get it done today? Let alone betting on chance to save you. Opponent: "From the Alaska Code " (a) A public officer may not use, or attempt to use, an official position for personal gain, and may not intentionally secure or grant unwarranted benefits or treatment for any person." "(1) shall order the employee to stop engaging in any official action related to the violation; (2) may order divestiture, establishment of a blind trust, restitution, or forfeiture; and (3) may recommend that the employee's agency take disciplinary action, including dismissal." AS39.52.410" Unfortunatly the above excerpt from the Alaska Code of Ethics has been altered. Here is the actual excerpt in as it reads in the legislation (http://www.law.state.ak.us...): Sec. 39.52.410. Violations; penalties for misconduct. (a) If the personnel board determines that a public employee has violated this chapter, it (1) shall order the employee to stop engaging in any official action related to the violation; (2) may order divestiture, establishment of a blind trust, restitution, or forfeiture; and (3) may recommend that the employee's agency take disciplinary action, including dismissal. The list goes on to about six. But notice how the (a.) in my opponents version differs from the (a.) posted on the Alaska Government website. Now for those who are not up to par on the Trooper-Gate scandal here is why the ACTUAL (a.) is important. The investigation was conducted by the legislature not the "Personnel Board". This investigation was conducted because the the APSC whistle blew on Palin for her abuse of power in trying to get Trooper Wooten fired. This investigation is simply that, an investigation. It holds not legal weight. It is just formal evidence. Now the "Personnel Panel", which are personally selected by the Governor, will review the investigation and decide whether or not to further action is needed. Now it is unlikely the "Personnel Panel" will conduct a review anytime soon, especially not before election day. So my opponent is wrong. Palin can not be impeached from office as a result of this investigation. Which is why it is important to not vote GOP and keep Palin far away from National Office. Opponent: "If I don't vote for McCain, simply because I don't like Palin, the only message I send is "I don't want McCain-Palin as our administration." That doesn't change things. Furthermore, as I said, the potential for Palin to gain great power would in all likelihood never become reality." I disagree, "I don't like McCain-Palin as our administration" is only ONE message that you will be sending. This belief is simplifying the impact of voting. Companies conduct hundreds of polls and crunch countless of pieces of data in order to better understand what causes voters to vote one way as opposed to another. Current polls already suggest that Palin is having a negative impact on the GOP ticket. People are becoming more and more turned off by her. The votes need to support this trend. The vote count is what all the analysts and strategists will come back to in order to reference their findings. It will tell them how much of an impact a candidate like Palin will have on an election. If we vote down GOP because of Palin they will know that other candidates like Palin will result in a lost election. My opponent claims that Palin's chances of getting into a position of power if elected as VP are unlikely. I consider the VP a position of great power in government. VP is #2 in line to protect this country and put forth agendas that will benefits all its people. "The informal roles and functions of the Vice President depend on the specific relationship between the President and the Vice President, but often include drafter and spokesperson for the administration's policy, as an adviser to the president, as Chairman of the Board of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), as a Member of the board of the Smithsonian Institution, and as a symbol of American concern or support" (http://en.wikipedia.org...). I can see it now, Palin pushing to get a display from a creationist museum, depicting Man riding on Dinosaurs, put into the Smithsonian Institution. Or trying to convince NASA that the Universe is not billions of years old, its 4,000 years old. Despite these informal roles, VP should be a close advisor and confidant for the President. Historically that has been their main role. Palin can't be that person for McCain. Palin can not and should not be trusted with the VP position. To much rides on this election to leave it to "Chance". Sarah Palin's lack of credentials, lack of knowledge on key issues, and recent "Abuse of Power" findings make her unfit for the job. These are reasons enough to Not vote GOP in this election.