Sarah Palin

[Balta1701]

Or Blagojevich taking charter jets to Springfield every day because he didnt want to stay in the governers mansion.

"Sarah Palin is not worse than Blagojevich!"

 

If Illinois wasn't already Obama country for a few other reasons...that's the kind of slogan that I'd love to see the RNC run with.

[DrunkBomber]

"Sarah Palin is not worse than Blagojevich!"

 

If Illinois wasn't already Obama country for a few other reasons...that's the kind of slogan that I'd love to see the RNC run with.

To be honest, is anyone worse than Blagojevich?

[Balta1701]

To be honest, is anyone worse than Blagojevich?

You're asking a guy in the wrong state.

 

When you start comparing crap from one species to another, does it really matter which species it comes from? What usually matters more is you don't exactly want it writing your budget/stuck to your shoes.

[EvilMonkey]

Just a couple of thought about this per diem stuff, now that the foaming at the mouth stuff has calmed down. First, why is every thing an all or nothing here? Libs here b****ing because she dared take a per diem, etc. No mention of the fact that she spend WAY less than her predecessor? Just in travel alone, according to the story linked here, she spent $93,000 compared to $463,000 (!) by the old guy. That right there cut out alot. She was also entitled to take a per diem for her kids.

Leighow noted that under state policy, all of the governor's children are entitled to per diem expenses, even her infant son. "The first family declined the per diem [for] the children," Leighow said.

As for the listing on some of the forms 'lodging - home', the form doesn't say that she is billing for lodging, but taking her per diem for meals, while staying at home. Each of those entrys listed whatever function she was doing/attending (the one in the Wapo article lists a funeral). Is it inconceivable that she could have stayed the night at her home, but yet driven to the funeral wherever it was? I suppose if you hate her, it is. You have to try and make a scandal where you can, I guess. if you want to argue that she shouldn't have attended certain events, well go ahead. The story doesn't list many of them, so we don't really know. It was cheaper for the state for her to bill her per diem to cover gas and food than to get a hotel somewhere and also eat out. Bottom line, this is still a job, not charity. Anyone have a problem with Obama (and John, and Joe) collecting a paycheck while campaigning?

 

One part of the story I found kinda odd are these 2 paragraphs by the former governor:

In the past, per diem claims by Alaska state officials have carried political risks. In 1988, the head of the state Commerce Department was pilloried for collecting a per diem charge of $50 while staying in his Anchorage home, according to local news accounts. The commissioner, the late Tony Smith, resigned amid a series of controversies.

 

"It was quite the little scandal," said Tony Knowles, the Democratic governor from 1994 to 2000. "I gave a direction to all my commissioners if they were ever in their house, whether it was Juneau or elsewhere, they were not to get a per diem because, clearly, it is and it looks like a scam -- you pay yourself to live at home," he said.

 

Must have beena very quiet scandal. Go to the Anchorage Daily News site (adn.com) and search for Tony Smith. No mention of any scandal at all, and barely any mention of Tony Smith. So, is this true or false? I can't find anything to back it up. Do you think the WaPo write tried to verify it at all? I dunno. I tried 'Tony Smith Scandal', 'Per Diem', 'expense', ' death' and 'retirement'. Nothing there.

 

So my point is if you are going to go all ape-s*** over a Palin for being a cost cutter and only cutting costs by over 75% instead of 100%, then you will never be happy. b**** and moan that you want to see her in an interview or a debate. me too. But this is the same crap that the more liberal people here bemoan that the conservatives do to Obama. I can hear Balta's response now: "So the essence of this defense is that St. Sarah the Reformer is fine because she didn't steal as much as she could have, or her predecessor did". No. She cut travel expenses over 75%. She can't cut them 100%, and to expect her to is being disingenuous. This is a non-scandal, and it is taking away time from the things I am sure people would really like to kow about.

 

And I did find my new excuse for not wanting to talk to people now, courtesy of former governor Murkowski. 'I can't talk right now, I'm hunting Moose.'

(Associates of Murkowski said the former governor was moose hunting and could not be reached to comment.)

[lostfan]

I feel dumber after reading this entire argument about this "scandal," and bmags already summarized my feelings a few pages back. It's a perfectly normal, and in fact necessary practice for elected officials to use government dollars to travel, and travel to and from home in the course of official duties is legit. Unless she was being blatantly wasteful I don't see a problem here, and it doesn't appear she is. So there is nothing to see here. I have plenty of other reasons not to like Sarah Palin.

[Steff]

Steff...a lot has to do with company policy and/or the job someone does. In every job I've had they always ask, are you ok with overtime and weekends? Why, because that's the nature of the beast. If I want to do it, that's part and parcel of the job. YET, if I travel for the company, like SS2K5, as soon as I walk out my door, I'm on the clock. Also, if I'm done with my day, and I'm called back in or called for another reason, even if I didn't have to go in, it gets charged. Because, I was done for the day.

 

We can't just throw everyone into a barrel and say, that's the way it is or that's not the way it is.

 

 

First bold: As is my husband and I never said he wasn't so I don't know why you are making that point. This has nothing to do with getting reimbursed for traveling for work. It has to do with being reimbursed for being at home.

 

Second bold: good for you. Some jobs, like VP or Prez of a private company, or say something like a Mayor or Gov of a city or state don't have set hours and OT comes without it being asked of you. There is a crystal clear difference.

 

Third bold: I never said that. Please don't put words in my mouth.

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

Just a couple of thought about this per diem stuff, now that the foaming at the mouth stuff has calmed down. First, why is every thing an all or nothing here? Libs here b****ing because she dared take a per diem, etc. No mention of the fact that she spend WAY less than her predecessor? Just in travel alone, according to the story linked here, she spent $93,000 compared to $463,000 (!) by the old guy. That right there cut out alot. She was also entitled to take a per diem for her kids.

 

I understand taking a per diem for actual travel. Makes absolute sense. I don't understand taking a per diem for staying at home. For meals or for lodging. It might be legal, but its still a legal scam. She's not walking her talk. Not even a little bit there. She got rid of the Governor's Chef. But its not like that person's job was actually eliminated, so just reassigned. So I guess she just repurposed, not cut back. Mileage gets paid back as mileage, not a per-diem I would imagine, so your defense of her seems a bit of a stretch. Especially since the state of Alaska Finance Director says the per diem is for lodging. If it was for mileage, when she amended her expense reports to remove the "home" part from lodging, wouldn't you think she would change it to actual mileage?

 

As for the listing on some of the forms 'lodging - home', the form doesn't say that she is billing for lodging, but taking her per diem for meals, while staying at home. Each of those entrys listed whatever function she was doing/attending (the one in the Wapo article lists a funeral). Is it inconceivable that she could have stayed the night at her home, but yet driven to the funeral wherever it was? I suppose if you hate her, it is. You have to try and make a scandal where you can, I guess. if you want to argue that she shouldn't have attended certain events, well go ahead. The story doesn't list many of them, so we don't really know. It was cheaper for the state for her to bill her per diem to cover gas and food than to get a hotel somewhere and also eat out. Bottom line, this is still a job, not charity. Anyone have a problem with Obama (and John, and Joe) collecting a paycheck while campaigning?

 

I don't have a problem with these Senators collecting a paycheck while campaigning, because they still do work that they are elected by their constituents are supposed to do. Their offices don't close, they still work with other Senators and actually show up for votes on issues when necessary. Just like Palin will still do the work of being a Governor while she runs for Vice President and should be paid for that as well. However, I would most definitely have a problem with any of these candidates claiming staying at home as a reimbursable expense from the government.

 

So my point is if you are going to go all ape-s*** over a Palin for being a cost cutter and only cutting costs by over 75% instead of 100%, then you will never be happy. b**** and moan that you want to see her in an interview or a debate. me too. But this is the same crap that the more liberal people here bemoan that the conservatives do to Obama. I can hear Balta's response now: "So the essence of this defense is that St. Sarah the Reformer is fine because she didn't steal as much as she could have, or her predecessor did". No. She cut travel expenses over 75%. She can't cut them 100%, and to expect her to is being disingenuous. This is a non-scandal, and it is taking away time from the things I am sure people would really like to kow about.

 

It's legal. But it's sleazy. If you talk about being frugal with the taxpayer's money because it's the right thing to do, and do exactly the opposite when it specifically benefits you, that's sleazy and hypocritical. Yes, she reduced the state's travel expenses by 75% by selling the state jet. But she ended up selling it at a $600,000 loss. So I guess maybe she didn't really save that much for the government after all.

 

If this was all there was, this wouldn't really be worth talking much about. But it's indicative of the fact that Palin says one thing, but actually does another.

 

She's against earmarks, but she hired a lobbyist to get her town earmarks when she was mayor.

She's against the Bridge to Nowhere, but she only stopped the project after Congress killed it. And she still kept that money. To build a road to where that bridge isn't being built.

She stood up against unethical politicians, except she ran a PAC for Ted Stevens, who is under indictment.

She's against raising corporate taxes, but created a windfall tax on oil corporations in the state of Alaska.

 

It seems like everything that she supports, she actually did the opposite of when she had the chance to put that in practice. Everyone loves Palin right now because she is fresh and new. But the brighter you shine when first lit, the sooner your flame starts to flicker and dim.

 

[EvilMonkey]

I understand taking a per diem for actual travel. Makes absolute sense. I don't understand taking a per diem for staying at home. For meals or for lodging. It might be legal, but its still a legal scam. She's not walking her talk. Not even a little bit there. She got rid of the Governor's Chef. But its not like that person's job was actually eliminated, so just reassigned. So I guess she just repurposed, not cut back. Mileage gets paid back as mileage, not a per-diem I would imagine, so your defense of her seems a bit of a stretch. Especially since the state of Alaska Finance Director says the per diem is for lodging. If it was for mileage, when she amended her expense reports to remove the "home" part from lodging, wouldn't you think she would change it to actual mileage?

 

 

 

I don't have a problem with these Senators collecting a paycheck while campaigning, because they still do work that they are elected by their constituents are supposed to do. Their offices don't close, they still work with other Senators and actually show up for votes on issues when necessary. Just like Palin will still do the work of being a Governor while she runs for Vice President and should be paid for that as well. However, I would most definitely have a problem with any of these candidates claiming staying at home as a reimbursable expense from the government.

 

 

 

It's legal. But it's sleazy. If you talk about being frugal with the taxpayer's money because it's the right thing to do, and do exactly the opposite when it specifically benefits you, that's sleazy and hypocritical. Yes, she reduced the state's travel expenses by 75% by selling the state jet. But she ended up selling it at a $600,000 loss. So I guess maybe she didn't really save that much for the government after all.

 

If this was all there was, this wouldn't really be worth talking much about. But it's indicative of the fact that Palin says one thing, but actually does another.

 

She's against earmarks, but she hired a lobbyist to get her town earmarks when she was mayor.

She's against the Bridge to Nowhere, but she only stopped the project after Congress killed it. And she still kept that money. To build a road to where that bridge isn't being built.

She stood up against unethical politicians, except she ran a PAC for Ted Stevens, who is under indictment.

She's against raising corporate taxes, but created a windfall tax on oil corporations in the state of Alaska.

 

It seems like everything that she supports, she actually did the opposite of when she had the chance to put that in practice. Everyone loves Palin right now because she is fresh and new. But the brighter you shine when first lit, the sooner your flame starts to flicker and dim.

Rex, maybe you didn't reasd the part about what the per diem was for. "a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business. " NOT rooms. Look at the expense sheet that is shown in th article. It lists for the day in question a funeral and Black commnity meeting. NOT for lodging. The home part was listed to explain why there was no seperate entry FOR lodging. So by staying at home, she saved the state money. Should she have paid for the gas to get there out of her own pocket? But go ahead, keep on believing what you want. Twist those facts in your head enough times and they will fit. As for the Chef and jet, the chef was both fired (from personal chef duties)and reassigned (to the house in general on call). However the job change resulted in a savings of over $40,000. But I guess that isn't good enough. The jet, while sold for less than it cost to buy, also saved the cost of the security guard/pilots for the plane (FAA required that both pilot & co-pilot be able to fly it) and the monthly maintenance and fuel costs which were upwards of $40,000. But again, it's all or nothing with you.

 

Ah, Ted Stevens. To pull a line from Obama on O'Reilly, "She knows thousands of people". She WAS on his pac. Just like Obama WAS on Ayers board. He's the sitting Senator from her state, there is no way she can completyely ignore him and still do her job in the state. They weren't too friendly when she ran for govenor against Murkowski, who was a good friend of Stevens. Stevens ended up endorsing Palin, but with 3 weeks left in the race when it was clear she was going to win. Here, from my favorite source, palin criticizes Stevens about the scandal.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...29/1305615.aspx

 

As for the oil taxes she passed, that was to get back much of what Murkowski gave away. They had been getting great deals under Murkowski, and the previous taxes were set with oil being around $50/barrel. Once it got over $100/barrel something was done to level the taxes back out.

 

I'm done with this, at least on the travel crap. Have at it if it makes you feel good.

[kapkomet]

Rex, maybe you didn't reasd the part about what the per diem was for. "a "per diem" allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business. " NOT rooms. Look at the expense sheet that is shown in th article. It lists for the day in question a funeral and Black commnity meeting. NOT for lodging. The home part was listed to explain why there was no seperate entry FOR lodging. So by staying at home, she saved the state money. Should she have paid for the gas to get there out of her own pocket? But go ahead, keep on believing what you want. Twist those facts in your head enough times and they will fit. As for the Chef and jet, the chef was both fired (from personal chef duties)and reassigned (to the house in general on call). However the job change resulted in a savings of over $40,000. But I guess that isn't good enough. The jet, while sold for less than it cost to buy, also saved the cost of the security guard/pilots for the plane (FAA required that both pilot & co-pilot be able to fly it) and the monthly maintenance and fuel costs which were upwards of $40,000. But again, it's all or nothing with you.

 

Ah, Ted Stevens. To pull a line from Obama on O'Reilly, "She knows thousands of people". She WAS on his pac. Just like Obama WAS on Ayers board. He's the sitting Senator from her state, there is no way she can completyely ignore him and still do her job in the state. They weren't too friendly when she ran for govenor against Murkowski, who was a good friend of Stevens. Stevens ended up endorsing Palin, but with 3 weeks left in the race when it was clear she was going to win. Here, from my favorite source, palin criticizes Stevens about the scandal.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/200...29/1305615.aspx

 

As for the oil taxes she passed, that was to get back much of what Murkowski gave away. They had been getting great deals under Murkowski, and the previous taxes were set with oil being around $50/barrel. Once it got over $100/barrel something was done to level the taxes back out.

 

I'm done with this, at least on the travel crap. Have at it if it makes you feel good.

That part right there is beautiful.

 

 

[bmags]

She WAS on his pac. Just like Obama WAS on Ayers board.

 

 

She helped a corrupt politician run for the very office he will be corrupt in. Obama wasn't on a board giving new ideas for Ayers to build bombs with. Just a dumb comparison.

[bmags]

Just in travel alone, according to the story linked here, she spent $93,000 compared to $463,000 (!) by the old guy. That right there cut out alot. She was also entitled to take a per diem for her kids.

 

what's the time frame on this alpha, because if it isn't a 18 month to 18 month comparison it is moot.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Obama wasn't on a board giving new ideas for Ayers to build bombs with.

yes he was. Obama's a Muslim terrorist.

[kapkomet]

yes he was. Obama's a Muslim terrorist.

Ok, stop it, no one's saying that.

[BigSqwert]

LOL...speaking of celebrities and their role in politics, check out this snippet from Matt Damon:

 

“It’s like a really bad Disney movie. The hockey mom…from Alaska and she’s the president and it’s like she’s facing down Vladimir Putin and using the folksy stuff she learned at the hockey rink and it’s absurd.”

 

“It’s a really terrifying possibility…the fact that we’ve gotten this far and we’re that close to this being a reality is crazy.”

 

I want to know if she really thinks dinosaurs were here 4,000 years ago. I want to know that. I really do. Because she’s going to have the nuclear codes.”

 

And Yes, I agree, most celebrities should be ignored when voicing their political opinions.

 

EDIT: And when I say "ignored" I mean that their opinions shouldn't sway voters.

Edited September 10, 2008 by BigSqwert

[GoSox05]

Ok, stop it, no one's saying that.

 

 

The ad that brought up Bill Ayers also talked about 9/11. You think that was on accident?

 

 

 

[thedoctor]

I can't argue with the bold, but political reasons are the only thing that candidates in either party care about. And in terms of that, Palin (along with the convention) has given McCain a significant boost in the polls.

 

did palin deliver the boost or did the convention? i don't recall significant jumps until after the convention, when the typical jumps you'd expect to see following a convention happened.

[BigSqwert]

did palin deliver the boost or did the convention? i don't recall significant jumps until after the convention, when the typical jumps you'd expect to see following a convention happened.

I'd have to guess it's mostly Palin.

[CanOfCorn]

I'd have to guess it's mostly Palin.

 

Also depends when they took the poll...after her speech or after the convention.

[EvilMonkey]

what's the time frame on this alpha, because if it isn't a 18 month to 18 month comparison it is moot.

I try to get out, and you drag me back in! If you would have read the story, it says it was her first year vs his last year. So apples to apples.

[Cknolls]

Maybe this helps:

 

 

The analysis prepared by Palin's office added up travel costs for time in Anchorage, other parts of Alaska, out of state, and public safety costs associated with gubernatorial travels — in other words, most of the cost of such travels. Palin's office found that she had spent $122,970 in her first nine months in office. I don't have a figure for her entire first year, but if she spent in the final quarter at the rate she spent in the first three, that would be about $164,000 for the year. These are the figures for the other governors:

 

 

Murkowski 2006 $525,392

Murkowski 2005 255,823

Murkowski 2004 217,023

Murkowski 2003 275,546

Knowles 2002 278,026

Knowles 2001 210,968

Knowles 2000 89,578

Knowles 1999 73,700

 

 

[Soxy]

I try to get out, and you drag me back in! If you would have read the story, it says it was her first year vs his last year. So apples to apples.

Was he in the middle of running again in his last year? Because if he wasn't, I would argue they weren't comparable because he'd essentially be lame duck.

[whitesoxfan101]

And Yes, I agree, most celebrities should be ignored when voicing their political opinions.

 

EDIT: And when I say "ignored" I mean that their opinions shouldn't matter because their idiots with no clue what is going on.

 

Fixed. And for the record, I'd say the same thing if they were all republicans. Some rich, famous person's opinion should mean nothing. End of story. The vast, vast majority of them don't even have a clue what they are talking about and say stupid s*** just because they can.

Edited September 10, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[Soxy]

Fixed. And for the record, I'd say the same thing if they were all republicans. Some rich, famous person's opinion should mean nothing. End of story. The vast, vast majority of them don't even have a clue what they are talking about and say stupid s*** just because they can.

That post would have been so much more convincing if it were grammatically correct.

 

I appreciate the irony though.

[whitesoxfan101]

That post would have been so much more convincing if it were grammatically correct.

 

I appreciate the irony though.

 

I don't do grammar checks when I post here. It's hard enough to keep track of it when I have to, I'm certainly not going to waste my time here. Thanks for validating my point by going the route of grammatical criticism though. I'd love to know why you think the opinions of the rich and famous matter.

[BigSqwert]

I'd love to know why you think the opinions of the rich and famous matter.

 

Where did she say that?