Bring It On!

Palin Billed Alaskans for Nights Spent at Home

September 9th, 2008 | by Steve O |

Remember, she’s a reformer, she once lied about selling a jet on e-bay and said she fired a chef but didn’t;

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a “per diem” allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions. And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

I don’t see reforms, I don’t see change, I see nothing but the same.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • e-mail
  • YahooMyWeb
Sphere: Related Content

  1. 20 Responses to “Palin Billed Alaskans for Nights Spent at Home”

  2. By Chris Radulich on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Does this mean ( if elected) we get to pay to schelp her children around? Have we done it in the past? Is she incapable of leaving her kids behind on trips?

  3. By manapp99 on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    She didn’t lie about selling the jet on Ebay. She said she PUT it on Ebay, no that she sold it on Ebay.

    More Palin lies debunked here:

    http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html

    Obama said something about lies getting around the internet faster than truths last week on This Week. Guess he is right about something after all.

  4. By Steve O on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Manapp, she implied which is no different than lying. And while we are going down that road. McCain flat out lied about it because he did say she sold it on e-bay.

  5. By manapp99 on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Steve O, these are such important issues I can see why you won’t be casting your vote for the McCain/Palin team. Hell Obama/Biden have been so consistantly truthful, except for little things like:

    Public campaign financing

    Pulling out of NAFTA

    Not allowing the Telecoms immunity in the FISA bill

    Not allowing drilling offshore

    Eliminating the Bush tax cuts for the rich

    That I can clearly see why you are so bent about the distinction between LISTING on Ebay and SELLING on Ebay.

    The big issues of the campaign.

    You could ask Biden about the issues but you will not know if they are his answers or ones he lifted from someone else speech.

  6. By Steve O on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Manapp, what does anything you just listed have to do with this topic?

    Please stay on topic or not reply please.

  7. By manapp99 on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    The first line of you post SteveO was this:

    “Remember, she’s a reformer, she once lied about selling a jet on e-bay and said she fired a chef but didn’t;”

    So it appeared that the topic had something to do with lies by those running for President or Vice President.

    Clearly the “topic” is about finding as much dirt as possible on Sarah Palin. Most of the dirt that has been running around the left wing blogs for the last week or so has been debunked and I am sure that the newest rummors will be so as well.

    It is also clear that the left is no longer willing to discuss any real issues and is intent on the politics of personal destruction.

  8. By Steve O on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Manapp, maybe McCain had done a better job vetting his choice. Also, it is becoming clear that he should have chosen someone else.

  9. By manapp99 on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Judging by her popularity rating in her home state, the newest poll numbers with the Palin bounce, and the futile efforts to smear Sarah, it looks as if the vetting and the choice were excellent.

    What is becoming clear is that Obama screwed the pooch by not picking Hillary.

    His judgement is to be questioned based on his poor VEEP choice.

  10. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    I think that Steve O’s use of the reporting in this Washington Post article to argue that Sarah Palin is no agent of change but more of the same is basically valid. Even her own spokesperson says in the article that the expenses are “not unusual”. Translation: they are usual. Point: they are more of the same.

    While lies by politicians are like the stars of the heavens, ubiquitous, pointing out lies by the Democratic presidential and vice-presidential candidate do nothing to rebut the charge that drawing expenses that are not unusual is indicative of more of the same. In other words, the proper rebuttal is to point out all of the ways that Sarah Palin has been an agent of change…like putting the state jet up for auction on E-Bay. That’s different. That’s change. Or how about standing up to three big oil companies, the vice president, a US senator from Alaska and a bunch of other pressure coming from Republicans to negotiate a better deal on a pipeline to benefit Alaskans and all Americans.

    The last guy to stand up to Dick Cheney got shot in the face for it. Sarah did it and won her fight. That’s different. Sarah Palin stood up to corruption by politicians in her own party, politicians who were ousted from office. That’s different. That’s all reform.

    Tu quoque arguments (roughly translated: “Oh, yeh? So’s yer ol’ man!”) may not be off topic (since Steve O made lies by Palin and McCain on topic) but they are ineffective. The only way to rebut the charge that Sarah Palin is more of the same is to show her to be a reformer. It can be done but not by painting the other guys as liars, too. We all know they’re all liars. The question is, is there truth to their claims. Strictly speaking, there is truth to the claim that Sarah Palin is a reformer and an agent of change.

  11. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    But there is also truth to the claim that, in some ways, she is a politician like any other politician.

  12. By manapp99 on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Then perhaps Steve O could run posts on Palin being a politician like any other or how she is not the agent of change instead of endless attacks many of which have now been debunked.

    Then we could argue the merits of as candidate for VEEP instead of her legal use of Per diem and where she sold or listed the governors jet.

    I am responding to the material presented.

  13. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    The most salient factor is that she is a human being with power who may be about to receive a grade bump, a big one! We should want, indeed we need, to know everything we can about her, the good and the bad. That’s the only way we can make an informed judgment.

    So Manapp99, you scored a point in my book about the E-Bay thing. She said she put the plane on E-Bay. She put the plane on E-Bay. She told the literal truth in a way that implied something that was not true. Sort of like Bill Clinton told the literal truth (depending on what the meaning of the word “is” is) about his flings outside of his official business in office.

  14. By Chris Radulich on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    McSame is saying that part of her executive experience is that she was on the PTA. Turns out that she was a member but never an officer. So in that regard I have more qualified than her, having been elected both treasurer and president of the PTA back in the early eighties.

  15. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Uh, yeh. When you are elected Mayor and Governor, get back to us, Chris. Til then, let’s try not to be laughably stupid, shall we?

  16. By Chris Radulich on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    I usually leave that up to you and you rarely disappoint.

  17. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Not in this case. Until you are actually more qualified than a woman whose been elected mayor and Governor, for you future reference, the words “I have more qualified (sic) than her” should never, ever leave your keyboard with reference to a woman who has. Having been elected treasurer and president of a PTA does not make you more qualified than Palin in ANY respect. Mayor and Governor trumps PTA president each and every time.

  18. By mr bigstuff on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    napp, craig,
    never let it be forgotten that you 2 as well as 50 some odd million other american fools voted for the most ill-spoken and without a doubt the absolute worst president in american history twice. anyone with the smallest degree of intelligence and least one book read other than the bible in ones life history could have easily predicted the disasters that the absolute worst administration has caused. not you guys though. hell w was somebody you’d want to drink a beer with. obviously ignoring the fact that the little pussy w couldn’t drink anymore, not even that one beer you thought it would be so cool to share with the moron. reason being, ole w would fuck up worse on one beer than he does sober, if such incompetence can even be imagined. he spoke from the heart you thought. your minds and what passes for w’s mind obviously melded. that don’t say much for your mind does it? you supported that fool every step of the way. just like that pitiful has been shell of a self described but obviously delusional and very alleged “maverick”. and now in walks sarah fucking palin with her disgusting hillbilly brood in tow, one who got banged up by the biggest redneck juvenile delinquent the alaskan wasteland could produce. all the while making the palins so proud of the little girl who didn’t have an abortion and didn’t use birth control because she had no idea where all those other palins who somehow all look alike came from. hell, in sunday school which is all that passes for any form of education in the evangelical environment she was told a stork brings babies to all those who have gods blessing. way fucking smart. sounds like somebody all you w supporters could get behind. you guys aren’t satisfied with hoisting upon america the worst president in american history. no, now you want to elect two morons even dumber than w to finish the job of greatest fuck up of all time while speeding down the path to the end times while you psychos sing hallelujah. it’s not enough that w with your unending support has kept this country on gasoline guzzling down even more while you bitch about peak oil and start a war for it that you and he cannot and will not finish. it’s not enough to destroy the constitution on which this country rose above all others and gave the rest of the world hope that the rule of law would always trump the rule of corrupt idealogues. it’s not enough that for the last 8 years scientific and medical advances have been seriously curtailed by bible thumping morons who can’t understand global warming and the delicate balance in which our precious environment survives as do we. it’s not enough that a dollar fucking bill spent many times over on health alleged care premiums is more important than a human life. no, fuck no. you want much more of the same. you want another president who sounds like a fool every time he opens his mouth and has no concept of truth. in a vice president, you want a mindless fucking bimbo only a state with less people than most major cities, comprised of runaways, castaways, and social misfits for the most part voted for. yeah way to work. try using your head for something besides a hat rack. you fools fucked up so bad voting for that idiot w twice, why do you think any american as dumb as most may be would want anything to do with another republican fuck up. hell, even a good portion of the republican higher ups and grand poopahs avoided your disgusting convention for the very reasons i have mentioned. there is no way in hell i will listen to or pay any heed to the opinion of anyone dumb enough to vote for w twice. and here you are again trying to drum up support for two more fools to continue the w campaign of complete and total american destruction. no fucking thanks. go home, turn on fox noise, pass out in front of the television while the few intelligent americans left clean up the mess you made.

  19. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Hey guy. Have you ever even heard of an argument that wasn’t an ad hominem? Do any of the administrators wish to say anything about personal attacks on posters and other commenters? Or are such attacks okay against conservatives?

    Have a great day!

  20. By mr bigstuff on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    thanx there w.

  21. By Craig R. Harmon on Sep 9, 2008 | Reply

    Manapp99,

    Then perhaps Steve O could run posts on Palin being a politician like any other or how she is not the agent of change…

    Actually, that’s exactly what I take Steve O’s post to be about: Palin is more of the same. Doesn’t that translate to “Palin is a politician like any other” and “Palin is not the agent of change”?

Post a Comment

Fish.Travel