AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Here's what Fact Check had to say about the distortions written about Palin--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sliming Palin
September 8, 2008
Updated: September 9, 2008
False Internet claims and rumors fly about McCain's running mate.
Summary
We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.
She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.


Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.


Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."
We'll be looking into other charges in an e-mail by a woman named Anne Kilkenny for a future story. For more explanation of the bullet points above, please read the Analysis.

Correction: In our original story, we incorrectly said that a few of the claims we examine here were included in the e-mail by Kilkenny. Only one of the claims " about the librarian's firing " was similar to an item in that e-mail. We regret the error.

Clarification: The summary originally said that Palin "tripled" per-student funding. The bill Palin signed will triple per-student funding for what Alaska calls "intensive needs" students, but has not done so yet. We also reworded that sentence to make clear the tripling is for funding for special needs students with particularly high costs. Special needs funding overall increased as well.
Analysis
Since Republican presidential nominee John McCain tapped Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to be his running mate, information about Palin's past has been zipping around the Internet. Several claims are not true, and other rumors are misleading.


No Cut for "Special Needs" Kids


It's not true, as widely reported in mass e-mails, Web postings and at least one mainstream news source, that Palin slashed the special education budget in Alaska by 62 percent. CNN's Soledad O'Brien made the claim on Sept. 4 in an interview with Nicolle Wallace, a senior adviser to the McCain campaign:

O'Brien, Sept. 4: One are that has gotten certainly people sending to me a lot of e-mails is the question about as governor what she did with the special needs budget, which I'm sure you're aware, she cut significantly, 62 percent I think is the number from when she came into office. As a woman who is now a mother to a special needs child, and I think she actually has a nephew which is autistic as well. How much of a problem is this going to be as she tries to navigate both sides of that issue?

Such a move might have made Palin look heartless or hypocritical in view of her convention-speech pledge to be an advocate for special needs children and their families. But in fact, she increased special needs funding so dramatically that a representative of local school boards described the jump as "historic."

According to an April 2008 article in Education Week, Palin signed legislation in March 2008 that would increase public school funding considerably, including special needs funding. In particular, it would increase spending for certain special needs students that Alaska calls "intensive needs" (students with high-cost special requirements) from $26,900 per student in 2008 to $73,840 per student in 2011. That almost triples the per-student spending in three fiscal years. Palin's original proposal, according to the Anchorage Daily News, would have increased funds slightly more, giving intensive needs students a $77,740 allotment by 2011.

Education Week: A second part of the measure raises spending for students with special needs [the intensive needs group] to $73,840 in fiscal 2011, from the current $26,900 per student in fiscal 2008, according to the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development.

Unlike many other states, Alaska has relatively flush budget coffers, thanks to a rise in oil and gas revenues. Funding for schools will remain fairly level next year, however. Overall per-pupil funding across the state will rise by $100, to $5,480, in fiscal 2009. ...

Carl Rose, the executive director of the Association of Alaska School Boards, praised the changes in funding for rural schools and students with special needs as a "historic event," and said the finance overhaul would bring more stability to district budgets.

According to Eddy Jeans at the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, funding for special needs and intensive needs students has increased every year since Palin entered office, from a total of $203 million in 2006 to a projected $276 million in 2009.

Those who claim that Palin cut special needs funding by 62 percent are looking in the wrong place and misinterpreting what they find there. They point to an apparent drop in the Department of Education and Early Development budget for special schools. But the special schools budget, despite the similar name, isn't the special needs budget. "I don’t even consider the special schools component [part of] our special needs funding," Jeans told FactCheck.org. "The special needs funding is provided through our public school funding formula. The special schools is simply a budget component where we have funding set aside for special projects," such as the Alaska School for the Deaf and the Alaska Military Youth Academy. A different budget component, the Foundation Program, governs special needs programs in the public school system.

And in any case, the decrease in funding for special schools is illusory. Palin moved the Alaska Military Youth Academy's ChalleNGe program, a residential military school program that teaches job and life skills to students under 20, out of the budget line for "special schools" and into its own line. This resulted in an apparent drop of more than $5 million in the special schools budget with no actual decrease in funding for the programs.

Not a Book Burner


One accusation claims then-Mayor Palin threatened to fire Wasilla’s librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. Actually, Palin never asked that books be banned; no books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren't even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication. The librarian was fired, but was told only that Palin felt she didn’t support her. She was re-hired the next day. The librarian never claimed that Palin threatened outright to fire her for refusing to ban books.

It’s true that Palin did raise the issue with Mary Ellen Emmons, Wasilla’s librarian, on at least two occasions, three in some versions. Emmons flatly stated her opposition each time. But, as the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (Wasilla’s local paper) reported at the time, Palin asked general questions about what Emmons would say if Palin requested that a book be banned. According to Emmons, Palin "was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can't be in the library." Emmons reported that Palin pressed the issue, asking whether Emmons' position would change if residents were picketing the library. Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who was at the meeting, corroborates Emmons' story, telling the Chicago Tribune that "Sarah said to Mary Ellen, 'What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?' "

Palin characterized the exchange differently, initially volunteering the episode as an example of discussions with city employees about following her administration's agenda. Palin described her questions to Emmons as “rhetorical,” noting that her questions "were asked in the context of professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city." Actually, true rhetorical questions have implied answers (e.g., “Who do you think you are?”), so Palin probably meant to describe her questions as hypothetical or theoretical. We can't read minds, so it is impossible for us to know whether or not Palin may actually have wanted to ban books from the library or whether she simply wanted to know how her new employees would respond to an instruction from their boss. It is worth noting that, in an update, the Frontiersman points out that no book was ever banned from the library’s shelves.

Palin initially requested Emmons’ resignation, along with those of Wasilla’s other department heads, in October 1996. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all of them (except one, whose department she was eliminating) to retain their positions. But in January 1997, Palin fired Emmons, along with the police chief. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons’ firing, but said she didn’t feel she had Emmons’ support. The decision caused “a stir” in the small town, according to a newspaper account at the time. According to a widely circulated e-mail from Kilkenny, “city residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin’s attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter.”

As we’ve noted, Palin did not attempt to ban any library books. We don’t know if Emmons’ resistance to Palin’s questions about possible censorship had anything to do with Emmons’ firing. And we have no idea if the protests had any impact on Palin at all. There simply isn’t any evidence that we can find either way. Palin did re-hire Emmons the following day, saying that she now felt she had the librarian’s backing. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned.

So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken “from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board”? If it was, the library board should take up fortune telling. The list includes the first four Harry Potter books, none of which had been published at the time of the Palin-Emmons conversations. The first wasn't published until 1998. In fact, the list is a simple cut-and-paste job, snatched (complete with typos and the occasional incorrect title) from the Florida Institute of Technology library Web page, which presents the list as “Books banned at one time or another in the United States.”

Update, Sept. 9: We have revised this section dealing with accusations that Palin wanted to ban books from Wasilla's library to include more detail about what transpired at the time.


Closet Secessionist?


Palin was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party " which calls for a vote on whether Alaska should secede from the union or remain a state " despite mistaken reports to the contrary. But her husband was a member for years, and she attended at least one party convention, as mayor of the town in which it was held.

The party's chair originally told reporters that Palin had been a member, but the official later retracted that statement. Chairwoman Lynette Clark told the New York Times that false information had been given to her by another member of the party after she first told the Times and others that Palin joined the AIP in 1994. Clark issued an apology on the AIP Web site.

The director of Alaska’s Division of Elections, Gail Fenumiai, confirms that Palin registered to vote in the state for the first time in May 1982 as a Republican and hasn’t changed her party affiliation since. She also told FactCheck.org that Palin’s husband, Todd, was registered with AIP from October 1995 to July 2000, and again from September 2000 until July 2002. (He has since been registered as undeclared.) However, the AIP says Todd Palin "never participated in any party activities aside from attending a convention in Wasilla at one time."

There is still some dispute as to whether Sarah Palin also attended the AIP’s 1994 convention, held in Wasilla. Clark and another AIP official told ABC News’ Jake Tapper that both Palins were there. Palin was elected mayor of Wasilla two years later. The McCain campaign says Sarah Palin went to the 2000 AIP convention, also held in Wasilla, “as a courtesy since she was mayor.” As governor, Palin sent a video message to the 2008 convention, which is available on YouTube, and the AIP says she attended in 2006 when she was campaigning.


Didn't Endorse Pat Buchanan


Claims that Palin endorsed conservative Republican Pat Buchanan for president in the 2000 campaign are false. She worked for conservative Republican Steve Forbes.

The incorrect reports stem from an Associated Press story on July 17, 1999, that said Palin was "among those sporting Buchanan buttons" at a lunch for Buchanan attended by about 85 people, during a swing he took through Fairbanks and Wasilla. Buchanan didn't help matters when he told a reporter for the liberal publication The Nation on Aug. 29: "I'm pretty sure she's a Buchananite." But in fact, she wasn't.

Soon after The AP story appeared, Palin wrote in a letter to the editor of the Anchorage Daily News that she had merely worn a Buchanan button as a courtesy to her visitor and was not endorsing him. The letter, published July 26, 1999, said:

Palin, July 26, 1999: As mayor of Wasilla, I am proud to welcome all presidential candidates to our city. This is true regardless of their party, or the latest odds of their winning. When presidential candidates visit our community, I am always happy to meet them. I'll even put on their button when handed one as a polite gesture of respect.

Though no reporter interviewed me for the Associated Press article on the recent visit by a presidential candidate (Metro, July 17), the article may have left your readers with the perception that I am endorsing this candidate, as opposed to welcoming his visit to Wasilla. As mayor, I will welcome all the candidates in Wasilla.

Palin actually worked for Forbes. Less than a month after being spotted wearing the "courtesy" button for Buchanan, she was named to the state leadership committee of the Forbes effort. The Associated Press reported on Aug. 7, 1999:

The Associated Press, Aug. 7 1999: State Sen. Mike Miller of Fairbanks will head the Alaska campaign chairman for Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes, campaign officials said. Joining the Fairbanks Republican on the leadership committee will be Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin, and former state GOP chairman Pete Hallgren, who will serve as co-chairs.

Still, after nine years, the truth has yet to catch up completely.


No Creationism in Schools


On Aug. 29, the Boston Globe reported that Palin was open to teaching creationism in public schools. That's true. She supports teaching creationism alongside evolution, though she has not actively pursued such a policy as governor.

In an Oct. 25, 2006, debate, when asked about teaching alternatives to evolution, Palin replied:

Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject " creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.

A couple of days later, Palin amended that statement in an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, saying:

Palin, Oct. 2006: I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.

After her election, Palin let the matter drop. The Associated Press reported Sept 3: "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them. ... It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans." The article was headlined, "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor." It was written by Dan Joling, who reports from Anchorage and has covered Alaska for 30 years.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STIMULUS BILL IS TREASON

The "stimulus bill" orders the distribution of government tax revenue to private individuals and private organizations, and orders the behavior of both contributors and recipients of those tax revenues. Nowhere in the Constitution is the President or Congress of the USA granted the power to do this.

President Obama and the Congressional majority are violating their oaths to support the Constitution of the USA by their implementation of their "stimulus bill." By failing to support the Constitution of the USA, the President and the Congressional majority are committing treason against the United States. They are "adhering to the USA's enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." Among these enemies are those who seek to overthrow the Constitutional Republic of the USA by replacing it with a socialist republic.

While some claim that President Obama and the Congressional majority are merely emulating previous presidents all the way back to 1913 and President Wilson, that is simply not true. They are not merely emulating past presidential violations of the Constitution. Obama and Congress are going well beyond emulation to a magnitude that, if not stopped, will destroy our Constitutional Republic. The distruction of the Constitutional Republic of the USA by Obama et al is proceding rapidly.

Weeeeellllll, maybe treason is a bit strong as there is no stated intent to violate the Constitution or overthrow the government or attack the people of the United States. We can only subjectively make a case for any of that within the stimulus bill.

This new $3.5 trillion dollar budget the President is proposing, however--I am assuming that is $3.5 trillion above and beyond the trillion plus bailout/stimulus plans already passed--bears some really close scrutiny as i am suspecting there are some pressures on American property, freedom of choice, restrictions on opportunity, and assaults on the American way of life in a way that we may have never seen before.

(And he magnanimously promises that the cost will be dealt with by 2013--that would be AFTER his first term of office and presumably after the next election when he won't have any incentive to do anything about it then either. . . )

Ican wrote:

Amendment X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
end of quote
That is very important, Ican. Let me supply some additions to that idea.

Justice Clarence Thomas noted:

"From the time of the ratification of the Constitution to the middle 1930's , it was widely understood that the Constitution granted Congress only limited powers, NOTWITHSTANDING THE COMMERCE CLAUSE. Moreoverm there was no question that activities WHOLLY SEPARATED from business, such as gun possession, were beyond the reach of the commerce power."
end of Thomas quote.


A great example is the USSC's invalidation of the Railroad Retirement Act in 1934 in which they found--

"We feel bound to hold that a pension plan thus imposed is in no proper sense a regulation of the activity of interstate transportation, IT IS AN ATTEMPT FOR SOCIAL ENDS TO IMPOSE BY SHEER FIAT NON-CONTRACTUAL INCIDENTS UPON THE RELATIONSHIP OF EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE."

If Obama has his way, we won't recognize our constitution in a couple of years, Ican. That is why his left wing colleagues must be defeated at the polls in 2010.

Perhaps it "is a bit strong," BUT I can find nothing in the Constitution that says or implies that there has to be a "stated intent to violate the Constitution or overthrow the government or attack the people of the United States" for these acts of treason to have actually been committed.

I worry that 2010 might be way too late! That's why I recommend we work to sooner impeach them all for treason.

Some may think convincing a majority of the members of the House of Representatives and two-thirds of the members of the Senate to, respectively impeach and remove Obama et al for violating their oaths to support the Constitution, is an impossible task to accomplish given the current Democrat majorities in each house. Perhaps that's true. Nonetheless, if say a half dozen members of the House were to move and publically defend a motion to impeach Obama et al, that all by itself would prove to be a substantial accomplishment for intimidating Obama et al, and greatly encouraging a great many Americans to demand the adoption of such an impeachment motion.

Merely waiting until the 2010 elections to save our republic will probably be too little, too late. Too much harm will have already been done to it to allow for its effective recovery.

Time's awaistin"!

LOL

Where were you for 8 years during Bush's term?

Too funny

Cycloptichorn

Amazing. That post was just for a laugh. What about Sarah Palin sends those with a liberal /progressive bent into cerebral apoplectic territory? Seriously, I thought I would be excoriated by the women here for being a male chauvinist Coulter enabler. I was willing to accept that. Perhaps, liberals can't believe a self starting, educated, young woman tired of local politics as usual, U.S. State politician, raised in the sticks, sporting a mind of her own, can possibly have an opinion that matters. Why? Wasn't Obama's newly adopted scion A. Lincoln the same exact thing with value added hangy down parts? Is she just a Hot Margaret Thatcher? But wait, isn't that a good thing?



JM

As grievous as Bush's actions were in violating the Constitution, they were no where near the severity of how Obama et al's declared future actions will violate our Constitution.

My personal failure to more timely deal with Bush's 2007, 2008, and 2009 huge failures to obey the Constitution, is a rotten excuse for any of us--including you Cycloptichorn--for not quickly working to stop Obama et al's declared and defended future efforts to do far worse.

Ah, mm hmm.

I think I'll just stick with my 'Ican is a crazy tax-denier' theory.

Cycloptichorn

You sound a bit like MM, the truck-driving constitutional expert. O has in no way violated the constitution. Had he, you can be assured there would be a plethora of lawsuits filed against him. You are aware, I guess, that he was a law professor.

More Coulter fun in the vein of your post :



JM

Here are some "real" Sarah Palin gaffs: http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/sarahpalin/a/palinisms.htm

Well, everyone makes Gaffes. That's not the problem.

The problem for Palin, and the thing that differentiates her from Obama and other politicians, is that sometimes other politicians sounds smart; and she very, very rarely did. Most of her speeches were heavily scripted and her unscripted interviews were disasters.

Cycloptichorn

That's not it at all; the joke "is" Palin. They just don't get it.

That the conservatives think she's the next best thing to apple pie, they've lost touch with reality with a candidate who's way beyond her league. She's perfect as mayor and governor of the small state of Alaska where they live most months inside the house - where she belongs. The whole state has a population of only 683k; doesn't even come close to many cities in the US.

Ican quoted

I am interested but both my senators are hopelessly liberal democrats. I don't think either one will listen...any suggestions?

An interesting fact; A few years ago a number of medicaid "reforms" were enacted in our state (NJ). I just read that since that time state employee numbers have increased by over 60, 000. The reform required that a given percentage cut of the welfare rolls must be met and recomended that those cut must be given help to find gainful employment...think there might be a connection?

JM

I'm curious, what would the education requirement be if you could set it?
Exactly how much education, and from what major schools, should a presidential candidate have?

And do we automatically bar anyone from running that doesnt meet those arbitrary requirements?

Frankly a college education should be the minimum that one has before attempting. I don't think graduate school should be required but it sure helps produce people who know how to deal with complex world situations in various fields. I don't believe we should bar ANYONE from running; a genius who had the ability to get people to vote for them deserves a shot.

My education desires in a leader has much less to do with where they were educated, and much more to do with their ability to display their intelligence and education through their words and actions. Palin was absolutely horrendous at this. Obama is great at it. It's the difference between the two popular politicians.

Cycloptichorn

A President Palin would do far less damage to our Constitutional Republic than either George Bush did or Barack Obama is doing!