McCain's VP:

ANCHORAGE - Gov. Tony Knowles recently signed legislation protecting victims of sexual assault from being billed for tests to collect evidence of the crime, but one local police chief said the new law will further burden taxpayers.

. . .

We would never bill the victim of a burglary for fingerprinting and photographing the crime scene, or for the cost of gathering other evidence, Knowles said. Nor should we bill rape victims just because the crime scene happens to be their bodies.

While the Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece, the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests.

Wasilla Police Chief Charlie Fannon does not agree with the new legislation, saying the law will require the city and communities to come up with more funds to cover the costs of the forensic exams.

In the past weve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just dont want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said.

According to Fannon, the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year to collect evidence for sexual assault cases.

After notifying the librarian that she was fired, Palin backtracked and decided to keep her on. Palin had twice asked this librarian what she thought about banning books, to which the librarian responded it was a lousy idea, one she wouldn't go along with. Later, Palin told the local paper that any questions she'd raised about censorship were only "rhetorical."

Palin put in place what the local paper called a gag order, prohibiting top city employees from talking to reporters unless she cleared it first.

After Stambaugh and the museum director were fired, two of the four remaining department heads quit. One, the public-works director, accused Palin of undermining him by meeting secretly with contractors and employees.

When three women who worked at the city's museum were asked to decide among themselves which one should be let go, all three quit.

Palin tried to fill two vacancies on the City Council herself, even though an ordinance said that wasn't her prerogative. It was the council's. After the city attorney stopped Palin, the mayor said she'd merely engaged in a ploy. "It was brilliant maneuvering I had to do to deal with the impasse," she told the Frontiersman.

The Frontiersman ran blistering editorials, condemning Palin's philosophy "that either we are with her or against her." The newspaper accused Palin of mistaking the 616 votes she received as a "coronation."

"Wasilla residents have been subjected to attempts to unlawfully appoint council members, statements that have been shown to be patently untrue, unrepentant backpedaling, and incessant whining that her only enemies are the press and a few disgruntled supporters of Mayor Stein. ... Palin promised to change the status quo, but at every turn we find hints of cronyism and political maneuvering. We see a woman who has long since surrendered her ideals to a political machine."

It is being reported that Mayor Palin wanted Wasilla rape victims to pay for the rape kit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfVchE_srp8

While Gov. Palin was Mayor of Wasila, Alaska in the late 1990s, the city's policy was to charge rape victims for the cost of the 'rape kits' used to collect forensic evidence to help prosecute the rapists. Eventually the state had to step in and pass a law banning the practice. And according to former Gov. Tony Knowles, the law was passed specifically in response to Wasila's policy. "There was one town in Alaska that was charging victims for this, and that was Wasilla," says Knowles.

So Wasila was either the only or one of the only towns in the state to follow this practice. And the state legislature had to intervene to put an end to it. There's no controversy about this. So this part is clear.

But it appears this is another case whether Sarah Palin is lying or in this case deputizing press aides to lie on her behalf. In this case spokeswoman Maria Comella, when asked, told USAToday that "does not believe, nor has she ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test. Gov. Palin's position could not be more clear. To suggest otherwise is a deliberate misrepresentation of her commitment to supporting victims and bringing violent criminals to justice."

Well, this just appears to be a confident statement of another lie. She does not and has never believed this, only it was her policy when she ran the city in question which was either the only or the most prominent in the state that held to this practice.

My Turn: Palin not abandoning earmarks altogether
By John Katz | Juneau Empire

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

With the coming of spring in the nation's capital, Congress has begun its annual ritual of producing a federal budget.

While Congressional earmarks represent less than 1 percent of the federal budget, a much higher percentage of the appropriations debate focuses on this topic.

One reason for this is several controversial earmarks and election-year politics. Another is that earmarks have become a metaphor for the federal budget generally. It's a lot easier to talk about earmarks than to address difficult budget issues, such as burgeoning domestic entitlement programs and defense spending.

The term earmark means different things to different people. The classic definition connotes an amount of money added by a member of Congress to the president's budget for a specific project or program.

In my opinion, earmarks are not bad in themselves. In fact, they represent a legitimate exercise of Congress' constitutional power to amend the budget proposed by the president.

Recognizing there have been instances of earmark abuse, Congress has instituted reforms to bring greater transparency and accountability to the process. These include the identification of each earmark's sponsor and a prohibition against earmarks inserted into the budget without public discussion.

Recently, members of the Alaska congressional delegation announced they would post on their Web sites the earmark requests it receives. Gov. Sarah Palin has applauded this decision.

Earlier this year, President Bush and the congressional leadership announced that the total number and dollar amount of earmarks must be reduced significantly.

The Palin administration has responded to this message by requesting 31 earmarks, down from 54 last year. Of these, 27 involve continuing or previous appropriations and four are new. The total dollar amount of these requests has been reduced from about $550 million in the previous year to just less than $200 million.

Further, the governor has insisted that each Alaska request must demonstrate an important federal purpose and strong public support.

We also have heard that, wherever possible, a state or local match should be provided. The state's budget requests incorporate this principle.

So, it is important to note there is no longer a "free lunch" at the federal level. Most federal requests have state or local budget consequences as well.

Meanwhile, the state works closely with the University of Alaska and dozens of local governments and others on the various aspects of the federal budget. These interactions are cordial and cooperative.

We take the position that each entity must interpret the new budget realities for itself. The members of the Alaska congressional delegation are the final decision makers concerning which earmark requests to pursue.

Congressional earmarks for roads and bridges have received much attention in Congress and have become a principal impetus for reform. Unfortunately, Alaska has featured prominently in this discussion.

The Palin administration has responded to this unwanted attention in a number of ways. Certain previous decisions concerning transportation earmarks are being re-examined. Currently, the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities is conducting an audit to determine the status of all recent earmarks.

In addition, the department will have further discussions with local governments that are interested in particular earmarks. This discussion is precipitated not only by the earmark reforms in Congress but by requirements imposed on all states by the Federal Highway Administration.

The department wants to ensure that sufficient funds are available to complete earmark projects and that such projects are consistent with statewide planning and priorities.

We anticipate even closer communication and coordination with the Alaska Congressional delegation as transportation earmarks are considered.

Palin has said the state can either respond to the changing circumstances in Congress or stick its head in the sand. We believe that by recognizing the necessity for change, we can enhance the state's credibility in the appropriations process and in other areas of federal policy as well.

The governor is very much aware of the importance of the federal budget to virtually every Alaskan. In responding to the new realities, we are not abandoning earmarks altogether but are seeking to constrain and document them in the ways discussed here.

• John Katz is director of State-Federal Relations and Special Counsel to Gov. Sarah Palin.

I confess, it was pretty riveting when John McCain trotted out Sarah Palin for the first time. Like many people, I thought, "Damn, a hyperconservative, fuckable, Type A, antiabortion, Christian Stepford wife in a 'sexy librarian' costume -- as a vice president? That's a brilliant stroke of horrifyingly cynical pandering to the Christian right. Karl Rove must be behind it."

Palin may have been a boost of political Viagra for the limp, bloodless GOP (and according to an ABC/Washington Post poll she has created a boost in McCain's standing among white women to a 53 over Obama's 41). But ideologically, she is their hardcore pornographic centerfold spread, revealing the ugliest underside of Republican ambitions -- their insanely zealous and cynical drive to win power by any means necessary, even at the cost of actual leadership.

Sarah Palin is a bit comical, like one of those cutthroat Texas cheerleader stage moms. What her Down syndrome baby and pregnant teenage daughter unequivocally prove, however, is that her most beloved child is the antiabortion platform that ensures her own political ambitions with the conservative right. The throat she's so hot to cut is that of all American women

I also thought Gibson conducted himself rather condescendingly.

The thing most impressive was her ability to not be suckered into answering a yes or no question, such as going into Pakistan, which is of course wise to say all options must be on the table