Palin Smears

This page is in response to people who like to take quotes of context, make something out of nothing, or just make crap up. It is dedicated to debunking some of the vitriol and garbage that has been circulating on the internet about Republican Vice Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin. Most of these claims come from Facebook groups I’ve seen or other mailings. If you have a claim you’d like to have debunked, email it to me.

The first is from my initial post on the subject titled “Palin Derangement Syndrome”

It told us that she can distort the facts and deliver mean-spirited zingers with the best of them. It told us that if Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter ever need a stand-in, she’d be a great pick.

It told us that she can be condescending and dismissive of the real work Barack Obama did helping real people on the South Side of Chicago. It told us that she can uphold the long Republican tradition of lying about Democratic tax cuts—even though Obama’s plan would give Americans a bigger break than McCain’s.

“Mean-spirited zingers,” Ooo, kinda like the attacks Barack Obama launched on John McCain in his acceptance speech, all ten of them. Meanwhile McCain used significantly less time attacking Obama (only four “mean-spirited zingers.”)

Also, can we begin to actually listen to what Palin and Giuliani were alluding to when they mentioned Obama’s community organizing. They are attacking the notion that his work as a community organizer is somehow executive experience that qualifies him for the presidency. We also can’t discount the fact that his work as a community organizer included getting his hands dirty with ACORN a fringe group that uses federal money to illegally register voters.

But the speech—written by one of President Bush’s speechwriters—didn’t tell us the truth about Sarah Palin’s extremist positions. And the more that people know her far-right views, the less they support her. (There’s a partial list below.)

Oh man, I can’t wait to see these “extremist positions,” she must believe in killing babies that are products of failed abortions. No wait, that’s Barack Obama.

Palin’s speech and the reaction to it also made clear why McCain picked her. It wasn’t a decision about who’s most qualified to serve a heart-beat away from the presidency—it was a political decision about pleasing the far-right base of the Republican party.

Sure, McCain picked her to please the base of the party, not the far-right base. McCain isn’t a conservative and the base of the party weren’t very fond of some of his positions, so yes, it was to please the base. But had he picked Mitt Romney, no one would be making this argument.

So are you ready for these “extremist positions?” Mind you these are all sourced to ThinkProgress and MoveOn.org, two extremely liberal blogs that are far left of the mainstream.

1.

Palin recently said that the war in Iraq is “God’s task.” She’s even admitted she hasn’t thought about the war much—just last year she was quoted saying, “I’ve been so focused on state government, I haven’t really focused much on the war in Iraq.”

You mean she believes in God? What a loon! It’s not like 80% believes in God or anything, I mean jeez, how out-of-touch.

As for her being more focused on state government than the war in Iraq isn’t a bad thing. After all, she is the governor of Alaska, she really shouldn’t be focused about Iraq, she can’t do anything about it, she should be concerned about her state. She can have her personal beliefs, and in fact she does, here’s the full quote.

“I’ve been so focused on state government, I haven’t really focused much on the war in Iraq. I heard on the news about the new deployments, and while I support our president, Condoleezza Rice and the administration, I want to know that we have an exit plan in place; I want assurances that we are doing all we can to keep our troops safe.”

So she’s a governor that’s more focused on state government than the war in Iraq. That sounds normal to me.

2.

Palin has actively sought the support of the fringe Alaska Independence Party. Six months ago, Palin told members of the group—who advocate for a vote on secession from the union—to “keep up the good work” and “wished the party luck on what she called its ‘inspiring convention.’”

First of all, it’s been proven that Palin was not part of the Alaskan Independence Party. Furthermore, if they quote the entire opening statement you’d hear that her speech was hardly an endorsement. In fact she says that the party plays an important role in state politics because she thinks “competition is so good.” See for yourself, the video is below.

The AIP has even released a message on their site saying…

Contrary to initial reports, Vice-President candidate Governor Sarah Palin was never a member of our party. We stand corrected. We issued a press release today. It is posted here to those members of the media who did not recieve it.

They also say…

Todd Palin was registered as a member but never participated in any party activities aside from attending a convention in 1994.

Furthermore, why would Palin endorse a rival party. She ran against a nominee from the Alaskan Independence Party in 2006, her address to the party was exactly what Barack Obama loves, bipartisanship. Also, if you watch the video Palin specifically hails the AIP for upholding the constitution, which is labeled as number one in their party platform.

3.

Palin wants to teach creationism in public schools. She hasn’t made clear whether she thinks evolution is a fact.

Again, if you read the full context of the quote, you see the truth…

In an interview Thursday, Palin said she meant only to say that discussion of alternative views should be allowed to arise in Alaska classrooms:

“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.”

She added that, if elected, she would not push the state Board of Education to add such creation-based alternatives to the state’s required curriculum.

Members of the state school board, which sets minimum requirements, are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Legislature.

“I won’t have religion as a litmus test, or anybody’s personal opinion on evolution or creationism,” Palin said.

So she believes creationism should be taught alongside evolution, but isn’t going to force it upon schools. Sounds mainstream and fair to me.

4.

Palin doesn’t believe that humans contribute to global warming. Speaking about climate change, she said, “I’m not one though who would attribute it to being manmade.”

This one really isn’t fringe, in fact over 30,000 scientists have signed a petition saying they don’t believe in man made global warming. Also a TIME poll found that only 31% of Americans think humans are the cause of global warming, 49% think both nature and mankind are to blame.

5.

Palin has close ties to Big Oil. Her inauguration was even sponsored by BP.

Actually Palin increased taxes on oil companies.

Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska’s Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry — a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared.

There is a difference between Palin’s tax and the one democrats support. Palin’s tax encourages production by increasing the tax as prices go up, and decreasing as prices go down. Alaska can do this because they have allowed oil companies to drill anywhere the state can legally open up. Meaning the companies have an incentive to create more fuel; their taxes will go down.

Her inauguration was sponsored by a whole slew of companies, including the Alaska Spine Institute. So can we assume that Palin was sympathetic to chiropractors as well? Here’s the full list of companies that sponsored the event, and I’m sure we can assume she was sympathetic to all of them.

6.

Palin is extremely anti-choice. She doesn’t even support abortion in the case of rape or incest.

I don’t really think you can be “extremely” pro-life. You’re either pro-life or you’re not. But, by the same token, we can call Obama extremely “pro-choice” considering he was the only senator in the Illinois state senate to oppose legislation that would ban the murder of babies that were a product of failed abortions. Palin does support abortion in one instance, “I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending an innocent’s life,” Palin said [LINK]

Also, I don’t think pro-life is a fringe view as this post makes it out to be. The issue is basically split among Americans.

7.

Palin opposes comprehensive sex-ed in public schools. She’s said she will only support abstinence-only approaches

This one is actually correct (it’s a surprise I know). Again, it’s a conservative viewpoint and one that isn’t fringe. A Zogby poll shows…

Some 47 percent of parents want teens to be taught that “young people should not engage in sexual activity until they are married.” Another 32 percent of parents want teens to be taught that “young people should not engage in sexual intercourse until they have, at least, finished high school and are in a relationship with someone they feel they would like to marry.”

When these two categories are combined, we see that 79 percent of parents want young people taught that sex should be reserved for marriage or for an adult relationship leading to marriage.

Clearly the belief that abstinence only education isn’t extreme, and is probably shared by the majority of independents (the people Palin needs to convince that she’s right for the job).

8.

As mayor, Palin tried to ban books from the library. Palin asked the library how she might go about banning books because some had inappropriate language in them—shocking the librarian, Mary Ellen Baker. According to Time, “news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving “full support” to the mayor.”

This one’s great. It comes from a TIME magazine article, and the information is from…wait for it…wait for it. The incumbent who Palin defeated in the election for mayor of Wasilla. I’m sure that’s a reliable source. Not to mention the information is second hand, it’s hearsay. If you know anything about law you’d know that hearsay isn’t admissible in court. So we’ve got a guy who was defeated by Palin for mayor and his evidence is hearsay. Doesn’t sound reliable to me.

9.

She DID support the Bridge to Nowhere (before she opposed it). Palin claimed that she said “thanks, but no thanks” to the infamous Bridge to Nowhere. But in 2006, Palin supported the project repeatedly, saying that Alaska should take advantage of earmarks “while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.”

This was is correct as well, but the fact is she ended up against it. She admitted that she was wrong, according to Palin spokesperson, “She changed her mind, [her spokesman] said, when “she saw that Alaska was being perceived as taking from the country and not giving, and that impression bothered her and she wants to change it. … I think that Sarah Palin is someone who has the courage to reevaluate situations as they developed.” [LINK]

—–

Second section is a post that was a follow-up to “Palin Derangement Syndrome,” titled “More Palin Derangement Syndrome,” how fitting.

Palin Cut Special Olympics Funding
The claim is that Palin cut the spending for the Special Olympics in half. What an evil person.

Too bad she didn’t.

This all goes back to having common sense and a wee bit of intelligence.

The evidence is the Alaska Budget for Fiscal Year 2008. As you can see below, the budget had $550,000 marked in for the Special Olympics. It was crossed out with $275,000. The liberal bloggers took this as Palin cutting the budget in half.

The truth is the $550,000 is what the Special Olympics asked for. Palin obviously thought it was too much and slashed it to $275,000, which is a 10% increase from the 2007 budget. So Palin simply denied the request of the Special Olympics and increased the budget by $25,000.

Wasilla made rape victims pay for their own rape kit
UPDATE to this story is below

CNN ran this story today. I find it humorous that news outlets continue to run these types of stories when they have no connection with Palin.

The story begins…

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s hometown required women to pay for their own rape examinations while she was mayor, a practice her police chief fought to keep as late as 2000.

Uh oh, Palin made rape victims pay for their own rape kits?

Not so much.

The story continually quotes former state representative Eric Croft, who ran for governor in 2006, and is a democrat.

The story continues…

Palin, the Republican nominee for vice president, often talks about her experience running Wasilla, population approximately 7,000, and that has prompted close scrutiny of her record there. Wasilla’s practice of charging victims for their rape exams while she was mayor has gotten wide circulation on the Internet and in the mainstream media.

Finally it gets to an all important point. Did Palin even know this was going on?

Interviews and a review of records turned up no evidence that Palin knew that rape victims were being charged in her town. But Croft, the former state representative who sponsored the law changing the practice, says it seems unlikely Palin was not aware of the issue.

I wouldn’t be surprised if she was unaware. The move was apparently pushed by the police chief, who would handle his own budget. Unless a citizen told Palin that this practice was going on, mayors can’t know everything that’s going on.

UPDATE: More information on this practice in Wasilla has emerged and it appears that no one was ever charged for a rape kit. The Wasilla City Clerk released a statement saying that no rape kits were charged to victims in fiscal year 2000; however, their computers only go back that far, so 1996-1999 is unclear.

However, the current Wasilla Police Chief, Angela Long, has said a search of files at the police headquarters show that no rape victims were ever charged.

It’s also noteworthy that the victims were never charged, rather their insurers were charged.

——-

This next section pertains to the claim that Palin abused Alaska’s per diem system as Governor. Of course she didn’t and used the money sparingly and it was all legit.

The Washington Post ran an article today that attempts to cast Sarah Palin as a money wasting governor because she charged per diem to the state when she was living at home. Unfortunately for the Post, their article contradicts itself.

The headline reads “Palin Billed State for Nights Spent at Home” From simply reading the headline it would appear that Palin stayed in her own home, and charged the state a per diem rate for simply staying in her home. Only she didn’t.

You can take a look at the travel authorization forms posted on the Posts site, clearly Palin wrote “Lodging – own home” to indicate why she didn’t charge a lodging per diem. Hence why on the forms there are no charges listed under “lodging.”

Let’s just go through the post’s story point-by-point to show how it is aimed at getting people to believe something based purely on the headline and the first few paragraphs, and not the whole story.

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 first paragraph fails to mention that the per diem charges are legal and, in fact, quite in line with her predecessors.

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.

This is the second paragraph, it is a complete misrepresentation of the truth, which the Post conveniently pushes to later on in the story. The fact is the children were given per diem because they accompanied their mother on official business. They accompanied her because they were asked to attend. For example, the first family of Alaska is expected to attend community events all over the state. That means the entire family, not just Palin, is on official business.

Palin, who earns $125,000 a year, claimed and received $16,951 as her allowance, which officials say was permitted because her official “duty station” is Juneau

In the third paragraph the Post finally gets around to telling the reader that all this is permitted and by no means did Palin take a per diem unlawfully. So is this really a story?

Gubernatorial spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Monday that Palin’s expenses are not unusual and that, under state policy, the first family could have claimed per diem expenses for each child taken on official business but has not done so.

Ah ha, so we start to see the truth. The state actually allowed Palin to claim a much more sweeping per diem that would have claimed expenses for each child taken on official business, but Palin didn’t.

We also can’t forget that when Palin took office she fired the family chef, sold the governors jet for millions, and drives herself to work. Palin’s record as a slasher of unnecessary spending is hard to argue.

The Post continues to elaborate on their non-story, and then they hit on an interesting statistic that was buried in the last paragraph on the second page (of the online version).

Gov. Palin has spent far less on her personal travel than her predecessor: $93,000 on airfare in 2007, compared with $463,000 spent the year before by her predecessor, Frank Murkowski.

Hmmm, why would the Post bury the fact that Palin cut travel expenses by 80% over her predecessor. I mean, that’s a fairly large component to the story. Well it’s simple, it doesn’t fit the narrative. They’re trying to cast Palin as a liar and over spender, when in fact she not only cut spending by getting rid of planes and unneeded workers, but she also cut spending through personal per diem.

Oh but it gets better.

The Post decries Palin for charging the state for her daughters travel expenses, and points out that Todd Palin charged for travel expenses between their house and Juneau, but Murkowski’s wife was no better.

Leighow said that the governor’s staff has tallied the travel expenses charged by Murkowski’s wife: $35,675 in 2006, $43,659 in 2005, $13,607 in 2004 and $29,608 in 2003

And finally let’s add up how much Palin charged in per diem. It was $16,951, across 312 days comes out to $54.33 per day, the per diem is $60.

Every time the main stream media pushes these non-story stories, McCain-Palin gain a point in the polls. The Washington Post may not believe it but the American people aren’t dumb, they aren’t simply going to read the headline and then the first paragraph and think Palin is a chronic over spender, they’ll read on and see that this story, isn’t really a story.

————

Here are some new Palin smears from a Facebook group entitled “1,000,000 Strong Against Sarah Palin” – Created 9/25/08

1.

As mayor of Wasilia, Palin built – as her legacy – a $15 million multi-use indoor ice arena on land that did not belong to the city. It will cost Wasilla at least an additional $1.67 million to acquire the land which the town is attempting to pay for by cutting library services, postponing capital improvement projects, and raising fees. Most cities under 10K don’t have such expensive facilities. This put her town into debt. This is against the GOP platform against wasteful spending and throwing the gov’t into debt.

One thing they failed to mention is that the sales tax increase, which was used to pay for the facility, was voted on and approved by the citizens of Wasilla. From the Anchorage Daily News December 6, 2001…

The city council will have a public hearing Monday before deciding whether to ask residents to raise the sales tax from the existing 2 percent to 2.5 percent to pay the estimated $14.7 million cost of the center. If passed, the question would appear on the ballot in May. Voters would have to approve the sales tax increase before the center could be built.

The big gripe conservatives have with raising taxes is a.) the money is usually taken against the will of the working and b.) it’s usually spent with no regard for the worker. In this instance not only did the citizens agree to the hike, they also knew exactly where the money was going and how it would be spent.

2.

Threatened a lawsuit to stop the listing of polar bears on the endangered species list, fearing that it would hurt oil and gas development in the bears’ habitat off Alaska’s northern and northwestern coasts. She has also been a vocal critic of scientists who suggest that climate change is leading to the decrease in polar bears in Alaska.

This is a two fold claim so let me address both claims. First, she did threaten to sue to block the polar bears being put on the endangered species list, mainly because they’re not endangered. The Alaskan polar bear population was at an all time high and there are five times as many polar bears now as there were 50 years ago. And yes, the addition of polar bears to the endangered species list would have threatened oil production. There are much stricter limits on drilling and production in areas were there are endangered species.

The second part of this claim, that Palin believes climate change isn’t leading to the decrease in polar bears in Alaska, is easily debunked by the fact that there isn’t a decrease in polar bears in Alaska. Nor in Canada or in general.

3.

Her Husband works for BP energy corporation at an oil field on Alaska’s North Slope (family ties to oil company)

Yeah, he had a blue-collar job working on the North Slopes for BP, what a great tie. Oh yeah, and he quit that job, for what many people believe was because of a conflict of interest (he claims it was because of his family’s busy schedule) either way he no longer works there.

4.

Zero Foreign policy experience, if you exclude her negotiating with foreign energy companies to exploit American resources. She is considered the leader of the Alaskan national guard but this is largely symbolic since she does not have authority to send the national guard into war. Biden, Obama, Cheney and McCain have all worked on legislation on national foreign policy. There are 17 border states, just because you’re a governor of a border state doesn’t mean you have national foreign policy experience.

Let us not forget the whopping foreign policy experience Obama had when he announced his run for the presidency. Uh wait, it was nothing? Oh man. What foreign policy legislation has he “worked on?” Besides the bill to stop nuclear weapons? Nothing. He’s voted on foreign policy bills, but if that’s a qualification to be president that there are 535 potential candidates waiting in the wings of the Capitol Building. I admit Palin is lacking in foreign policy experience, but let us not forget, she’s not running for president.

I also want to stress on the fact that in foreign policy judgment matters more than experience. The president has aides, cabinet members, and advisers surrounding him day in and day out. Them, along with the intelligence community, will provide the information, and ultimately the “experience” that the president needs to make a foreign policy decision. The key is what the president does with that information, making judgment more important that experience.

5.

Does not know what the V.P. actually does. “As for that V.P. talk all the time,” she told CNBC’s Larry Kudlow in late July, “I tell ya, I still can’t answer that question until somebody answers for me: What is it exactly that the V.P. does every day?”

I urge everyone to actually watch, and listen, to the interview in which Palin said this. And then ask yourselves, what does the vice president do? One thing, preside over the senate. That’s it. That’s all the constitution tells the VP to do. The rest is totally up to the president. So when Palin asks this question she’s asking what will McCain have his VP do? And we now know that Palin will be handling energy.

6.

She has a total of a little under 2 years in state government. In comparison, Sen. Obama has 7 years of experience in state government and 3 years in federal government.

Might I add that she has 12 years of executive experience to Obama’s zero. Might I also add that she has 16 years of political experience to Obama’s 12. Might I also add that she’s defeated two incumbents to Obama’s zero. Might I add that this woman has headed up a state with the seventh largest GSP in the nation ($40 billion). She’s also run a city that had a $10 million+ budget. Meanwhile Obama has voted on budget’s, he’s never crafted or dealt with one. He’s never allocated money.

7.

She has less experience (beyond the local level) in government than Obama, McCain, and Biden.****** If she assumes the presidency within McCain’s first term, she would assume office with less experience beyond the local level in the government than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY of the United States.******

The reason they narrow down the experience is because Obama has less than her. And the fact is Obama would be the least experience candidate ever, including ALL experience. Furthermore, Palin isn’t running for president. Wait until she seeks the job until you slam her for having a lack of experience for it.

8.

Palin recently said that the war in Iraq is “God’s task.” She’s even admitted she hasn’t thought about the war much—just last year she was quoted saying, “I’ve been so focused on state government, I haven’t really focused much on the war in Iraq.”

Again, quote taken out of context. Watch the Charlie Gibson interview where she explains the quote was a reference to Abraham Lincoln and the notion that God is on our side.

On the claim that she was focusing more on Alaska than the war in Iraq…good. She’s kinda the governor of Alaska, I would hope she’d be more concerned with the state she governs than a war that she has no political control over.

More to come a little later.