PDA

View Full Version : Palin Bills Alakan Govt. to Work From Home.


The Banterer
09-10-2008, 02:11 AM
Apparently sometimes it's just easier not to be fiscally conservative. Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090803088_pf.html).

ANCHORAGE, Sept. 8 -- Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Sarah+Palin?tid=informline) 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.

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, according to an analysis of her travel documents by The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/The+Washington+Post+Company?tid=informline).

The governor's daughters and husband charged the state $43,490 to travel, and many of the trips were between their house in Wasilla and Juneau, the capital city 600 miles away, the documents show.
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.

Before she became the Republican Party's vice presidential nominee, Palin was little known outside Alaska. Now, with the campaign emphasizing her executive experience, her record as mayor of Wasilla, as a state oil-and-gas commissioner and as governor is receiving intense scrutiny.

During her speech at the Republican National Convention (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Republican+National+Convention?tid=informline) last week, Palin cast herself as a crusader for fiscal rectitude as Alaska's governor. She noted that she sold a state-owned plane used by the former governor. "While I was at it, I got rid of a few things in the governor's office that I didn't believe our citizens should have to pay for," she said to loud applause.

Speaking from Palin's Anchorage office, Leighow said Palin dealt with the plane and also trimmed other expenses, including forgoing a chef in the governor's mansion because she preferred to cook for her family. The first family's travel is an expected part of the job, she said.

"As a matter of protocol, the governor and the first family are expected to attend community events across the state," she said. "It's absolutely reasonable that the first family participates in community events."

The state finance director, Kim Garnero, said Alaska law exempts the governor's office from elaborate travel regulations. Said Leighow: "The governor is entitled to a per diem, and she claims it."

The popular governor collected the per diem allowance from April 22, four days after the birth of her fifth child, until June 3, when she flew to Juneau for two days. Palin moved her family to the capital during the legislative session last year, but prefers to stay in Wasilla and drive 45 miles to Anchorage to a state office building where she conducts most of her business, aides have said.

Palin rarely sought reimbursement for meals while staying in Anchorage or Wasilla, the reports show.

She wrote some form of "Lodging -- own residence" or "Lodging -- Wasilla residence" more than 30 times at the same time she took a per diem, according to the reports. In two dozen undated amendments to the reports, the governor deleted the reference to staying in her home but still charged the per diem.

Palin charged the state a per diem for working on Nov. 22, 2007 -- Thanksgiving Day. The reason given, according to the expense report, was the Great Alaska Shootout, an annual NCAA (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/National+Collegiate+Athletic+Association?tid=infor mline) college basketball tournament held in Anchorage.

In separate filings, the state was billed about $25,000 for Palin's daughters' expenses and $19,000 for her husband's.

Flights topped the list for the most expensive items, and the daughter whose bill was the highest was Piper, 7, whose flights cost nearly $11,000, while Willow, 14, claimed about $6,000 and Bristol (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Bristol+Palin?tid=informline), 17, accounted for about $3,400.

One event was in New York City in October 2007, when Bristol accompanied the governor to Newsweek (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Newsweek+Inc.?tid=informline)'s third annual Women and Leadership Conference, toured the New York Stock Exchange (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/NYSE+Euronext?tid=informline) and met local officials and business executives. The state paid for three nights in a $707-a-day hotel room. Garnero said the governor's office has the authority to approve hotel stays above $300.

Asked Monday about the official policy on charging for children's travel expenses, Garnero said: "We cover the expenses of anyone who's conducting state business. I can't imagine kids could be doing that."
But Leighow said many of the hundreds of invitations Palin receives include requests for her to bring her family, placing the definition of "state business" with the party extending the invitation.

One such invitation came in October 2007, when Willow flew to Juneau to join the Palin family on a tour of the Hub Juneau Christian Teen Center, where Palin and her family worship when they are in Juneau. The state gave the center $25,000, according to a May 2008 memo.

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. "The amount that they had declined was $4,461, as of August 5."

The family also charged for flights around the state, including trips to Alaska events such as the start of the Iditarod (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Iditarod+Trail+Committee+Inc.?tid=informline) dog-sled race and the Iron Dog snowmobile race, a contest that Todd Palin (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Todd+Palin?tid=informline) won.

Meanwhile, Todd Palin spent $725 to fly to Edmonton, Alberta, for "information gathering and planning meeting with Northern Alberta Institute of Technology," according to an expense report. During the three-day trip, he charged the state $291 for his per diem. A notation said "costs paid by Dept. of Labor." He also billed the state $1,371 for a flight to Washington to attend a National Governors Association (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/National+Governors+Association?tid=informline) meeting with his wife.

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 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Frank+Murkowski?tid=informline). He traveled often in an executive jet that Palin called an extravagance during her campaign. She sold it after she was sworn into office.

"She flies coach and encourages her cabinet to fly coach as well," said Garnero, whose job is equivalent to state controller. "Some do, some don't."

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

In the past, per diem claims by Alaska state officials have carried political risks. In 1988, the head of the state Commerce Department (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/U.S.+Department+of+Commerce?tid=informline) 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 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/Tony+Smith?tid=informline), 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.

Knowles, whose children were school-age at the start of his first term, said that his wife sometimes accompanied him to conferences overseas but that he could "count on one hand" the number of times his children accompanied him.

"And the policy was not to reimburse for family travel on commercial airlines, because there is no direct public benefit to schlepping kids around the state," he said. The rules were articulated by Mike Nizich, then director of administrative services in the governor's office, said Knowles and an aide to another former governor, Walter Hickel.

Nizich is now Palin's chief of staff. He did not return a phone call seeking comment. The rules governing family travel on state-owned aircraft appear less clear. Knowles said he operated under the understanding that immediate family could accompany the governor without charge.

But during the Murkowski years, that practice was questioned, and the state attorney general's office produced an opinion saying laws then in effect required reimbursement for spousal travel.

atxtraveler
09-10-2008, 09:30 AM
Apparently sometimes it's just easier not to be fiscally conservative. Link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090803088_pf.html).

Good find... it should be interesting to see the counter argument. Once again, I love to point out that reporters really should tell both sides of the potential story.

ChipOC
09-10-2008, 01:53 PM
I don't have a problem with the state paying for flights for the family and for the per diem when on the road, but why would someone bill a per diem for working at home?

Texas Golfer
09-10-2008, 03:45 PM
There's money in the budget for doing this. Her home is in Wasilla and her office is in Anchorage. She spent $93K last year on this per diem. Her predecessor spent $147K his last year doing the same.

This is a non-issue. But, then again, almost every attack on her as been so.

Keep trying, Banterer.

ChipOC
09-10-2008, 04:55 PM
I agree that the money isn't comparable to the previous guy, but why per diem at home?

The Banterer
09-10-2008, 05:27 PM
There's money in the budget for doing this. Her home is in Wasilla and her office is in Anchorage. She spent $93K last year on this per diem. Her predecessor spent $147K his last year doing the same.

This is a non-issue. But, then again, almost every attack on her as been so.

Keep trying, Banterer.

Keep trying what? She billed the Alaskan taxpayers 312 days worth of per diem while she was at home. Just because someone can swindle money for no reason, doesn't mean one should, especially when that person is billing themself as a fiscal conservative.

You go ahead and keep pretending she's infallible. That worked out great for Bush.

nein51
09-10-2008, 06:39 PM
I agree that the money isn't comparable to the previous guy, but why per diem at home?

I bill per diem from home some times as well. Depends on the nature of the business. In some areas it is totally common to bill per diem from home. I dont know about 300+ days of it but if there is an explanation I am sure we will hear about it.

Diehard
09-10-2008, 07:06 PM
Or we could just keep getting drowned out with lipstick talk back and forth, with the media now playing the chief instigator role. I swear this is like an episode of Jerry Springer.

The Banterer
09-10-2008, 07:50 PM
Or we could just keep getting drowned out with lipstick talk back and forth, with the media now playing the chief instigator role. I swear this is like an episode of Jerry Springer.

Passion Pink FTW!

Volunteer
09-10-2008, 10:12 PM
It will be interesting to see/hear both sides of this story. I'm not surprised that the Post really didn't do that.

Texas Golfer
09-10-2008, 11:29 PM
Keep trying what? She billed the Alaskan taxpayers 312 days worth of per diem while she was at home. Just because someone can swindle money for no reason, doesn't mean one should, especially when that person is billing themself as a fiscal conservative.

You go ahead and keep pretending she's infallible. That worked out great for Bush.

:001_rolleyes:

GigaBear
09-11-2008, 03:31 AM
There's money in the budget for doing this. Her home is in Wasilla and her office is in Anchorage. She spent $93K last year on this per diem. Her predecessor spent $147K his last year doing the same.

This is a non-issue. But, then again, almost every attack on her as been so.

Keep trying, Banterer.



TG, you know I love you and agree with you in large part, but when this is on every thread, it gets old very quickly.


From what I've seen, Banterer is not a McCain/Palin hater, he's just playing devil's advocate and doing so very reasonably. You are the ONLY one on this thread that does not see how this is a LEGITIMATE issue that needs to be addressed. For her to claim to be fiscally conservative yet bill the state for all of this does seem to be a bit hypocritical. Furthermore, who cares whether she spent 50K or 50M less than her predecessor; her predecessor isn't what she is competing with here--the integrity of her political ideologies are what she is competing with here.

Just once---ONCE---acknowledge that maybe, MAYBE Palin isn't infallible, and just ONCE, use some demonstrated logic when discussing a topic instead of just attacking the other person repeatedly for making legitimate points that you don't answer.

Bigolburlybear
09-11-2008, 01:10 PM
I'm sure she turned her phones off and refused to answer the door while at home. Other than her spending money budgeted for per diem expenses, I am sure she figured the only way to truly rip off the state was to hide from her duties as Gov. Otherwise, all that money allocated for that expense might have been justifiable. Good digging Washington Post, we got her this time!

Bigolburlybear
09-11-2008, 01:15 PM
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.

That and the DEMOCRAT former governor giving his opinion on this really should tell the story. She sold the private jet, and you people are concerned she makes the state pay for her and her family to fly COACH.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 01:35 PM
That and the DEMOCRAT former governor giving his opinion on this really should tell the story. She sold the private jet, and you people are concerned she makes the state pay for her and her family to fly COACH.

I'm concerned that she makes the state pay her extra to not go into the office.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 01:36 PM
I'm sure she turned her phones off and refused to answer the door while at home. Other than her spending money budgeted for per diem expenses, I am sure she figured the only way to truly rip off the state was to hide from her duties as Gov. Otherwise, all that money allocated for that expense might have been justifiable. Good digging Washington Post, we got her this time!

I'm not saying she shouldn't be paid while she's at home, but she shouldn't be paid extra, and certainly not with funds intended for covering costs while she's traveling.

Bigolburlybear
09-11-2008, 02:04 PM
How far is her home from her office? Any idea? That might be pertinent.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 02:18 PM
How far is her home from her office? Any idea? That might be pertinent.

The article says that the office she works in is in Anchorage, which is 45 minutes from her home. Even if her office was 1000 miles from her home, it still wouldn't change the fact that she is collecting extra money(beyond just travel costs) to get to work from home.

Bigolburlybear
09-11-2008, 02:28 PM
45 minutes isn't bad.

If the money was already allocated for this purpose, and she works from home as well as the office, where is the scandal?

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 02:41 PM
45 minutes isn't bad.

If the money was already allocated for this purpose, and she works from home as well as the office, where is the scandal?

First, there's no such thing as a free lunch, you know that. Just because money(especially public funds) are available, doesn't mean that you should use them when they aren't deserved. The scandal is in her collecting money designed to offset the cost of travel while working at home, where she probably spends less money(unless she's getting on Ebay) than she would at the office, while telling everyone that she's a fiscal conservative who is opposed to unnecessary spending.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 03:00 PM
TG, you know I love you and agree with you in large part, but when this is on every thread, it gets old very quickly.

From what I've seen, Banterer is not a McCain/Palin hater, he's just playing devil's advocate and doing so very reasonably. You are the ONLY one on this thread that does not see how this is a LEGITIMATE issue that needs to be addressed. For her to claim to be fiscally conservative yet bill the state for all of this does seem to be a bit hypocritical. Furthermore, who cares whether she spent 50K or 50M less than her predecessor; her predecessor isn't what she is competing with here--the integrity of her political ideologies are what she is competing with here.

Just once---ONCE---acknowledge that maybe, MAYBE Palin isn't infallible, and just ONCE, use some demonstrated logic when discussing a topic instead of just attacking the other person repeatedly for making legitimate points that you don't answer.

Nobody is infallible. I am just tired of the barrage of attacks on her for everything except the issues.

Alaska has always had this in the budget for a reason. To attack her on it is beyond ridiculous as is her religious beliefs, bookgate (supposedly her wanting to ban books from the library that weren't even in print yet), troopergate, etc.

It's also an irritant to attack her experience for the bottom of her ticket when she has clearly more experience than does Obama at the top of the other ticket.

But, Giggles, if you want me to stop posting here, let me know because you aren't opposing my positions, you are opposing my posting my positions.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 03:12 PM
Alaska has always had this in the budget for a reason.

The reason is so that when the Governor travels, her expenses can be taken care of, not so that she can get paid extra for working at home instead of the office.

Let's say that Texas has a special fund set up for natural disasters(I don't know if they do or don't, but let's say they do). If we have a year without natural disasters, should the Rick Perry get that money, or should it be saved?

Diehard
09-11-2008, 03:19 PM
First, there's no such thing as a free lunch, you know that. Just because money(especially public funds) are available, doesn't mean that you should use them when they aren't deserved. The scandal is in her collecting money designed to offset the cost of travel while working at home, where she probably spends less money(unless she's getting on Ebay) than she would at the office, while telling everyone that she's a fiscal conservative who is opposed to unnecessary spending.

Gotta agree with Banterer on this one. Just because the stipend exists doesn't mean it's necessary or in the taxpayers' best interest to take it.

For family reasons I think it's terrific that she was able to keep her clan in Wasilla and not move to Juneau. Relocating to Juneau would have been something of a sacrifice and the per diem would have been some fitting compensation to make up for that. Taking the stipend without the travel looks like the kind of politicians' personal pocket-lining that has contaminated too much of modern politics.

I'm not saying she's unethical because I actually think she's toward the more admirable end of the spectrum, but clearly she's not perfect.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 03:21 PM
The reason is so that when the Governor travels, her expenses can be taken care of, not so that she can get paid extra for working at home instead of the office.

Let's say that Texas has a special fund set up for natural disasters(I don't know if they do or don't, but let's say they do). If we have a year without natural disasters, should the Rick Perry get that money, or should it be saved?

Personally, I don't see the analogy.

I also don't know how you know what the reason it is that they have this in their budget. Since they've been paying this money for the reason that she's claiming for many, many years, I don't think she's misusing it.

In any case, the fine citizens of Alaska apparently have no problem having their taxes used this way. As of the latest poll, she has an 86% approval rate in her state. I dare say that no other politician has such an approval rating.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 03:23 PM
I'm not saying she's unethical because I actually think she's toward the more admirable end of the spectrum, but clearly she's not perfect.

Like all of us, I'm sure she's far from perfect.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 03:30 PM
Personally, I don't see the analogy.

I also don't know how you know what the reason it is that they have this in their budget. Since they've been paying this money for the reason that she's claiming for many, many years, I don't think she's misusing it.

In any case, the fine citizens of Alaska apparently have no problem having their taxes used this way. As of the latest poll, she has an 86% approval rate in her state. I dare say that no other politician has such an approval rating.

The money has to come from somewhere. There isn't a per diem fairy that creates the per diem fund, and then if you don't use it, it disappears. If she doesn't take this money, then there is extra money left for the state, that can either be spent elsewhere or factored into a surplus.

I don't think this makes her a bad person at all, but it speaks to her commitment to fiscal discipline to basically give herself a bonus under the guise of per diem.

Bigolburlybear
09-11-2008, 04:10 PM
What percentage of her used per diem is out of 12,000,000,000?

GigaBear
09-11-2008, 04:18 PM
Nobody is infallible. I am just tired of the barrage of attacks on her for everything except the issues.


This *IS* an issue. For a fiscal conservative to be pegged for such an egregious use (or misuse) of state funds IS an issue, and a very important one.



Alaska has always had this in the budget for a reason.


Does that make it right? I don't think so.


To attack her on it is beyond ridiculous as is her religious beliefs, bookgate (supposedly her wanting to ban books from the library that weren't even in print yet), troopergate, etc.


Disagree. There's a BIG difference between all of those things which are all PERSONAL issues (except for the book-gate thing, which was BS from the jump) and the misuse of state funds. Don't see how you don't see that difference.


It's also an irritant to attack her experience for the bottom of her ticket when she has clearly more experience than does Obama at the top of the other ticket.



I disagree. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and examining Palin's experience is as big of a deal as examining Obama's experience. "Top" or "bottom" of ticket is, IMO, pretty irrelevant. What if McCain keels over dead on the second day of his term? Her experience would be very important then, as she would then be the leader of the free world.


But, Giggles, if you want me to stop posting here, let me know because you aren't opposing my positions, you are opposing my posting my positions.


You know that's not true. What I'm asking is that you be REASONABLE in your positions. On both threads discussing Palin on this board, you have, IMO, been very unreasonable with your statements. I know you're not an unreasonable person, and again, I *AGREE* with your positions, but I agree with Banterer---you keep acting as though Palin is infallible, and you refuse to admit that she has ANY faults whatsoever. You may "believe" that "Nobody is infallible" as you said, but you're not acting like it.

That becomes tiring. That's all I'm saying.

GigaBear
09-11-2008, 04:20 PM
What percentage of her used per diem is out of 12,000,000,000?



Irrelevant. Doesn't matter to me whether she misused one cent of it, the bottom line is that she misused it. Doesn't change that fact.


Now, where's my McCain/Palin sticker....

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 04:26 PM
What percentage of her used per diem is out of 12,000,000,000?

It's about the same percentage as $231,000,000 out of the federal budget.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 05:16 PM
what percentage of her used per diem is out of 12,000,000,000?

0.00077%

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 05:27 PM
This *IS* an issue. For a fiscal conservative to be pegged for such an egregious use (or misuse) of state funds IS an issue, and a very important one.

Does that make it right? I don't think so.

Apparently, the citizens who paid the taxes to budget her for this don't have a problem. I'm not sure why you do.

I disagree. There's a BIG difference between all of those things which are all PERSONAL issues (except for the book-gate thing, which was BS from the jump) and the misuse of state funds. Don't see how you don't see that difference.

Please explain how spending money in the budget is misuse. Again, her constituents disagree with you.

I disagree. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, and examining Palin's experience is as big of a deal as examining Obama's experience. "Top" or "bottom" of ticket is, IMO, pretty irrelevant. What if McCain keels over dead on the second day of his term? Her experience would be very important then, as she would then be the leader of the free world.

I have no problem examining Palin's experience. But it's not her experience that is really in question. Even, Heaven forbid, should McCain "keel over dead", she clearly has more experience than does Obama. Comparing the top of one ticket to the bottom of the other is ridiculous.

If you think that comparison is valid, perhaps, McCain should sit out the debates and let Palin debate both Obama and Biden.

You know that's not true. What I'm asking is that you be REASONABLE in your positions. On both threads discussing Palin on this board, you have, IMO, been very unreasonable with your statements. I know you're not an unreasonable person, and again, I *AGREE* with your positions, but I agree with Banterer---you keep acting as though Palin is infallible, and you refuse to admit that she has ANY faults whatsoever. You may "believe" that "Nobody is infallible" as you said, but you're not acting like it.

That becomes tiring. That's all I'm saying.

I think I'm being more than reasonable. Bring a real issue related problem with her and we'll discuss it. But the criticism, thus far, has been more of partisan posturing (Obama being more experienced than Palin). Not only is that categorically wrong, it's comparing the top of one ticket to the bottom of the other. Nobody had a problem with Gore's lack of experience as VP or Edwards lack of experience for the VP on the Democrat ticket in '04.

But, if you don't like what I have to say, put me on ignore.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 05:29 PM
0.00077%

Actually, my math was wrong from before. Out of the federal budget that would be $231 Million.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 05:31 PM
Irrelevant. Doesn't matter to me whether she misused one cent of it, the bottom line is that she misused it. Doesn't change that fact.


Now, where's my McCain/Palin sticker....

Prove misuse and I'll change my position.

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 05:40 PM
TG, let me try to explain why many feel that this is an issue. The biggest policy reason that I believe Palin was picked, was because she was viewed as a fiscal conservative(to go after voters who might've been wavering towards Libertarian Party, or even the Democratic Party because of Bush's insane deficit spending). Taking money that's meant for travel expenses while you're staying at home, casts doubt on her fiscal discipline.

In this case, whether her Alaska constituency cares or not(which can't really be debated with much certainty since there is no data for their opinions on this issue), isn't the point, it's about how she reacted when she saw that she could basically get extra money(the taxpayer's money) for doing nothing.

That isn't the behavior of a fiscally disciplined leader, which is why this is an issue.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 06:44 PM
TG, let me try to explain why many feel that this is an issue. The biggest policy reason that I believe Palin was picked, was because she was viewed as a fiscal conservative(to go after voters who might've been wavering towards Libertarian Party, or even the Democratic Party because of Bush's insane deficit spending). Taking money that's meant for travel expenses while you're staying at home, casts doubt on her fiscal discipline.

In this case, whether her Alaska constituency cares or not(which can't really be debated with much certainty since there is no data for their opinions on this issue), isn't the point, it's about how she reacted when she saw that she could basically get extra money(the taxpayer's money) for doing nothing.

That isn't the behavior of a fiscally disciplined leader, which is why this is an issue.

I'm sure it comes as no surprise that I disagree with you.

With 86% of her constituents approving of her leadership, I have no problem with the way she runs her office.

You were talking earlier about her getting an incentive not to go to the office. How do you feel about Obama's tax plan to give tax "rebates" to those who don't pay any taxes at all? Isn't that an incentive for those who don't work to not work? It seems a little hypocritical of you if you support Obama on such a plan.

He wants to tax me more to give to those who pay no taxes. Talk about misuse of funds!

The Banterer
09-11-2008, 07:25 PM
I'm sure it comes as no surprise that I disagree with you.

With 86% of her constituents approving of her leadership, I have no problem with the way she runs her office.

You were talking earlier about her getting an incentive not to go to the office. How do you feel about Obama's tax plan to give tax "rebates" to those who don't pay any taxes at all? Isn't that an incentive for those who don't work to not work? It seems a little hypocritical of you if you support Obama on such a plan.

He wants to tax me more to give to those who pay no taxes. Talk about misuse of funds!

For starters, I don't support Obama, or any form of redistribution of wealth outside of the market's. Approval ratings just prove that she's popular, not that she's dedicated to fiscally disciplined behavior, as she has touted herself to be.

GigaBear
09-11-2008, 07:30 PM
With 86% of her constituents approving of her leadership, I have no problem with the way she runs her office.





Wow. No wonder we disagree.


I base my opinions and points-of-view off of facts, morals, and personal convictions. You base yours off of approval ratings.


Seeing as how you're the ONLY ONE on this thread who doesn't see at least SOME problem with Palin's actions, it makes A LOT of sense.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 08:25 PM
Wow. No wonder we disagree.

I base my opinions and points-of-view off of facts, morals, and personal convictions. You base yours off of approval ratings.

Seeing as how you're the ONLY ONE on this thread who doesn't see at least SOME problem with Palin's actions, it makes A LOT of sense.

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy. The Obama/Biden campaign is using Bush's unpopular ratings as a scare tactic (4 more years of Bush and McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time, etc).

Using Bush's unpopular rating is okay but using Palin's popular rating is ridiculous? Hypocrisy by its definition.

I don't know why you are getting so angry at me because I don't care about her using a fund that is budgeted for such use.

quash
09-11-2008, 08:27 PM
With 86% of her constituents approving of her leadership, I have no problem with the way she runs her office.


TG: How many other governors cut checks to every citizen of their state for dang near $5000 last year? No wonder she has a high approval rating.

Unfortunately, for approval purposes, she won't be able to pull that off in Washington. No matter how much she raises taxes on Big Oil.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 08:33 PM
TG: How many other governors cut checks to every citizen of their state for dang near $5000 last year? No wonder she has a high approval rating.

Unfortunately, for approval purposes, she won't be able to pull that off in Washington. No matter how much she raises taxes on Big Oil.

She won't have to pull that off in Washington. Obama will do that for her. Obama said he would cut a $5000 "rebate" check to those who pay no taxes.

GigaBear
09-11-2008, 08:43 PM
I don't know why you are getting so angry at me because I don't care about her using a fund that is budgeted for such use.



I'm not getting angry--not at all actually. I'm confident enough in my views that I don't care about anyone else's.



I'm simply amazed that you don't seem to understand the hypocrisy of what you just said. That's all. No anger, just amazement.

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 09:38 PM
I'm not getting angry--not at all actually. I'm confident enough in my views that I don't care about anyone else's.

I'm simply amazed that you don't seem to understand the hypocrisy of what you just said. That's all. No anger, just amazement.

How is my not caring how her using a fund that is budgeted be hypocritical on my part? Have I ever criticized Obama for spending money in his budget? No. Biden? No.

Just because you care about this and I don't isn't hypocritical. It's just a difference of opinions.

quash
09-11-2008, 11:40 PM
She won't have to pull that off in Washington. Obama will do that for her. Obama said he would cut a $5000 "rebate" check to those who pay no taxes.

You really think 80% of Americans don't pay taxes?

Texas Golfer
09-11-2008, 11:48 PM
You really think 80% of Americans don't pay taxes?

No, but, when asked, what about those who pay no tax at all, Obama responded that they'll get a check for $5000.

quash
09-12-2008, 07:06 AM
No, but, when asked, what about those who pay no tax at all, Obama responded that they'll get a check for $5000.

Dude, that's total non sequitur.

You are defending Palin based on her popularity in Alaska. She cut 2 checks last year to every citizen of the state, based in part on a big whomp to Big Oil. I think her popularity was thus bought. And I contend she cannot buy national popularity in the same way.

So, you need a better defense of her for this per diem crap, which is just barely above the de minimus of my concern.

ChipOC
09-12-2008, 11:03 AM
86% approval is amazing. You can't buy liberals with $500. Congress sent a ton of people (myself not included thank you very much) that much and they are at 9%.

Texas Golfer
09-12-2008, 03:02 PM
Dude, that's total non sequitur.

You are defending Palin based on her popularity in Alaska. She cut 2 checks last year to every citizen of the state, based in part on a big whomp to Big Oil. I think her popularity was thus bought. And I contend she cannot buy national popularity in the same way.

So, you need a better defense of her for this per diem crap, which is just barely above the de minimus of my concern.

I would say your accusation that she "bought" her popularity is pure speculation on your part.