Church & state

"State paid for trip when Palin told students to pray for pipeline"

Gov. Sarah Palin used state funds in June when she traveled from Juneau to Wasilla to speak to graduating evangelical students and urge them to fan out through Alaska "to make sure God's will be done here."

State records show that Palin submitted a travel authorization for a quick round-trip visit to attend the June 8 graduation of the Master's Commission program at the Wasilla Assembly of God, the church where she was baptized at age 12. The only other item on the agenda for that trip was a "One Lord Sunday" service involving a network of Mat-Su Christian churches earlier that morning at the Wasilla sports complex.

The records show Palin flew from Juneau on Saturday, June 7. She returned to Juneau that Monday afternoon. The plane tickets cost the state $519.50, and she claimed an additional $120 for meals and other expenses.

Fly home for church services for the weekend, call it official state business, and charge the taxpayers $640 bucks. Nifty trick.

* * *

State Senate President Lyda Green, Republican, of Wasilla, Alaska, on Gov. Sarah Palin:

"She's not prepared to be governor. How can she be prepared to be vice president or president? Look at what she's done to this state. What would she do to the nation?"

Sen. Thad Cochran, Republican of Mississippi, on Sen. John McCain

"The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine. He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me."

* * *

To understand what likely prompted McCain to choose Palin, here's Funny or Die with what may be the most astute analysis of John McCain at Saddleback that I've seen anywhere:

Yep. ...

The Culture Wars are here again
We'll appeal to hate and fear again
We'll declare 'The End Is Near' again
Culture Wars are here again ...

Comments

[Hellsau]

The audio of the audience screaming about McCain just sounds all kinds of wrong.

At least he knows what must be done to get elected now.

[Amaryllis]

Sarah Palin, as quoted: I think God's will has to be done, in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built.

So the Almighty, the Lord of Hosts, the Most High, has such strong opinions about whether natural gas gets moved across Alaska, and by which big-oil company? Who knew?

And here I'd have thought for that kind of thing He'd just say, "I gave you intelligence and free will; do what seems best to you and live with the consequences."

(J disclaimer: religious language here, not to be confused with denial of evolution or endorsement of creationism, thank you. Just ignore it.)

[Armando]

Frequent drive-by commenter here (sorry).

I wish I could laugh, but John McCain scares me more than George Bush ever did, probably because he seemed so levelheaded and intelligent during his run in 2000. I want THAT John McCain back.

Except we have Barack Obama. Here's a candidate who really seems to stand for change; who is eloquent, passionate and driven; a champion of human rights and of the rights of regular American citizens. For years we, the electorate, have complained that there is not enough difference between the two parties and their presidential candidates. Now, in a year when there is not only a huge amount of difference, but that difference seems obvious, the candidate who is clearly the better choice has a one point lead. All because the GOP nominated a hotheaded, backwards thinking, corrupt, incompetent moron who just happens to be a woman and has managed to convince people that, even though they have been in power for the last eight years (six of them in control of practically all branches of government), that they are the party for change.

If these people get elected we deserve the hell they will unleash on this nation.

[Dana]

>>If these people get elected we deserve the hell they will unleash on this nation.>>

Yeah, but what about the rest of us in the world, we're going to hell in a handbasket along with the US - and I really don't think we deserve it.

[Becky]

Wow, I didn't actually see Saddleback, I just read the transcript. I had no idea his answers were that... forced.

[Ryan]

Yeah, but what about the rest of us in the world, we're going to hell in a handbasket along with the US - and I really don't think we deserve it.

Well... Too bad!

[SV]

Forget about whether or not she charged the state for the trip. She advocated for a specific political agenda in a church. Why does that church still have tax-exempt status?

[M Groesbeck]

Except we have Barack Obama. Here's a candidate who really seems to stand for change; who is eloquent, passionate and driven; a champion of human rights and of the rights of regular American citizens.

...except for pro-unionists, non-Christians, non-heterosexuals, non-gender-conforming people, anyone too broke to afford health care, people struggling with their mortgages, public dissenters at the DNC...

[aunursa]

By selling the corporate jet, she recouped $2.1 million for the State of Alaska. And you're complaining because she spent $640 on a trip home?

Whatever.

[Geds]

By selling the corporate jet, she recouped $2.1 million for the State of Alaska. And you're complaining because she spent $640 on a trip home?

Um, and if she spent $500 of state money to have one of her political rivals assassinated, would it make sense to complain about the cost or the reason for the expenditure?

That was, like, an example of intentionally missing the point, right? Because you can't be that dumb.

[Hellsau]

By selling the corporate jet, she recouped $2.1 million for the State of Alaska. And you're complaining because she spent $640 on a trip home?

The state bought it for $2.7 million. I'd think a net loss of $600k for the state merely to make a political point announces her corruption more than stealing $600 at a time.

[JessicaR]

The "audience" screaming in the Cutaways is the joke, they're taken from "Houswives Completely Losing Their Shit" aka one of Oprah's "My Favorite Things" giveaway shows. SNL did a wonderful parody of it I wish I could find it online.

[Jeff]

Because you can't be that dumb.

This is the tort... aunursa we're talking about, Geds. He's either that malicious, or, more likely, that dumb.

[Praline]

Slight deviation from the point, but thinking about the article that Fred links to, which points out that Palin works by connecting with people rather than actually being good at her job - which makes her more of a threat than McCain, I think - my fiance made a comment that I'd like to spread around, as it undermines her shtick:

Palin is the woman you'd hate to have with you on the PTA committee. You know the kind: the self-righteous, aggressive one, the one who manipulates people into groups, ganging up on some and bossing the others, the one who won't listen to other opinions, the one who won't hear that her kid is bullying the others but demands punishment when yours loses his temper and punches her kid back, the one who demands a zero-tolerance alcohol policy then threatens to sue if her kid gets suspended for drunkenness, the one who's sure she's right all the time...

Pass it on. You wouldn't buy a second-hand car from Nixon, and you wouldn't want Palin on your PTA.

[Dympha]

SV -

I run an interfaith non-profit that focuses on social justice issues and public policy, and as it turns out the rules against political activity for entities with tax exempt status are not nearly as strict as many people think they are. In fact, they are so vague that you can get away with just about anything except a) specifically endorsing or engaging in campaign activity for a candidate to elected office or b) spending a "substantial" (yes, it's that vague but usually means >5%) amount of resources directly lobbying to elected officials about legislation. I don't think that praying for an oil pipeline would fall under a) or b), even if you're with the governor of your state when you do it.

It only gets hairy when someone in power wants to shut you up -- then they can trot out the vagueness of the law and try to make a case against you. It rarely works, as anything more than intimidation, unless you've done something really flagrant.

[Jon P]

@JessicaR: Yeah, I was going to say I was getting a "You get a car! You get a car!" vibe from the screaming women.

@M Groesbeck: What? I can't figure out what point you're trying to make, if any.

[The Amazing Kim]

Well... Too bad!

And that's pretty much been the past 8 years.

[Ryan]

He's either that malicious, or, more likely, that dumb.

And now we're right back to bad faith arguments

[Ryan]

Well... Too bad!

And that's pretty much been the past 8 years.

Yup, but that's only just become my new philosophy. I'm sick of activists whining about things they want but will never have. So now I say, "That's just too darn bad!"

[Hellsau]

The "audience" screaming in the Cutaways is the joke, they're taken from "Houswives Completely Losing Their Shit" aka one of Oprah's "My Favorite Things" giveaway shows.

I'd hope everyone caught that, it is just quite odd to hear the screaming that follows anything McCain says.

In other news, if you vote McCain for president, YOU ALL GET A NEW CAR! Surely you want to vote McCain now yes?

[spencer]

By selling the corporate jet, she recouped $2.1 million for the State of Alaska. And you're complaining because she spent $640 on a trip home?

First, she sold that jet at a loss.

Second, billing taxpayers for what amounts to a personal trip home for the weekend is part of a pattern - it is another example of a sense of entitlement that Palin has made no effort whatsoever to hide.

Palin has no problem abusing government resources for her own personal reasons. She's spent state money taking her kids with her on trips (official policy is to pay travel costs for people who are actually conducting official state business - how Palin's kids would be doing this is, shall we say, unclear). And let's not even get into Troopergate or her attempts to ban library books she doesn't like. She is a serial liar at best (see: Bridge to Nowhere), and a provincial corrupt authoritarian bully at worst. And John McCain somehow thinks she'd be a peachy choice to run the country in the event that he strokes out while yelling at Kim Jong Il over the phone. *That's* the point.

But as you say, whatever.

[Ryan]

"Vote for me, and all your wildest dreams will come true."

[MikhailBorg]

...except for pro-unionists, non-Christians, non-heterosexuals, non-gender-conforming people, anyone too broke to afford health care, people struggling with their mortgages, public dissenters at the DNC...

None of which means that McCain's a preferable choice for anyone in that (rather mixed) category, of course. Either McCain or Obama's going to get elected; those of us in your category are going to have to take their chances with one or the other, and all things considered...

[aunursa]

It turns out that $640 is 3/100's of one percent of $2.1 million. Definitely a winning issue for Obama-Biden.

Nevertheless, it's so refreshing to see liberals so concerned about what they consider wasteful spending on the part of elected officials. Which side has racked up greater expenses that were billed to the taxpayers -- John McCain and Sarah Palin or Barack Obama and Joe Biden? I imagine the McCain campaign would love it if that were to become a focus of the electorate and/or media.

The Obama campaign has made a lot of mistakes. Just yesterday, they released an ad -- reminiscent of the 2004 line that sunk Kerry -- in which they attacked Palin for being "for the Bridge-to-Nowhere before she was against it."

How dumb can they be? Guess who voted for the Bridge-to-Nowhere in the first place? That's right -- both Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Even when the Senate considered an amendment to kill the project and redirect the funds to Katrina victims, Obama and Biden voted for the Bridge again! The McCain response ad practically writes itself.

I sincerely hope that the Obama campaign goes after Palin for this $640 trip at the AK taxpayers' expense.

[Geds]

It turns out that $640 is 3/100's of one percent of $2.1 million. Definitely a winning issue for Obama-Biden.

Wow. You really aren't intentionally missing the point.

Here in Illinois we have a Governor everyone hates named Rod Blagojevich. He's a Chicagoan who hates Springfield and at the beginning (still?) of his time in office he regularly used taxpayer money to fly back and forth from Chicago to Springfield even though the Governor is supposed to, y'know, stay in Springfield in the house they've got down there for him to do his job.

The issues that came up were wastefulness and contempt of taxpayers. It's one thing to say, "Oh, it's just six hundred bucks, boo hoo." The question needs to be asked, though, "If the governor is using taxpayer money to go on a personal trip to speak before a religious gathering and apparently encourage religious activism, what else is she doing with public funds?" Is it not a violation of the separation of church and state to have an elected official encouraging others to "make sure god's will be done?"

And, trust me, as a former fundagelical, "Make sure god's will is done," is a political statement as much as a religious statement.

Also, I once sold a car for like $500 on eBay and had to pay a posting fee of some ridiculous amount, like $100. What would the posting fee for a $2.1M private jet be? Can we call Mark Cuban and ask?

[hapax]

Which side has racked up greater expenses that were billed to the taxpayers

Uh. Considering that McCain's party has been the one in power of all three branches of government for most of the last eight years, during which (among other spectacular examples of government waste) including over half a trillion dollars on an ill-conceived, incompetently managed, and illegal war, and Palin (for her brief tenure in inconsequential offices) has still managed to rake in earmarks with both greedy fists at a rate a hundred times greater than afforded to the average US citizen...

Yeah, I'd be happy to make that comparison.

But you're right. Obama wants to spend money on sending kids to college, getting health care to poor folks, and fixing crumbling bridges and stuff. The irresponsible spendthrift!

[spencer]

Palin (for her brief tenure in inconsequential offices) has still managed to rake in earmarks with both greedy fists at a rate a hundred times greater than afforded to the average US citizen

And don't forget how she left her tiny hometown - with a population of maybe 9,000 people - saddled with $22 million in debt as a direct result of her own managerial incompetence.

But, you know -Democrats! Taxes! Ooooga-boooga!

[Armando]

"Nevertheless, it's so refreshing to see liberals so concerned about what they consider wasteful spending on the part of elected officials. Which side has racked up greater expenses that were billed to the taxpayers -- John McCain and Sarah Palin or Barack Obama and Joe Biden? I imagine the McCain campaign would love it if that were to become a focus of the electorate and/or media."

This argument might have flown back in 1980, but in 2008, after eight years of the largest government expansion and uncontrolled government spending under a REPUBLICAN administration, it just doesn't hold any water.

[Praline]

Can anybody explain why all those women are acting like McCain's a rock star? I mean, even if they agree with his policies, all that heart-clutching starry-eyed-ness seems oddly heated.

[Geds]

Can anybody explain why all those women are acting like McCain's a rock star?

The audience shots are from Oprah...

And don't forget how she left her tiny hometown - with a population of maybe 9,000 people - saddled with $22 million in debt as a direct result of her own managerial incompetence.

Actually, if you're talking about the whole sports complex thing, I'm wondering if there's some amount of corruption tied in to that incompetence. Like, was that land company that stepped in to buy the land before the city got around to it somehow connected to the good mayor?

[embees]

But, you know -Democrats! Taxes! Ooooga-boooga!

This may very well be a line I steal in the next political "discussion" I have with my in-laws. Thank you!

/still laughing

[zmayhem]

Regarding the Bridge To Nowhere and the Obama/Biden ad: It's unfortunate that both Obama and Biden voted for that boondoggle, but it is not the point of the ad. Neither one of them has made his position on the BTN, or even on earmarks in general, a centerpiece of his campaign.

In contrast, both McCain and Palin have pointed repeatedly to her BTN story as a shining example of why she's such a brave, lovable maverick reformer after McCain's own heart. They've made it an issue, repeatedly--and almost everything they're saying is a lie. In fact, more of a lie than Obama/Biden are pointing out (and anytime they want to be less polite and delicate about it, I'd be delighted).

The Daily Howler has an excellent summary of the actual BTN timeline: in brief, Palin favored the BTN way back when (way, way back when, while she was still mayor of Wasilla), just as the current ad points out. Some thirteen months before she became governor, Congress eliminated the BTN earmarks (though, sigh, not the money--Alaska still got all $442 million previously earmarked for the bridges, just not for the bridges anymore). So, she not only favored the BTN before she opposed it, she never told Congress "Thanks but no thanks" because by the time she was elected governor the matter had been settled long ago (or, I suppose it's possible that she did say "Thanks but no thanks," but in that case the response must have been, "Um, for what exactly?").

The ad doesn't talk about Obama or Biden's position on the BTN because it's not their issue. It's the centerpiece of Palin's claim to maverick reformerism. And it's total bullshit.

Re the jet, The Daily Howler also has a great summary of that tale. Long story short, supported by the original Anchorage Daily News article printed when the jet was finally, finally sold: Everyone in Alaska hated that jet; every single candidate running against Murkowski had pledged to sell it off; selling it off on eBay was not Palin's clever hockey mom innovation but established state practice in selling off largeish surplus items; she manages to stay just this side of a lie by not outright asserting that she actually sold it on eBay (it was posted four times but didn't sell), but both she and McCain then lurched across that line with the assertion that it sold at a profit (er, no, a $5-600K loss, and that's before the broker's fee that they had been trying to avoid by going on eBay).

Also, everything Ged so eloquently said. I just thought I'd throw in some actual facts and cites, on the off chance that you're genuinely missing the point in good but misinformed faith.

[not_scottbot]

'Which side has racked up greater expenses that were billed to the taxpayers'

I am going to guess that neither Obama or Biden billed the taxpayers for sleeping in their own bed as part of their official duties. But it is just a guess.

Based on the fact that neither Obama or Biden are really that stupid. But give Palin some credit - the documents still exist, and they clearly show her billing the state of Alaska for sleeping in her own home. Which shows either she is either truly a new model Republican - why even bother with a cover up? - or a really stupid and/or greedy politician, which comes as no surprise.

[Jeff]

And now we're right back to bad faith arguments

I could point to a comment to show aunursa being stupid or malicious, and another comment, and another comment. At what point do you stop pointing to comments and say he IS malicious or stupid?

=====================

And John McCain somehow thinks she'd be a peachy choice to run the country in the event that he strokes out while yelling at Kim Jong Il over the phone.

I've seen a lot of comments about Palin that talk about McCain dying. But doesn't the VP take over if the President is not available under other circumstances (I remember Haig saying "I'm in charge here" after Reagan was shot)? So even if McCain has to undergo a week of hospitalization, say, Palin would hold the reins of power. Brrrrrrr!

=================

Guess who voted for the Bridge-to-Nowhere in the first place?

The bridge would have served a purpose -- linking two of the remoter islands. Perhaps Jenny can give us more details....

[Zyzzyva]

Given as Haig wasn't Vice President -he was Chief of Staff, which is why everybody freaked out over his line- it's not really a good example for your argument. That said, if something does happen to John McCain, Sarah Palin is really, really not the person I want to see running the country, even temporarily.

[RMKrist]

Yes, if the President is incapitated or otherwise unable to perform his duties, for example, having medical tests done, the Vice President takes over.

Geds, from what I've read, they began building the roads and utilities infrastructure for the sports complex before they had title for the land. Really bad planning and must have made the land that much more expensive to acquire. When Palin left the mayor's office, it was some $19 million in debt with a population of a little more than 6,000 people. That means everyone owed about $3,400 toward the debt. And she raised the sales tax to pay for the sports complex, said sales tax is levied on food so lower-paid people would pay more proportionally in taxes and have less available for food.

[hapax]

Zyzzyva, a tiny correction. Haig WAS Chief of Staff. At the time of the comment, though, he was Secretary of State. He would have been "in charge" only if the President, the VP, and every single member of the House of Representatives was incapacitated.

[Steve]

The funniest part of the video were there were black women screaming in support of John McCain. Black women!

[Froborr]

At the time of the comment, though, he was Secretary of State. He would have been "in charge" only if the President, the VP, and every single member of the House of Representatives was incapacitated.

Not true. If the President, VP, and Speaker of the House were all incapacitated at once, the Secretary of State would become temporary President until the House elected a new Speaker. Once they did elect a new Speaker, the question would become more complicated, since the former Secretary of State would have been sworn in as President and it's not entirely clear whether the new Speaker would replace him as President (requiring the new Speaker to resign from Congress as it's illegal to work for two branches of the government simultaneously, and thus necessitating the election of a third Speaker) as the situation has never arisen.

That said, considering how rare it is for the President, Vice President, and Speaker to all be in the same place at the same time (State of the Union address is the main time) anything which takes out all three at once is a sign that something has gone so wrong the order of succession is likely to be the least of our problems.

[Caravelle]

But doesn't the VP take over if the President is not available under other circumstances (I remember Haig saying "I'm in charge here" after Reagan was shot)?

I'm younger, so I just remember all the comics talking about that fateful day when Dick Cheney was (gasp !) In Charge for a few hours while W had some surgery.

[Caravelle]

That said, considering how rare it is for the President, Vice President, and Speaker to all be in the same place at the same time (State of the Union address is the main time) anything which takes out all three at once is a sign that something has gone so wrong the order of succession is likely to be the least of our problems.

Not to mention, if that happens shouldn't the next person in the line of succession be the prime suspect anyway ? :p

[DN]

So the Almighty, the Lord of Hosts, the Most High, has such strong opinions about whether natural gas gets moved across Alaska, and by which big-oil company? Who knew?

You'd think He could have just put it in the right place the first time, so we wouldn't have to move it around.

[DN]

And you're complaining because she spent $640 on a trip home?

I believe the point is that it speaks volumes about her character (or rather, lack of it), which—according to the Republican Party these last few election cycles—is the single, sole, only criterion that matters when choosing a President, trumping experience, competence, knowledge of foreign affairs, and the ability to put a coherent English sentence together.

[SchrodingersDuck]

That said, considering how rare it is for the President, Vice President, and Speaker to all be in the same place at the same time (State of the Union address is the main time)

During these events, there is always a designated survivor held in a distant, secure location. If disaster were to befall the event, the designated survivor - typically a randomly selected member of Cabinet - is then automatically declared President.

[Froborr]

During these events, there is always a designated survivor held in a distant, secure location. If disaster were to befall the event, the designated survivor - typically a randomly selected member of Cabinet - is then automatically declared President.

Well, that's the idea, anyway. It's never actually happened, so we don't know what would happen in practice if somebody bombed Congress during the State of the Union and left the Secretary of Agriculture as the new President. I suspect it would not go very smoothly.

[Geds]

the designated survivor - typically a randomly selected member of Cabinet - is then automatically declared President.

It's good they choose a non-elected official for that role...

[Geds]

if somebody bombed Congress during the State of the Union and left the Secretary of Agriculture as the new President.

That was actually the plot of a Tom Clancy book. Jack Ryan, the newly-appointed NSA, survived by accident after an airline pilot crashed the party. With his plane.

[Tayi]

The infamous Bridge to Nowhere story has been a little bit overblown, I think. The bridge was supposed to connect two islands, one of which has the town of Ketchikan on it and the other of which has the nearby airport on it. The only way to get to Ketchikan is by boat or airplane. My father has taken business trips there in the past and he says that to get to Ketchikan you have to fly into the airport and then take a water taxi or ferry to the city. So yeah, the place is small and remote and it has a transportation structure that works, but its not totally insane to want a bridge there, especially if as a local you're wanting to encourage growth by making it easier to get from the airport (which is sort of big I think, its an international airport) to the town. Maybe its not worth $400 million of federal taxpayers' money, but people talk about it like it was literally a bridge that didn't go anywhere at all.

Not that this makes Sarah Palin any less of a petty authoritarian religious nutjob.

[JayH]

Praline writes: Palin is the woman you'd hate to have with you on the PTA committee. You know the kind: the self-righteous, aggressive one, the one who manipulates people into groups, ganging up on some and bossing the others, the one who won't listen to other opinions, the one who won't hear that her kid is bullying the others but demands punishment when yours loses his temper and punches her kid back, the one who demands a zero-tolerance alcohol policy then threatens to sue if her kid gets suspended for drunkenness, the one who's sure she's right all the time...

Problem with that approach is that the analogy fails. The conservative voter who likes Palin doesn't think they're going to be in the PTA meeting with Palin - they think Palin's going to be fighting for them, in a PTA meeting with people whom they don't like, and who don't like America, and who, therefore, deserve anything they get.

Remember, this woman called herself, essentially, a "pit bull with lipstick." And people cheered.

In the Limbaugh-Coulter era, the Republican base has no interest in being nice, or playing well with others. They see enemies not just in the Middle East, but also in their own neighborhoods and legislatures and even in their churches (after all, "the devil can quote scripture for his own purposes").

[MikhailBorg]

That was actually the plot of a Tom Clancy book. Jack Ryan, the newly-appointed NSA, survived by accident after an airline pilot crashed the party. With his plane.

While the Stock Market subplot is fairly neat, I really had to stop reading Tom Clancy with that book.

The Japanese attempt to destroy the American economy, and then threaten nuclear war if we don't give them Guam? Did Clancy research the Japanese at all, or was he just running out of countries that the U.S. could credibly bomb?