Friday, January 9, 2009

Going Through "There You Go Again"

Going through Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's very self-serving press release from Thursday, a lot of us came up with a series of blanks. Part of Gov. Palin's recent modus operandi is to dismiss questions about her veracity, authenticity and mendacity. Typically, she picks a straw man, sets it up, and pokes weird sticks at it and into it. Then she moves on to the next strange tidbit.

Palin herself has helped fuel speculation into several stories by simply refusing to provide innocent, timely information, or by creating an adversarial relationship with press members, either by her own actions, or through the actions of subordinates, such as Meg Stapleton, Ed O'Callaghan, or Bill McAllister.

Anchorage Daily News publisher Patrick Dougherty illustrates this in his response to the Palin press release, at his well-hidden personal niche, the ADN Editor's Blog. As Gryphen at the Immoral Minority has observed, though, Dougherty's response is at odds with statements issued by the ADN last year, when they denied anything of the sort, of efforts being assiduously pursued then by reporter Lisa Demer, as possibly occurring. As usual, Dougherty is too busy running ruining a great paper to notice the falsity he is enabling.

But Dougherty does raise a number of good points about how much bullshit the press has had to put up with from the Palin administration from the second half of 2008 until now - especially since August 29th, the day Palin stopped blinking and started looking for God's doors to open up for her.

Looking through her press release, some in the mainstream press, alternative press and electronic press (ie - bloggers) have written essays about where they might fit into Palin's list of accusations. I guess I should do the same, especially since I found out yesterday that
I received a national award from a real magazine, based on one early article I wrote about Gov. Palin.

Here are my responses to some of the governor's claims:

The governor’s interview came as news organizations pursued erroneous and often outrageous leads on a variety of non-issues.

She is probably right. I had to deal with calls from two national tabloids about an alleged fight between Todd and Levi on Saturday night, after, supposedly, Levi and Bristol had attempted to move out. I have no idea whether that happened or not, so told the people that, and didn't write about it now, except to illustrate the kind of bullshit I have to deal with, defending her.

There are other examples.
For instance, yesterday, when a national blog tried to turn the Wasilla High School bomb scare lockdown into a story, I wrote there:

Sorry, Lisa, but this is sort of a BS story. Wasilla, Colony an Palmer High Schools all seem to get something like this about once every year or so. Dwight Probasco is a good friend of mine. I taught an evening course at WHS for 14 years.

Why is this even up here?

Just this week, false stories in the media surfaced alleging improper influence by the Palin administration or the governor herself.

Not at Progressive Alaska.

In one case, a state union alleged that the administration delayed serving an arrest warrant on the mother of Levi Johnston, the father of the governor’s grandson. The union admitted within 48 hours that the allegation was not true.

Progressive Alaska
commented on this story by questioning whether the story was all that Sean Cockerham seemed to be making out of it. My story was called "More Weirdness at the Anchorage Daily News?"

In another case, an irresponsible talk show host in Anchorage alleged in a newspaper column that the governor must have intervened to get a job for her future son-in-law, circumventing eligibility rules for the position. Again, the allegation was immediately discredited by proof that the governor did not influence Levi’s employment.

Progressive Alaska covered the story's coverage. I certainly agree with Palin that Dan Fagan is an "irresponsible talk show host." From the beginning of this blog, I've been critical of his racism, his lies abut the George Bush record, and his shilling for corporate interests. The way the ADN pumped pimped his usual Sunday whoring out there on a Friday night to bring traffic by their increasingly decrepit street corner was prostitution at its best. Or worse, depending on whether you are Pat or me.

My comments in
PA's coverage, and my quote from Diane Benson, in retrospect, were as accurate as anything written then about this incident.

Meanwhile, bloggers, the
Atlantic magazine and even the Anchorage Daily News continue to give credence to the sensational allegation that the governor’s child, Trig, is not hers.

I can't recount the number of times I have commented at national blogs about this. Essentially, I say that Cathy Baldwin-Johnson helped save MY son's life and was my wife's doctor for a long time. I stick up for CBJ every time I have an opportunity.
Like every doctor I've spoken with about Palin's questionable travel in the days and hours before her youngest child's birth, I question Palin's wisdom, but question her motives in those decisions, even more.

“As a public official, I expect criticism and I expect to be held accountable for how I govern,” Gov. Palin said. “But the personal, salacious nature of recent reporting, and often the refusal of the media to correct obvious mistakes, unfortunately discredits too many in journalism today, making it difficult for many Americans to believe what they see in the media.”

Palin's absurd conclusion to her rant shows how unprepared she still is for the obvious fact that the mainstream American press treats presidential-level contenders - ALL OF THEM - like competitors in a hybrid version of American Idol and Survivor. Her accommodation Monday of John Ziegler, one of the chief purveyors of distortions she pretends to lament shows how out of her league Gov. Palin continues to be.
I doubt that will change.

images - AP, Alaska Report, Darkblack


Anonymous said...

The MSM and liberal blog disgusting attacks on Palin were outrageous. Even the most die hard progressive would have to feel a little shame about some of the slanderous, vile blogs that unfairly attacked Palin.

Some criticisms of Sarah were justified, but they were lost among the scum.

The sad thing is IT WORKED. Those that want to win at any cost may be encouraged. We must stand up to Hate by either side.

Is there any hope for some minimum standards for bloggers.

I wonder what Dr. Martin Luther King would say. I doubt he would have sat quietly, rather I believe he would have forcefully and practically spoke out. - Not just give some lip service

Philip Munger said...

anon @ #1 - please illustrate with examples. If you are disparaging AK liberal/progressive blogs, especially, I'm interested in any examples you might have, rather than reading your shotgun scatter comment.

I certainly feel a lot more outrage at what right-wing blogs have been writing about Obama than any perception I have of "lost among the scum" re articles about Palin.


House of Brat said...

Palin sounds like she's losing it. The press release she had her office put out would never pass muster in other states like Washington, Minnesota or Colorado. She just comes across as a whiner and her interview with Ziegler should be labled, "Interview with the Eternal Victim."

That said, I'm looking forward to Andrew Halcro's post tomorrow about her administration acting like little kids. Can't help but wonder what's going on since Mudflats stated that two of Palin's staff resigned this week.

Philip Munger said...

A lot of other stuff going on too. The Palins appear (from the behind-the-scenes moves one of the media whores I know is going through right now) are at the stage Gary Hart was at when he challenged the media way back when.

Anonymous said...

I was amused when Mr. Dougherty asked in his editor's blog:

"Will the governor's press office correct its misrepresentation of the Daily News?"

Poor Pat. Does the Daily News ever retract anything? Dougherty made some good points in his blog, but from someone who can't admit mistakes himself I thought it was a bit ironic that he apparently expected the governor's office to "correct its misrepresentation of the Daily News." Ha!

He should come clean and practice what he preaches.

Anonymous said...


Within hours of the Palin VP Announcement blogs were posting stories that Sarah had faked the birth of her child and that she did not have a baby but that it was Bristol's baby.

Hours later there were blogs reporting she had been cheating on her husband.

There was the terrible charge about Palin making rape victims pay for rape kits.

"Liberal blogs like HuffingtonPost, DailyKos and are using this interview the Frontier conducted with Fannon to accuse Palin, who was mayor of Wasilla from 1996-2002, of supporting making rape victims pay for their rape kits-- a charge vehemently denied by her aides."

This charge was debunked. But wrongly using rape victims was horrible.

Phil, there are way to many examples of a cruel and unfairly biased MSM and Blogs from both sides.

There are many more examples. I fear that this is the trend of the future. WIN, WIN WIN at any cost.

I have not pointed the finger at Progressive Alaska and Republicans are guilty of their fair share of dirty tricks.

But the attack on Sarah Palin was way overboard.

Positively Palin

Anno #1

Anonymous said...

Anno #1:

You are dead wrong about Palin charging victims for their rape kits. I know Eric Croft. He was the sponsor of HB270. That bill's inspiration was Palin's Wasilla. Palin's policy was, in fact, to charge victims for their forensic rape kits. Rape kits come with Plan B-a pill that PREVENTS fertilization! Palin, like most misguided right wing nuts, equates that to an abortion pill. Plan B is NOT an abortion pill. In fact, a pregnant woman could take plan B with no adverse affects.

Your love of Palin has blinded you to her ignorance, bad choices, race baiting, and all around unethical behavior.

What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Frank Murkowski?




Anonymous said...


After an extensive investigation, Even Obama's strongest supporters backed off on the charge that Palin supported charging rape victims for the exam kits.

Dr. CBJ was also disgusted by these allegations. It is a bit complicated but Palin and the City of Wasilla were a leading supporter of the Children's Place, a Child Advocacy Center. Start up Grants, annual funding, Burn grant applications and a Sexually abuse investigator on the Wasilla Payroll.

Valley Hospital was charging insurance companies to help pay for the rape crisis program. This was wrong but don't blame Palin.

Lip Stick, there is plenty to disagree about Palin but on this issue you are wrong.

Anno 1

Philip Munger said...

anon @ #1 - re City of Wasilla rape kit history;

You are wrong. I have looked at the Wasilla budgets from FY 1997 though 2001. Palin signed each one that had no line item for payment of such forensic exams. She was mayor when they were eliminated. She was mayor when the state forced Wasilla to reinstate the line item in the budget.

Palin has herself never been confronted with a direct question on this. Her advisors have weaseled out of a direct statement on it too. They have been enabled by the local press, especially the ADN (which never wrote about it in 1999 and 200 when it was an issue, nor did they in 2008).

I hve no idea where you live, or how you've gotten your inadequate information, but you are wrong. Mayor Sarah Palin, by overseeing the elimination of payment by the WPD for those exams, and by then signing consecutive budgets that did not include payment for forensic exams of victims of sexual assault, did exactly what you say the media has falsely accused her of doing.

Go look at those budgets yourself.

Anonymous said...

The Palin Rape-Kit Story Was Not 'Debunked'

By Eric Boehlert
Media Matters for America

Gov. Sarah Palin's introduction onto the national stage has ignited scores of Alaska-based narratives and mini-controversies as reporters and voters scrambled to learn more about her political past.

But has any other Palin issue produced the type of visceral response ignited by the revelation that while she was mayor of Wasilla, the town began charging rape victims or their insurance companies for costly emergency-room rape kits and post-assault examinations?

The story remains woefully under-covered by the mainstream media, where most outlets have shied away from tackling the touchy topic as a straight news story about Palin's political past. But the issue continues to generate all kinds of discussion in the opinion pages and online. (AmericaBlog was among the first big-name liberal blogs to highlight the story.)

The persistent buzz, I think, stems from the fact that the Wasilla story just seems so ... weird. What municipality would bill rape victims for traumatic post-assault forensic exams? And especially in Alaska, where the rape rate is twice the national average. And wouldn't charging the victims or their insurance companies (assuming the victims were insured) simply drive down the number of women who are willing to report sexual attacks?

Having that story hover around Palin as she introduced herself to the American people could not have helped the Republican ticket. And I suspect that's why the conservative press and right-wing bloggers have tried so hard to knock the story down, why they have been so quick to condemn journalists who dared report the rape-kit story as being unethical and biased.

But facts are not a fungible commodity.

And the hurdle the GOP press simply cannot clear in its debunking effort is that the policy did exist while Palin was mayor. Boxed in by the obvious, overeager bloggers instead claim Palin didn't "support" or even know about the policy and that Palin did not personally bill the victims herself. (Strawman alert: Nobody ever suggested Palin went around knocking on doors demanding payments.)

Sadly for Palin partisans, they got schooled on the Wasilla specifics by a 20-year-old blogger and junior at George Washington University who did what so many on the right can't quite pull off: fact-based reporting.

He proved without a doubt that Palin, as mayor, signed off on the initiative that forced rape victims or their insurance companies to foot the bill for the post-assault exam kits.

It's important to highlight the deficiencies of the so-called debunking of the rape-kit story so that reporters don't continue to ignore the issue, which raises questions about Palin's leadership. So they don't take seriously the conservative claims that the story has been proven a "lie," a "smear," a "myth," and a "bunch of baloney."

The loud pronouncements by the right have become almost a cult-like mantra online, and they seem to be effectively scaring the press off the story.

For instance, The Washington Post has never written about the rape-kit story in its news pages, according to a search of Nexis, nor has The New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, the New York Daily News, The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Baltimore Sun, The Boston Globe, Newsweek, or Time.*

Credit goes to USA Today for treating the issue seriously, while posted a detailed investigation. And on the air, CNN seems to have reported more on the issue than its cable competitors, which isn't saying much, since its competitors have virtually ignored the story.

As for the news networks, there's been a blackout on the rape-kit story. Journalists ought to be reporting the story and asking Palin to give detailed, unambiguous answers, since the rape-kit issue could offer some insights into how she governs.

Instead, the press has treated the story as something of a taboo. And the loud, bogus claims about it being "debunked" likely add to its untouchable status.

Trust me, nothing has been debunked.

"No truth to the rape kit lie. Doesn't really matter. They just make the shit up," wrote conservative blogger Atlas Shrugs, blind to the irony of making shit up while accusing others of making shit up. The blogger was in search of a "retraction" from the media, which "deliberately obfuscates and lies by omission."

Again, irony alert: Somebody deliberately obfuscating the facts of the rape-kit story? That would be Atlas Shrugs.

Writing at National Review Online, Jim Geraghty, setting out to "debunk" the story, claimed that "liberal bloggers have cited the story of Wasilla charging victims for rape kits as evidence that as mayor, Sarah Palin backed cruel and insensitive policies. But just about everything we know from initial accounts of this controversy is wrong."

Indeed, according to NRO, the rape-kit stories online and in the press represented "crimes on truth."

That's almost too silly for words. (Click here for a paragraph-by-paragraph evisceration of Geraghty's rape-kit spin; and by a gossip website, Jezebel, no less.) The "initial accounts" of the controversy were quite straightforward: Wasilla once had a policy on the books -- publicly supported by Palin's hand-picked police chief -- that it would charge rape victims or their insurers to collect evidence of sexual assaults. (Or to be more precise, the town would no longer pay for the fees out of its own budget and would seek reimbursements.)

And while that policy was in effect, Palin was mayor, and Palin approved the town budget. In 2000, though, that practice was deemed so offensive that the Republican-leaning Alaska Legislature stepped in and quickly passed a law so that towns like Wasilla could not charge victims.

And guess what? That's all still true. (Where exactly do the "crimes of truth" come in to view?) Geraghty didn't even try to disprove it. Instead, he got lost in the weeds reading minutes from legislative hearings and became wildly impressed that the town of Wasilla never came up in the hearings and that Wasilla wasn't the only town in Alaska to charge for rape kits.

That somehow led him to the conclusion that bloggers and the Obama campaign owed Palin "an apology." Why? Because Wasilla, Geraghty stressed, was not the only town in Alaska that adopted the rape-kit policy.

But so what? I mean that literally: So what if Wasilla wasn't the only town that adopted the rape-test policy?

The argument represented another straw-man effort, so not surprisingly, conservative media critics at NewsBusters embraced it as well. Throwing a temper tantrum after a Boston Globe editorial raised the same rape-kit question that everybody else was asking (i.e. "Why?"), one NewsBusters writer complained, "It is absolutely untrue that the town of Wasilla was the one town that caused the Alaska Legislature to ban the fees in question."

That's all well and good, but the Globe never claimed Wasilla was the "one town" that adopted the rape kit policy. (Why would the Globe even care if Wasilla was the "one town"? It's irrelevant.)

Fact: Wasilla is the "one town" that adopted the rape-kit policy whose former mayor is currently running for vice president. That's what made it a legitimate news story; that's why it's deserves far more focus than the fleeting mainstream media attention it's received so far.

Other so-called proof used to "debunk" the story was equally lame. Confederate Yankee, a popular GOP site that took a lead role in the pushback, pointed to a statement recently released by Palin in response to a 14-point questionnaire submitted by her hometown newspaper. One of the questions asked about the rape-kit story:

The entire notion of making a victim of a crime pay for anything is crazy. I do not believe, nor have I ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test. As governor, I worked in a variety of ways to tackle the problem of sexual assault and rape, including making domestic violence a priority of my administration.

That's what's commonly referred to as a non-denial denial; Palin said the idea was "crazy," but she never addressed the newspaper's very specific question: "During your tenure as Mayor, what was the police department and city's standard operating procedure in recovering costs of rape kits?"

Palin avoided a direct response to the direct question in favor of commenting on the "notion" at hand.

But for Confederate Yankee and many other conservatives, Palin's elusive denial about a plainly embarrassing policy her town adopted was all the proof they needed that the rape-kit story was false. Palin said so!

Please note that as part of the same newspaper questionnaire, Palin continued to insist that she had put an end to the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere" ("I cancelled the project"), despite the fact that numerous news and independent fact-checking organizations have pointed out Palin's bridge claim is patently false. Knowing that her "Bridge to Nowhere" questionnaire answer was not truthful, why should her vague denial regarding the rape-kit story carry real weight?

But the bloggers had more proof the rape-kit story was a smear: Wasilla town officials, including current police chief Angella Long, recently announced that they could not find any records of the police department ever billing a rape victim for a post-assault test. And with that, Confederate Yankee announced, "If current Police Chief Long's information is correct, then Mayor Palin didn't know that rape victims were charged for rape kits, because none were."

Two holes in that logic are plainly apparent. First, local hospitals administered the post-assault examinations, which means hospitals likely generated the bills sent to the victims or their insurance companies, not the town of Wasilla. But it was the town of Wasilla that set the policy instructing the hospital to bill the victim. (And naturally, the hospital/patient records in question remain confidential.) So the fact that the town can't find any collection records is not surprising since the hospital did the collecting.

In other words, for years, the local hospital billed the Wasilla police department when it brought in a rape victim to be tested. After the town adopted a new policy, the Wasilla police instructed the hospital to bill the victim or her insurance company instead.

But secondly and more important, whether the town actually billed anyone during the relatively short time the policy was in place was secondary to the fact that the policy was instituted while Palin was mayor. Or was the very small town of Wasilla in the habit of adopting budgetary policies without the mayor's consent, and Palin in the habit of signing off on city budget initiatives she disapproved of?

Based on the annual budget documents she signed off on, Palin either consented to the policy or signed documents she hadn't bothered to read -- both issues that should get the media's attention.

Oh, yeah: A third point regarding the claim that the town never billed anyone. Here's what Palin's hand-picked police chief told a reporter for the local newspaper, the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman, in 2000 after the state outlawed the practice of billing victims for rape kits: "In the past, we've charged the cost of the exams to the victim's insurance company when possible" [emphasis added].

Yes, you read that correctly. Palin's own police chief freely discussed how the town of Wasilla had charged "the victim's insurance company" for the post-assault exam. (He opposed the new state law that forced Wasilla to stop.)

So how did Confederate Yankee deal with the large blemish on the rape-kit-story-is-a-smear meme? Easy: He ignored it. In his September 22 post "debunking" the controversy, the blogger made no mention of the damning Frontiersman article.

The NewsBusters writer took the same route when he harangued The Boston Globe on October 2 for its rape-kit editorial. The article that quoted Palin's police chief, in real time, acknowledging that the town had charged victims' insurance companies and that he was disappointed the town could not continue to do so was completely ignored in order to sustain the right-wing claim that the rape-kit story had been completely concocted.

See how much easier it is to be indignant when facts are ignored?

And yes, the police chief's 2000 quote remains an enormous obstacle for conservatives who desperately want to debunk the Wasilla story. Not surprisingly, some have even raised doubts about the police chief's quote in the Frontiersman.

But ask yourself this: If the police chief's comments in 2000 had been some kind of massive misunderstanding and were being foolishly used to fuel the current rape-kit story, wouldn't the former police chief clear the matter up? Wouldn't Palin be able to persuade her former police chief to come forward and explain to the press how his comments in the Frontiersman in 2000 were completely taken out of context and that no, of course not, Wasilla never charged the insurance companies of rape victims when Palin was mayor?

Instead, we've heard radio silence from the former police chief, who seems to have no interest in walking back his rape-kit comments from 2000, comments that frustrated bloggers just cannot make disappear.

Stuck with a public statement that leaves no room for ambiguity ("We've charged the cost of the exams to the victim's insurance company when possible"), bloggers clung to the idea that Palin should not be tarred by the rape-kit policy because she had been completely in the dark about it as mayor.

* "She never supported" the policy, claimed Amanda Carpenter, a national political reporter for

* "There's no evidence Mayor Palin knew about the policy," agreed an outraged Boston Herald columnist.

* "There is not yet any evidence generated that Palin was aware of this policy," announced NRO.

* "She wasn't even aware it was going on," stressed the NewsBusters writer.

Set aside the oddity of Palin's press supporters pushing her candidacy by emphasizing that she apparently had no idea what the town of Wasilla was doing in her name, and focus on this: Unless Palin had no idea what was going on in her own city government and unless she signed budget documents without actually reading them, the claim is plainly false. And that's where conservatives got schooled by a GW junior named Jacob Alperin-Sheriff. Writing for The Huffington Post's Off The Bus, and crossposting at Daily Kos, Alperin-Sheriff posted by far the most specific and factual analysis of the rape-kit story in terms of Palin's role as mayor and the final say she had over the budget.

Combing through Wasilla's budgetary documents, which are posted online, Alperin-Sheriff showed that Palin had clearly signed off on a fiscal-year budget that reduced by three-quarters the amount of money the town set aside annually for rape-kit costs and that the rape-kit reduction was spelled out before the fiscal-year 2000 budget was approved by Mayor Sarah Palin on April 26, 1999.

This week's bottom line: No matter how many times partisans in the GOP press announce the Palin rape-kit story has been "debunked," the central, undisputed facts remain hidden in plain sight for all to see.

It's time for the press to take a closer look.

Posted to the web on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:58 AM ET

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Palin and Ann Coulter could get together and talk about their victimization by the liberal media victims, yet still victimizers. Talk about projections and irony.

It's so canny how they actually turn around what they are doing and try to place it on someone else. The art of obfuscation: you don't have to win the arguement, just blur the lines.

Anonymous said...

Annon #1
YOU ARE WRONG and so is the "article" you PRINTED out for us.
Pay attention to Phil and lipstick on a pig b/c they are RIGHT. You are like will not admit you are wrong.
Sarah Palin: The rape kit controversy
SP was treated with kid gloves by the MSM, she could say anything she wanted about Obama and MSM did nothing about the only thing I did see was MSNBC report on her AIP ties and the RCN/Mccain machine immediately DEMANDED a apology?
If it wasn't for progressive bloggers like Phil here, we wouldn't know all about Gov. Grifter. She is doing interviews on State time, using State website to post her petty grievances and still whining about losing the election. I hope people of Alaska grow a set and impeach her. And Thank you Progressive bloggers for not caving and telling us the truth about her!!!

CelticDiva said...

Phil is correct about the budgets.

I printed the history of the Wasilla Rape Kit story, complete with links.:

Jacob Alperin-Sheriff of Huffington Post was in contact with me while he was researching the rape kits story. He was the first one to interview the former police chief, Irl Stambaugh, to establish a time frame for when victims began getting the billings. He also searched the budget information which is provided in his story:

Like Phil, every time I see some wing-nut try to contradict this story, I correct it. I hope everyone does.

Anonymous said...

I would like MSM to visit the and investigate three pictures of Palin. One dated 03-14-08 (35 days from Trig's alleged delivery) that shows no pregnancy. And one dated 03-26-08 made at Alaska State Museum in Juneau which shows no 6+ month pregnancy. As well as the photo made the week of April 8, which shows a square underneath. Keep scrolling will find all of them.

There are two pictures that show a pregnant Palin...but the above mentioned pictures would bring the two into question.

Anonymous said...


The City of Wasilla never billed any victim for an exam or rape kit. Never have never will.

Alleging that Palin supported making rape victims for rape kits is a cruel twisting of the facts. Even the Obama campaign backed off.

Palin never supported billing individual rape victims.

Philip Munger said...

anon @ #15,

The city of Wasilla did not pay for the exams because of a budgetary and policy change under her administration. Before the change, the city did. After passage of a state law mandating payment of such fees by all police departments, they included that line item once again in their annual budgets.

Your statement "P never supported billing individual rape victims" hides the fact that under her administration the CoW did not pay after she ended the payment policy, until forced to. Even then, her chief of police objected.

In my article, I do not state what you are claiming somebody has said. Nor did I claim here or elsewhere that "Palin made rape victims pay."

The City of Wasilla did not perform the medical service rendered, so had they billed victims for what medical personnel did, they would have committed fraud. By not paying for the exams, they forced either the victim, the hospital, an insurance company or somebody else to pay for the service, which was part of a criminal investigation. It was also a medical exam, so until somebody waives confidentiality regarding her record, there will remain unanswered questions.

I'll ask you this - who should pay for the criminal investigation of the Wasilla Bible Church fire - the church or the investigating agencies?

Anonymous said...


You have set up a strawman and you are off point.

The blogs accused Pallin as follows:

By Eric Boehlert
Media Matters for America

...But has any other Palin issue produced the type of visceral response ignited by the revelation that while she was mayor of Wasilla,

the town began charging rape victims or their insurance companies for costly emergency-room rape kits and post-assault examinations?

The city never did charge a Victim.

Valley Hospital should have just "eaten" the expense.

DR. CBJ was head of the SART team. She has defended Sarah on this issue.

Sarah was very supportive of Dr CBJ when she founded the "Children Place" A child advocacy center. (which performs medical examinations of sexualy abused children) Dr. CBJ is the volunteer medical director. The City of Wasilla spent Hundred of thousands of dollars supporting the Childrens Place with grants, investigators and start up monies.

No child or family is ever billed. But if there is medicare or insurance available to help defray the expense it will be billed.

The blogs were flat wrong. The city of Wasilla never billed a victim. Sarah never supported billing a victim. Valley hospital should have just absorbed the exam fees.

Phil, I know you highly respect DR CBJ as most of the valley does. When you get a chance to privately talk to her, I am sure you will decide to drop the issue and stop defending the blogs. (she might even scold you a bit)

Sarah has plenty for the blogs to shoot at. But the blogs have twisted and miscontsrued some complicated facts for a cruel political purpose.

Palmer Palin Bot.

Philip Munger said...

Palmer Palin Bot,

To say that an outside unit assisting in a criminal forensic exam should "absorb the exam fees" or any other aspect of getting to the truth of a criminal matter is absurd. Or that the public in a city, borough or state accept that some crime victims expect all investigative fees to be paid on some types of investigations, but not on others. I'm sorry you don't understand the intrinsic problem with the stance you claim the Palin administration of the city of Wasilla took, as being moral in any way.

CBJ is not going to discuss this with me. Get real.

As to CBJ's defending Mayor Palin on the elimination of payment for forensic exams from the WPD budget, I've never read, seen or heard of such an article. Do you have a link?