Is There a HouseGate in Sarah Palin's Future?

Update 7/4/09: The FBI says there is no investigation of any kind involving Sarah Palin.


Original Post 7/3/09

Speculation is mounting on the internet that Sarah Palin is facing trouble over the source of the building materials for her Waslilla, Alaska home. If you remember, Todd was interviewed saying he built the house with his own hands and some buddies helped out with materials. [More...]

The details were reported in 2008 by Village Voice reporter Wayne Barrett. Mudflats also reported on it. Hypocrites and Heffalump Traps wrote it up in February, with pictures of each, showing similarities and posts an update today.

Here's the railing at the Wasilla Sports Complex:

And here's the railing at the Palin home:

The complex cost $12.5 million to build. Barrett reported:

Six months before Palin stepped down as mayor in October 2002, the city awarded nearly a half-million-dollar contract to design the biggest project in Wasilla history to Kumin Associates. Blase Burkhart was the Kumin architect on the job—the son of Roy Burkhart, who is frequently described as a "mentor" of Palin and was head of the local Republican Party (his wife, June, who also advised Palin, is the national committeewoman).

Asked if the contract was a favor, Roy Burkhart, who contributed to her campaign in the same time frame that his son got the contract, said: "I really don't know." Palin then named Blase Burkhart to a seven-member builder-selection committee that picked Howdie Inc., a mostly residential contractor owned at the time by Howard Nugent. Formally awarded the contract a couple of weeks after Palin left office, Nugent has donated $4,000 to Palin campaigns. Two competitors protested the process that led to Nugent's contract.

The Village Voice obtained a list of sub-contractors at the Complex. One was Spenard Builders.

In addition to being a sponsor of Todd Palin's snow-machine team that has earned tens of thousands for the Palin family, Spenard hired Sarah Palin to do a statewide television commercial in 2004. When the Palins began building a new family home off Lake Lucille in 2002—at the same time that Palin was running for lieutenant governor and in her final months as mayor—Spenard supplied the materials, according to Antoine Bricks, who works in its Wasilla office.

Spenard actually filed a notice "of its right to assert a lien" on the deed for the Palin property after contracting for labor and materials for the site. Spenard's name has popped up in the trial of Senator Stevens—it worked on the house that is at the center of the VECO scandal as well.

Other subcontractors also donated to Palin:

Dorwin and Joanne Smith, the principals of complex subcontractor DJ Excavation & Development, have donated $7,100 to Palin and her allied candidate Charlie Fannon (Joanne is a Palin appointee on the state Board of Nursing). Sheldon Ewing, who owns another complex subcontractor, Weld Air, has donated $1,300, and PN&D, an engineering firm on the complex, has contributed $699.

Max Blumenthal writes at the Daily Beast:

Many political observers in Alaska are fixated on rumors that federal investigators have been seizing paperwork from SBS in recent months, searching for evidence that Palin and her husband Todd steered lucrative contracts to the well-connected company in exchange for gifts like the construction of their home on pristine Lake Lucille in 2002. The home was built just two months before Palin began campaigning for governor, a job which would have provided her enhanced power to grant building contracts in the wide-open state.

...Just months before Palin left city hall to campaign for governor, she awarded a contract to SBS [Spenard] to help build the $13 million Wasilla Sports Complex. The most expensive building project in Wasilla history, the complex cost the city an additional $1.3 million in legal fees and threw it into severe long-term debt. For SBS, however, the bloated and bungled project was a cash cow.

Wouldn't the statute of limitations be up on home renovations performed and contracts awarded in the 90's? Even if she didn't declare the value of the contributions on her tax return, the statute of limitations has probably run. If Palin has upcoming legal problems, I think it's more likely they are related to the e-mails that supposedly are coming out than the Wasilla Sports Complex.

As to theories she's resigning to hit the lecture circuit or become a cable news pundit to pay her legal bills, didn't she just get a fat book contract that should take care of those?

Whatever her reasons for resigning, I suspect her political career is over. She can run around the country from now until 2012, and she's not going to be nominated for President. Memo to Mrs. Palin: We're just not that into you.

Update: AK Muckraker has a good analysis over at Huffington Post today.

< Hospital Lab Tech in Colorado May Have Infected 5,700 With Hepatitis | Happy 4th of July: Let Freedom Ring >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Caution (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by gyrfalcon on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:44:18 AM EST
    on some of this.  I haven't, God knows, followed the intricacies of the Palin home construction, but I do live in a small town in a rural area of a state with a small population and very small business community.  It's not like living in NY or even Colorado.  The fact that a railing in the complex is similar to, or even identical to the railing in the Palin home strikes me as totally meaningless in the very restricted business environment of a state like mine or Alaska.  There just aren't that many options for that kind of work without paying an exhorbitant fee to have stuff flown in from outside the state.

    In states like this, as in Arkansas when Bill Clinton was governor, it all looks -- and is -- pretty incestuous.  If you're going to do any kind of business within the state, you have no option but to use the same sources and contacts as everybody else, from the governor on down.

    Didn't our current President . . . (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by nycstray on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:22:54 AM EST
    also have a "housing issue"? That amounted to nothing?

    Actually, the same thing can happen in NY and Colorado. Just use a contractor, designer, architect etc . . .  


    That was different (5.00 / 6) (#6)
    by jbindc on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:05:33 AM EST
    Rezko?  Just a kind man and his wife doing a neighborly thing for a nice couple and their young children.  

    Palin?  Must be a crooked deal somewhere.....


    Rezko Was Convicted (5.00 / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:52:25 AM EST
    And Obama's connection to him was investigated by a federal prosecutor, namely Patrick Fitzgerald.

    It is rather hilarious that amid speculation of why Palin resigned, the Obama haters here would bring up Rezko in order to defend Palin, but not surprising. Habits die hard.

    If Palin abused her position and committed a seriously unethical act, the public should absolutely know, especially if she plans to be in public office again.

    As for any other criminal act she may have done, why would anyone here argue that she should not be investigated? That is what the GOP does all the time, I guess for some here GOP behavior is catchy.


    Ah, but don't forget, this is a criminal (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by oculus on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:09:01 PM EST
    defense site.

    Of course it's a criminal (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:47:03 PM EST
    defense site, which is why I made no judgments about whether Palin is being investigated. If you read what I wrote, I said I doubt the house issue is a problem because the statute of limitations should have run by now. I said IF she has a problem, I think it more likely related to her emails which she has refused to disclose and which are the subject of a FOIA request and people in AK say they should be coming out soon.

    I reported what others are saying and provided the source links.

    As for my personal opinion, "we're not that into you" -- that clearly has nothing to do with legal issues.

    Now, do I think something's up and she's facing some kind of unpleasant legal problem? That makes the most sense to me as I wrote in an earlier post-- but to say someone might be facing a legal problem is vastly different than saying someone is guilty.

    I write about what's in the news and she was yesterday's news. If you don't want to read about what's in the news, try reading a food blog. Or come over to PopLeft and help me figure out who the Bachelorette's final choice will be.


    See the update (none / 0) (#87)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:58:27 PM EST
    The FBI says there is no investigation of any kind into Sarah Palin, for acts past or present.

    Yeah (none / 0) (#16)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:21:13 PM EST
    Although, a liberal political blog as well. That certainly trumps defending corrupt GOP pols and corrupt dems. Funny, but not surprising, to hear our local prosecutor missing that distinction.

    Gov. Palin does not (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by oculus on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:23:18 PM EST
    benefit from the presumption of innocence.

    Talk Left's Jeralyn Merrit re (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by oculus on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 02:23:29 PM EST
    Presumption of Innocence (nice work):



    Thanks. (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by ghost2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:09:47 PM EST
    I wish I could rate your comment 50!

    As for the owner of this blog piling on Palin, it doesn't even shock me.  I figure such hypocrisy is par for course.

    Of course, after Madoff pleaded guilty, JM wrote a comment (or a post) lamenting the fact that he'll die in jail.

    Tells you a lot, doesn't it??


    Just What Does It Tell You? (none / 0) (#56)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:16:15 PM EST
    Sounds like you are implying something nasty about JM.

    No. (none / 0) (#59)
    by ghost2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:20:51 PM EST
    Just pointing out her comments.

    I am entitled to that much, I think!!


    Huh? (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:29:50 PM EST
    What are you talking about? Has she been arrested?

    You called her "corrupt" (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:20:50 PM EST
    that certainly carries the connotation of criminality.

    The fact is Democratic bloggers have shown that when it comes to nonsense like this, they are exactly like GOP bloggers for the most part.


    Point Taken (none / 0) (#34)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 02:07:27 PM EST
    Although the larger point is that TL usually suspends its defense oriented point of view when it comes to political corruption, both Dem and Gop.

    And as far as presumed innocence, this is not a trial, I am not on a jury, and I do tend to believe that Palin is corrupt.


    you may state your opinon (none / 0) (#89)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 12:23:12 AM EST
    but you must label it as such and may not state it as fact. Everyone should refrain from making potentially libelous accusations.

    Point Taken (none / 0) (#90)
    by squeaky on Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 03:04:33 PM EST
    Although I was referring to political corruption cases both R and D that have been reported at TL in the past, the obvious implication was that I was stating that Palin was also corrupt as a fact.

    It is true though, imo, I believe that Palin is corrupt mainly from what I have read about her, and because she is a Republican, and corruption seems to be more than not the GOP tradition these days.


    Are you calling me an "Obama Hater"? (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by nycstray on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:58:06 PM EST
    At Best (none / 0) (#25)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:13:57 PM EST
    Sour grapes and an attempt to defend poor innocent little victim Sarah Palin by slinging mud at Obama, obviously a hat tip for the Hillary base.

    At worst, a comment more likely to be seen on Red State, than TL, imo.



    Exactly what in my brief comment was a defense (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by nycstray on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 02:04:51 PM EST
    of her or hate towards Obama. It was simply an observation.

    And for the millionth time, I DO NOT HATE OBAMA, so get over yourself. And refrain from calling me an "Obama hater" please. It's offensive.


    OK (1.00 / 0) (#36)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 02:31:18 PM EST
    I assume that you bring up Rezko to argue that we should presume Palin innocent, because Obama turned out to be innocent. Seems to me that presumption of innocence regarding Obama was not your position during the primaries.. just saying.  

    And my response was to jbindc who is in an entirely different league than you when it comes to anything Obama.


    I guess we are supposed to presume (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by nycstray on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:07:35 PM EST
    she's innocent, heh, that wasn't so much my thought (to defend her) as I made the observation. Not all observations are as calculated as you would like them to be. Nor are all actions. In the primaries and presently.

    And O did admit he was guilty of being a bonehead (I prefer stupidity), on more than one occasion  ;)


    I think the point is (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:19:31 PM EST
    many Dems act about Palin with the same irrationality that Republicans act about Obama.

    It is quite unseemly and frankly, makes Palin's supposedly crazy speech seem all the more accurate.


    Back it up (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:02:25 PM EST
    many Dems act about Palin with the same irrationality that Republicans act about Obama.

    Examples?  Does anyone claim she isn't a citizen?  That her birth certificate is forged?  That she is a secret Muslim?  That she stole an election with the aid of ACORN?

    I challenge your claim that anyone has come up with anything against Palin nearly as irrational as the attacks on Obama.

    Disclaimer: There is plenty that Obama does that I don't like, but of course the alternative was unthinkable.


    There was so much (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Slado on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:11:13 PM EST
    lunacy about Palin when she burst on the scence it's not worth going over again.

    It was endless and trying to argue over which politician was tarnished  thh worst is rather pointless and purely partisan.

    BTD is correct in calling blind hatred of any politician what it is.   Silly.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#31)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:57:29 PM EST
    Irrationality about Cheney and Giuliani too. The only difference is that they, being white men, escape the sexism.

    he said his buddies supplied the materials (none / 0) (#3)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:16:30 AM EST
    and he refused to name them. I'm not sure I get your point.

    After working my fingers to the bone (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by CoralGables on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:46:32 AM EST
    I have discovered why the Palin resignation was announced today.

    Both Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert went on vacation after last night's show and won't return for a week. By going with the Friday news dump at the start of their vacations, Palin will avoid the intellectual comedy skewering that would have surely been forthcoming. Jon Stewart would have had his popcorn on the desk and drink in hand. A shrewd move by Palin. Her first smart move in quite sometime.

    Smarter Than You Think (none / 0) (#47)
    by Gary P on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 04:34:31 PM EST
    As Palin starts to position herself for the next presidential election you know that Obama is a little bit nervous about it all. After all during the last election Obama and the Chicago thugs kept comparing her qualifications to those of Obama, not to those ofBiden . What this says is that President Barrack Hussein Obama is very much intimidated by her, he even made sure that his state run press groups, ABC, CBS, NBC were on board. Remember how scared he  was, he threw a reporter of his plan for siding with her. I think this will be an interesting approach and a professional one at that. She will start attacking Obama on all fronts without being employed by Alaska, steeping down so as to not use the time as Alaska's governor to attack Obama. Do we have a start to 2012 and can we elect a conservative?

    lol (none / 0) (#49)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 04:43:24 PM EST
    Sure, Obama is quaking in his boots...  Funniest thing I have heard all day.  

    I certainly do not underestimate Palin but the party of Family values does not have enough idiots left to elect anyone as out of touch as Palin is.


    Not very good pictures (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Rojas on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:04:01 AM EST
    But I don't think the materials are similar at all. The glass panels do not appear to be the same height or width on either project.

    Railing may share a similar extrusion for the top and bottom rails, but again I really don't think so. It appears the top extrusion passes over the vertical supports on the complex and abuts the vertical supports on the house

    I agree entirely with you, and with gyrfalcon's (5.00 / 5) (#7)
    by allimom99 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:44:31 AM EST
    comment earlier on. I live in a remote area of far northern CA, and the construction community here is VERY incestuous, by necessity.

    I continue to be surprised at how much energy is being wasted on trying to find dirt on Palin. Those people who really want her to go away should stop talking about her, and maybe use some of that energy trying to get your issues addressed by the administration we have NOW.

    It's up to the Republicans to decide if she's even relevant in 2 years - if she continues to be able to portray herself as standing up to constant harassment (maybe you saw the piece that was up briefly at Huffpo - they pulled it, but screen shots are out there - would you want to put YOUR family through that?), people you might not expect will admire that. If our president maybe still isn't doing much for us by then, all it takes is disappointed progressives staying home to bring us your "worst nightmare."

    Let me make clear that I disagree with Palin on pretty much everythig politically, but the obsessing over her is not getting our issues addressed, and it comes off as so much more foaming at the mouth. It gives her supporters a rallying point.

    We should be condemning people like that moron at Huffpo, who obviously thought he was being too clever by half. Clue for you, Eric, making fun of Downs Syndrome sufferers isn't funny. Jeralyn, I'm kind of disappointed to not see you calling him out - why is it OK to be this mean-spirited if the writer is a so-called liberal?


    My question (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:58:43 AM EST
    is why does Ms. Palin instill such hatred if she's a non-threat? (Answer she is obviously a threat, but I don't know why.)

    I don't like her policies a bit, but I find myself defending her, because as wrong as she is, the indefensible hatred of her is just as wrong,  if not moreso.  Why aren't these same awful things being directed at male GOP?

    And that disgusting story on HuffPo.  Not only should the story have been pulled, the writer should have been suspended and a formal apology directed on the front page toward all families of Down Syndrome children.  Talk about crossing the lne.  What a putrid, despicable SOB to think that article was even worth writing.


    Reminiscent of the Bill Clinton take down (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:12:40 AM EST
    Diggin' in any pile of dirt they could find. Short of finding one, they created them.

    This has about as much substance as the promise from The Enquirer they would be able to expose Sarah's affair.

    She's not part of the elite, same flaw Bill had.


    Wouldn't want to have to keep those (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Inspector Gadget on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:14:07 AM EST
    glass panels clean, myself!!

    Why she quit? (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by AlaskaDale on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:52:55 AM EST
    Perhaps she quit because of housegate, but another detail may also be a factor. The national news has missed the more recent feud in local Alaska politics. The day before she resigned, the Governor fired the top two heads of the state Public Health Division, Chief Medical Officer, Bev Wooley, and her assistant, Dr. Jay Butler.  Both were scheduled to give testimony to a state committee regarding a proposed parental notification law for teens seeking abortion. Their testimony did not contradict Governor Palin (a noted pro-life leader), but she wanted to edit their remarks. When they refused to allow her to edit their remarks, they were fired. Shortly after, Palin resigned.

    Now that's interesting... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Radiowalla on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:44:08 AM EST
    I did read in the NYTimes today that the Lt. Guv is also very anti-choice and will be supporting the parental notification law.

    Well, you are right there in the catbird seat, watching this up close.
    Must be quite a show.


    Digby Provides a Link (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:54:50 AM EST
    To that story:

    Update: And by the way, to those who insist that Palin hasn't governed as a social conservative, this pretty much proves otherwise.

    And I don't know if you saw her press conference, but I almost expected her to start babbling about soul mates and David and Bathsheba. The Republicans are getting more deeply weird every day.

    Disappointing Digby is piling on. Why? (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by oculus on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:59:57 PM EST
    Here's the key part of this post (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:25:30 PM EST
    "Many political observers . . . are fixated on rumors . . ."


    As for Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Dadler on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:41:00 PM EST
    IMO, the comparison is spurious at best.  They are two completely different people, in completely different circumstances.  Whatever left wing machine exists to fry her is NOTHING compared to Scaife's millions used to finance dirt digging against the Clintons.  Not even close.  And the allegations against the Clintons were SO far out there, come on, they had Vince Foster murdered, etc?  They are incomparable but for the fact they both come from states of "lesser importance" to most "elites".  They are also imcomparable in this respect: one quit on her state, the other didn't quit on his state or nation.

    Palin is a two-bit hack, intellectually, politically, in every way.  She is not even in the minor leagues in that respect.  She is over her head, has been for a long time, and it is quite OBVIOUS, when she can't put together a coherent answer to a logical question -- which she has yet to do about anything, from politics to bad jokes made sort of about her daughter.

    Agree (none / 0) (#22)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 12:56:28 PM EST
    Except for the part about Palin's intelligence. I believe that you are seriously underestimating her in that regard, or your definition of intelligence is limited to appearing polished.

    Not Polished (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 04:37:01 PM EST
    Or nervous, doesn't mean not intelligent. I don't think that you can get to be governor on just sex appeal, if that is what you are implying.

    From digby:

    I'm back now (luggage is lost, naturally) and I've had some time to talk to my friends in Alaska and review what's being said about Sarah Palin. Here's the most interesting thing: my brother in law and his girlfriend, both teachers, card carrying NPR listening, Riverdance loving, Jim Lehrer watching diehard liberals .... quite like the woman. They don't like her social conservatism, but it's so prevalent in Alaska that they hardly notice it.

    She sure had something going on, I am not convinced that she is done.


    lol (none / 0) (#70)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:36:43 PM EST
    Anyway her kind of "being regular", which you define as lack of intelligence, reminds me of GWB. It is not to be underestimated, imo, voters like that.

    That being said, I do not think that there are enough morons left to fall for that schtick again.


    Of course she isn't dumb (none / 0) (#53)
    by samtaylor2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 06:46:43 PM EST
    compared to the average American, but compared to the "average" person trying to be president, she doesn't seem to rise to the occasion.

    GWB? (4.00 / 1) (#54)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 06:50:34 PM EST
    She is a genius compared to him, imo.

    I don't think she's (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:58:00 PM EST
    any brighter than GW. She remains, in my view, the most unqualified Democrat or Republican to run for  VP. Even Dan Quayle was smarter. But for John McCain's delusional Hail Mary Pass, we wouldn't even know who she was or have to talk about her. Too bad we can't turn back the hands of time and send her back to obscurity. Soon though, I hope.

    Dan Quale Was Smarter???? (none / 0) (#83)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:53:33 PM EST
    Wow that is about the biggest insult you can charge about a politician's intelligence. I disagree. Usually (always) for women, especially attractive women of childbearing age, there is a double standard.

    Being a super wasp, Quail must be stupider than Palin, he had all the advantages in every way his whole life, and people still thought he was stupid.


    Doug Feith & Dan Quayle (none / 0) (#86)
    by weltec2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 11:37:58 PM EST
    The new Repug dream team featuring Sarah Palin as Secretary of State. Now I'm going to have nightmares.

    lol (none / 0) (#71)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:37:11 PM EST
    you are cracking me up...

    Dadler, your first comment (none / 0) (#88)
    by Jeralyn on Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 12:03:30 AM EST
    was deleted for making an unsustainable, legal accusation against Palin. Watch the name-calling, please.

    The rumors (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:22:46 PM EST
    without a doubt. I have no idea about her intelligence.

    I do know that the Left blogs are heaping themselves with discredit on this.

    A very poor performance. But when it comes to Palin, irrationality has reigned from the beginning.

    Thank you, BTD (none / 0) (#29)
    by trillian on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 01:31:13 PM EST
    You are a voice in the wilderness.

    Going from blog to blog this morning I felt a violent urge to scrub my brain out with bleach.


    Good work BTD (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Slado on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:05:28 PM EST
    I don't like obama's politics but I bet he's a great guy and a great dad and husband.   It is important to separate someones politics from their personal life and for some reason people just throw away common sense when they attack Palin.

    To the point that I don't think I've ever seen someon so loathed in national politics since Bill Clinotn.

    Mayber it's being the outsider, outspoken whatever.   When Plain speeaks some in this country just loose their minds.

    BTW I think she is cashing in on her fame.  Why be governor when you can make $50K a night preaching to the choir.


    How about this? (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Sweet Sue on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:44:50 PM EST
    Examples?  Does anyone claim she isn't a citizen?  That her birth certificate is forged?  That she is a secret Muslim?  That she stole an election with the aid of ACORN?
    I challenge your claim that anyone has come up with anything against Palin nearly as irrational as the attacks on Obama

    Does anyone claim that Obama did not really father both of his children?

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 03:54:13 PM EST
    Today's Manufactured Outrage of the Day* is that, on a mid-day Fox News program featuring Megyn Kelly and Michelle Malkin debating the impact of Michelle Obama on the race, the production assistant in charge of writing chyrons dubbed the would-be first Lady "Obama's Baby Mama." Apparently, this is a racial slur which suggests that she and Obama aren't actually married and the children are illegitimate and therefore they should just head on back to Africa.


    Also that Obama himself is an illegitimate child.


    Oh, but that is not mudslinging by GOPers but Dems...


    No one here claimed that (none / 0) (#76)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 08:04:04 PM EST
    In fact, the topic was off-limits. Please don't bring trash from other sites here.

    Ironic (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by DXP on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 04:14:07 PM EST
    The dem party is further alienating working class with the demonizing and ridiculing of Palin. It is not smart of democrats to do this. The working class - former backbone of the dem party - did indeed "find somewhere else to go".

    Don't Worry (none / 0) (#45)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 04:16:07 PM EST
    The GOP seem to be doing the same thing.

    well (none / 0) (#51)
    by connecticut yankee on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 06:07:04 PM EST
    Using the same rhetoric you can argue that putting your head in the sand over Palin might be alienating the educated and discerning critics who find her a little short on substance.  I find many of her democratic defenders a little overboard in their defense of her record, statements and other obvious problems.  But offend away. I don't like her but will still vote democrat despite the home-grown "poor sarah" camp's attempt to slander my reasoning at every turn.

    We get it. You are empathic. Have a cookie.


    style is not substance BTW (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by DXP on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:54:33 PM EST
    Ridiculing her style is what dems are doing mostly. The argument is not either/or.... either one says nothing about issues/or one ridicules her style which devolves into both classism and sexism. It is a practical matter for political parties to include differing styles of speech. Its smarter to actually look for the meaning and substance than to verbally attack her family, looks, style of speaking. I think her democratic "defenders" are reacting to this. Saying she "sounds" stupid more often means she talks like a rural working class person than that she is actually unintelligent.

    How about refraining from (none / 0) (#94)
    by jondee on Tue May 25, 2010 at 12:22:26 PM EST
    insulting the intelligence of "the working class" (the way the GOP did women), by practically demanding that anyone in a carefully targeted demograph accept the company-gal from Alaska as their personal savior?

    The transparent hacks pushing this meme need to be insulted lustily, creatively and as often as possible.


    please watch your language (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Jeralyn on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 08:00:47 PM EST
    the chickensh*t word...use an asterisk if you have to but don't repeat those words here please. Thank you.

    Gee. (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by Dr Molly on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:18:12 PM EST
    I don't know what I've missed more in the last few months - the bickering about Palin or the squeaky wars.

    Oh (none / 0) (#85)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:56:07 PM EST
    Not to seem as if I am anything like you, I have been away from TL for a while too. Bad coincidence on your part, I guess.

    ordinarily true. (none / 0) (#50)
    by cpinva on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 04:50:18 PM EST
    Even if she didn't declare the value of the contributions on her tax return, the statute of limitations has probably run.

    except for fraud, in which case there is no statute. for substantial understatement, the statute is 6 years. both must be shown to be affirmative acts, and the onus is on the government to prove them. she could well argue that it was a "gift" from a friend, therefore not taxable as income to her.

    with regards to her intellect, i am not now, nor have i ever been particularly impressed with hers. conceivably, her whole public schtick is just that, an act for the rubes making up her base, to show she's "one of them". max baer, who played "jethro" on the "beverly hillbillies" was actually one of the smartest guys in tv, successfully portraying an ignorant, backwoods clown.

    of course, the "beverly hillbillies" was not real life, everyone watching recognized it as fantasy, and the cast as merely playing parts. somehow, i just haven't gotten that same sense from gov. palin, ever, in the time she's been exposed to the national public. i get the sense that her displays of intellectual vacuuity aren't an act, there really is no "there, there".

    myself, i thought she was already toast politically, this simply seals it. in time, she'll fade from the public consciousness, much like macarthur's old soldier.

    I wouldn't bet the farm on it, cp. (none / 0) (#52)
    by prittfumes on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 06:45:10 PM EST
    myself, i thought she was already toast politically, this simply seals it. in time, she'll fade from the public consciousness, much like macarthur's old soldier.

    Digby Did Call Sexism (none / 0) (#58)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:19:09 PM EST
    Perhaps not as much as you or she would have liked to. So are you saying that Jeralyn is a sexist? Is that why you brought up Mafoff?

    This comment is about Digby. (none / 0) (#60)
    by ghost2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:23:51 PM EST
    and I am quoting what Digby said about herself, according to Eric Boehlert.

    If you are not sure about what people are saying, try reading the comment again.  That usually helps.


    Reading Problems? (none / 0) (#62)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:27:08 PM EST
    Digby Did Call Sexism (none / 0) (#58)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:19:09 PM EST
    Perhaps not as much as you or she would have liked to.

    For Instance (none / 0) (#61)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:24:14 PM EST
    digby Jan 08

    I get constantly lambasted as a Hillary shill/hack/DLC scumbag, which I'm not, because I've written a lot about the media's truly shameful coverage of her over the past few months. (I also defended Edwards and Obama, but because the nature of the attacks against Hillary were often so sexist --- and there were so many more of them --- it's unbalanced.)

    more here


    Despite What She May Have Said (none / 0) (#64)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:31:33 PM EST
    The record is linked above, Knock yourself out. You are smearing digby by generalizing a comment out of context, btw, and it is really a poor tactic. Par for the course.

    Whatever. (none / 0) (#65)
    by ghost2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:32:08 PM EST
    Not Whatever (none / 0) (#66)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 07:33:16 PM EST
    You are smearing both Jeralyn and digby as sexists, for your own selfish reasons. Nasty, and unfair, imo.

    try some reading comprehension. (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by ghost2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 08:40:28 PM EST
    And stop flaming people by putting words there that weren't in the first place.

    But then, I notice that's your mode of operation around here.  Unlike you, I do not have unlimited time.  I am entitled to criticize comments  and posts for their content. And point  out inconsistencies and double standards and so on.  That's what blogging is all about.

    You, on the other hand, seem to have nothing else to do other than "cleaning the isles".

    This sub-thread is getting really silly.  Let people read and make what they like of the comments (including links).  Trust them.  They can do this, and don't need babysitting by you or me.  


    lol (none / 0) (#84)
    by squeaky on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:54:37 PM EST
    It's all in black and white.

    Sarah's resignation (none / 0) (#77)
    by weltec2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 08:20:07 PM EST
    is going to give thinking Republicans the opportunity they have been waiting for to dump this unqualified individual into oblivion where she belongs. If there is a House Gate, all the better for them to do this.

    too many gates (none / 0) (#80)
    by diogenes on Sat Jul 04, 2009 at 10:03:40 PM EST

    Whatever happened to Charlie Rangel?

    FBI (none / 0) (#91)
    by Fergish on Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 03:57:12 PM EST
    Why would the FBI investigate the criminal activities of a mayor?  US Senator Stephens, yes.  But when the recently convicted Mayor of Detroit was investigated, it was by the State Attorney General.

    An excellent question (none / 0) (#92)
    by CoralGables on Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 04:07:36 PM EST
    If a violation of state or local law it would be handled locally, and not by the FBI unless they were asked to assist.