• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 19 family trips

F107HyperSabr

DP Veteran
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
2,617
Reaction score
375
Location
Connecticut
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 19 family trips
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 9 family trips | Comcast.net

Gov Palin (aka Igloo Girl among her non-friends) has paid more than $8,000 reimbursing Alaska for the costs associated with 19 trips taken with her children.

There is an ethics complaint alleging Palin abused her power by charging
for her children to travel with her.

If an ethics shower she is taking to try and clean up before running for POSTUS.
 
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 19 family trips
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 9 family trips | Comcast.net

Gov Palin (aka Igloo Girl among her non-friends) has paid more than $8,000 reimbursing Alaska for the costs associated with 19 trips taken with her children.

There is an ethics complaint alleging Palin abused her power by charging
for her children to travel with her.

If an ethics shower she is taking to try and clean up before running for POSTUS.

From the article:

The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing, but Palin agreed to reimburse the state for trips found to be of questionable state interest.
:yawn: :yawn: :yawn:
 
Last edited:
From the article:


:yawn: :yawn: :yawn:

Its OK, just the daily "Look what non-story Sarah Palin has gotten into today" story by a liberal.
 
Its OK, just the daily "Look what non-story Sarah Palin has gotten into today" story by a liberal.

The really story here is whether or not palin derangement syndrome is fatal.
 
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 19 family trips
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 9 family trips | Comcast.net

Gov Palin (aka Igloo Girl among her non-friends) has paid more than $8,000 reimbursing Alaska for the costs associated with 19 trips taken with her children.

There is an ethics complaint alleging Palin abused her power by charging
for her children to travel with her.

If an ethics shower she is taking to try and clean up before running for POSTUS.



Damn Conservatives, always bringing up Palin! (You rock Captain, I think I may thank a random post of yours for every palin thread started by a lefty.... :mrgreen:)



From the article

The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing, but Palin agreed to reimburse the state for trips found to be of questionable state interest.



How do you manage being all that FAIL and all... The anti-palin crowd sure is looking foolish these days.
 
8k? I am a liberal, and don't like Palin, but even I am pretty unimpressed by this.
 
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 19 family trips
Palin reimburses Alaska $8K for 9 family trips | Comcast.net

Gov Palin (aka Igloo Girl among her non-friends) has paid more than $8,000 reimbursing Alaska for the costs associated with 19 trips taken with her children.

There is an ethics complaint alleging Palin abused her power by charging
for her children to travel with her.

If an ethics shower she is taking to try and clean up before running for POSTUS.

I fail to see what the story here is. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing and she reimbursed them. And...?
 
I fail to see what the story here is. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing and she reimbursed them. And...?

Oh...and as a condition of reimbursement, she called for clearer guidelines to be drawn up on the issue. AND...this was the 15th ethics charge against her that has been dismissed.
 
Oh...and as a condition of reimbursement, she called for clearer guidelines to be drawn up on the issue. AND...this was the 15th ethics charge against her that has been dismissed.

So ethics charges mounting up are just nothing you guys seem to think. Yet you do admit by nature of your response that since "clearer guidelines to be drawn up on the issue" that this "issue" as you call it was at least question action on her part. With all of these ethics charges mounting up it is just a matter of time that she is nailed.

This is not a question of partisanship it is a question of right and wrong and Igloo is going something wrong.

Maybe she will run for POTUS and we just may see how many more clearer guidelines will need to be drawn as a result of her activity.
 
I fail to see what the story here is. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing and she reimbursed them. And...?

Wasn't it more that she was not caught violating laws or Alaska just failed to have a law to cover her actions.

Yet with all of the charges against her Alaska will have create a mountain of "guiedlines" to cover her little escapades.
 
So ethics charges mounting up are just nothing you guys seem to think. Yet you do admit by nature of your response that since "clearer guidelines to be drawn up on the issue" that this "issue" as you call it was at least question action on her part. With all of these ethics charges mounting up it is just a matter of time that she is nailed.

That's not what I said at all. Thanks for trying to misrepresent me along with moving the goal posts.

Palin called for clearer guidelines as part of a generous agreement on her part to settle some of the charges. The travel expense guidelines were unclear but were enforced by the same organization that enforced for her predecessor and his predecessor and were never questioned until Palin was tapped for VP.

And 15 ethics charges being dismissed means to me (and to the courts, I might add), not that Palin has been involved in any wrong-doing, but that Palin has had some pretty ridiculous and false ethics complaints against her.

When she is found by the proper authorities to be guilty of any wrong-doing, then we have something to discuss.

This is not a question of partisanship it is a question of right and wrong and Igloo is going something wrong.

Who is this Igloo you speak of? :confused:

Maybe she will run for POTUS and we just may see how many more clearer guidelines will need to be drawn as a result of her activity.

Maybe pigs will fly or you will make a post that isn't a hyper-partisan, grossly emotional, mindless smear campaign and without childish monikers...with an intent to have a discussion instead of a junior high bitch fest.

I'm not holding my breath for any of those scenarios, however.
 
Wasn't it more that she was not caught violating laws or Alaska just failed to have a law to cover her actions.

Do you even hear yourself. Basically you just said she's a bad person for not being caught violating laws that don't exist for her to violate.

Seriously? Wow. That's whole new heights to blind rage we've never seen here before at DP. Congratulations. You, too, are now that guy. :lol:

Yet with all of the charges against her Alaska will have create a mountain of "guiedlines" to cover her little escapades.

What little "escapades" might those be? Please do tell. :lol:
 
The really story here is whether or not palin derangement syndrome is fatal.

I think the real story here is, what the hell is she doing giving money to the government that isnt theirs???:doh

I guess this means her ethics are actually better then what the status quo calls for?
 
Wasn't it more that she was not caught violating laws or Alaska just failed to have a law to cover her actions.

:surrender: **** I surrender. If we are gonna start saying people violated laws that dont exist, then freedom is totally lost.

Do you even realize what you just said Sabr? :bolt:

Yet with all of the charges against her Alaska will have create a mountain of "guiedlines" to cover her little escapades.

Could you like, list all the charges against her please.

You do realize b/c someone is charged with something doesnt mean they actually did it right?:yes:
 
:surrender: **** I surrender. If we are gonna start saying people violated laws that dont exist, then freedom is totally lost.

Do you even realize what you just said Sabr? :bolt:



Could you like, list all the charges against her please.

You do realize b/c someone is charged with something doesnt mean they actually did it right?:yes:

OK let's look at this:

"An ethics complaint had alleged Palin abused her power by charging the state when her children traveled with her. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing, but Palin agreed to reimburse the state for trips found to be of questionable state interest. "

The trips were "found to be of questionable state interest. " In other words her kids did not serve a function for the state so she never should have charged the state for therir travel.

"The board's investigator, Timothy Petumenos, said in his report that state rules give little guidance to determine ethical standards for travel by the governor's family. But he interpreted the law to require that the state pay only if the first family serves an important state interest. "

...... last phrase of this paragraph "state pay only if the first family serves an important state interest. "

If your girl was on solid ground why did she reimburse the state for THEIR money.
 
OK let's look at this:

"An ethics complaint had alleged Palin abused her power by charging the state when her children traveled with her. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing, but Palin agreed to reimburse the state for trips found to be of questionable state interest. "

The trips were "found to be of questionable state interest. " In other words her kids did not serve a function for the state so she never should have charged the state for therir travel.

"The board's investigator, Timothy Petumenos, said in his report that state rules give little guidance to determine ethical standards for travel by the governor's family. But he interpreted the law to require that the state pay only if the first family serves an important state interest. "

...... last phrase of this paragraph "state pay only if the first family serves an important state interest. "

If your girl was on solid ground why did she reimburse the state for THEIR money.

Umm, because she's a fair-minded person who never wanted to abuse her power.

Let me also remind everyone that Murkowsky traveled with his family and was never questioned about it. Hell, he appointed his own daughter to the senate when a vacancy came open but never took any real flak for it.

All I see here is a move by Palin to shore up regulations against future questions and conflicts. In doing so, she also agreed to show good faith by paying for anything that that new regulations would cover.

Bottom line, no wrong-doing along with a show of good faith on her part. But don't let those pesky facts get in the way of a good Palin bashing hootenanny.
 
I'm no Palin fan but there's no news here folks.

Mountains out of molehills. :roll:

Give the lady a break.

Move along.
 
OK let's look at this:

"An ethics complaint had alleged Palin abused her power by charging the state when her children traveled with her. The Alaska Personnel Board found no wrongdoing, but Palin agreed to reimburse the state for trips found to be of questionable state interest. "

The trips were "found to be of questionable state interest. " In other words her kids did not serve a function for the state so she never should have charged the state for therir travel.

"The board's investigator, Timothy Petumenos, said in his report that state rules give little guidance to determine ethical standards for travel by the governor's family. But he interpreted the law to require that the state pay only if the first family serves an important state interest. "

...... last phrase of this paragraph "state pay only if the first family serves an important state interest. "

If your girl was on solid ground why did she reimburse the state for THEIR money.

Possibly to head off silly complaints by the brainless Palin haters in the world. I guess she didn't appreciate the depths to which the haters will go to try to make a non-story such as this into something it isn't.
 
That's not what I said at all. Thanks for trying to misrepresent me along with moving the goal posts.

Palin called for clearer guidelines as part of a generous agreement on her part to settle some of the charges. The travel expense guidelines were unclear but were enforced by the same organization that enforced for her predecessor and his predecessor and were never questioned until Palin was tapped for VP.

And 15 ethics charges being dismissed means to me (and to the courts, I might add), not that Palin has been involved in any wrong-doing, but that Palin has had some pretty ridiculous and false ethics complaints against her.

When she is found by the proper authorities to be guilty of any wrong-doing, then we have something to discuss.



Who is this Igloo you speak of? :confused:



Maybe pigs will fly or you will make a post that isn't a hyper-partisan, grossly emotional, mindless smear campaign and without childish monikers...with an intent to have a discussion instead of a junior high bitch fest.

I'm not holding my breath for any of those scenarios, however.

Before you go off accusing me of emotionlism, partisanship, or childishment you should read your own posts. I do not have to rely on childish words to get my point accross " bitch fest".

You also are showing your inability to respond with reason if all that you can do is make pointless accusations against me.

As regarding the pile of charges those were not all dismissed in court.

The accusation of partisanship cuts boths ways since it apapears that you are ready to dismiss any charge against her just because of your apparent partisanship.
 
Before you go off accusing me of emotionlism, partisanship, or childishment you should read your own posts. I do not have to rely on childish words to get my point accross " bitch fest".

You also are showing your inability to respond with reason if all that you can do is make pointless accusations against me.

As regarding the pile of charges those were not all dismissed in court.

The accusation of partisanship cuts boths ways since it apapears that you are ready to dismiss any charge against her just because of your apparent partisanship.

If you can't make the distinction between an attack on a post and an attack on you, personally, then you have arrived at the wrong place.

And yeah, most of your posts are juvenile, substanceless, ranting bitchfests so far. If you want to change the reputation your posts have earned, then that is on you to do.

Also, learn to read. I stated that 15 charges have been dismissed. Not all. But she still hasn't been convicted of any.

And no, I have not dismissed every charge against her. I dismissed this one because the APB dismissed it and, gee I dunno DERRRRR, this one happens to be the one that you started a thread topic on. :doh

Care to try again?
 
Last edited:
You obviously have every right to attack my posts on any redicuouls basis you want but to contend that someone who reimbursed the state for her unwarranted reciepts of funds only after his was "charged " with it hardly ranks up there with the actions of Mother Theresa.

Furthermore to justify her actions based upon Murkowski's poor or possibly illegal behavior is like justifying a ponzi scheme just because Madoff did it.

Lastly I find it completely laughable that her apologists revere her as a reformer and she is involved with abuse of power from troopgate on.

Reformers are supposed to reform not swin in the stench of abuse of power. Are some of you guys so blinded by your partisanship that you cannot see the diference bewteen reform and abuse.
 
You obviously have every right to attack my posts on any redicuouls basis you want but to contend that someone who reimbursed the state for her unwarranted reciepts of funds only after his was "charged " with it hardly ranks up there with the actions of Mother Theresa.

And to reimburse the state for funds that might or might not be questionable under new guidelines but definitely broke no existing guidelines hardly ranks up there with Calamity Jane either.

Furthermore to justify her actions based upon Murkowski's poor or possibly illegal behavior is like justifying a ponzi scheme just because Madoff did it.

No, it was pointing out a double standard that has risen since she was tapped for VP and everyone lost their goddamned minds over it. It was to point out that she enjoyed the same benefits as any other governor before her (minus the free plane from the oil companies because she has ethics) and nothing more.

Lastly I find it completely laughable that her apologists revere her as a reformer and she is involved with abuse of power from troopgate on.

Which was also dismissed as her having no wrong-doing or abuse of power. I find it completely laughable that her haters gnash their teeth that she is some power hungry whore of babylon when every grievance filed against her has been dismissed from troopergate on.

Reformers are supposed to reform not swin in the stench of abuse of power. Are some of you guys so blinded by your partisanship that you cannot see the diference bewteen reform and abuse.

Well when you can actually point to a case where it's been proven she abused her power, then we have something to discuss. Otherwise, you're just pissing against the wind and the stench here is all over you.

Why don't you just do what it is you set out to do and start an "I hate Palin because..." thread and then have your little bitchfest all in one place so we don't waste bandwidth on several threads all meant to do the same asinine **** you intend to do anyway: bitch about Palin and call her names whether it is warranted or not?
 
Unfortunately for Palin most of her news headlines seem to be negative. Fortunately for her critics, she's a gift that keeps on giving.

I'm beginning to doubt she can even get re-elected as governor. A look at her polling numbers shows a steady decline of her approval rating, suggesting that all these allegations are taking it's toll regardless of merit.

Any politician who skates as close to the edge of the ice as Palin seems to is more than likely to fall in.
 
While they found no wrongdoing, I think it shows poor judgment on her part. If I travel for work, I would NEVER EVER EVER think that the company should pay for my husband and/or my son. Hello? Are you kidding me? Yes, I am not a governor, but I think I would have the conscience and logic to think that the state paying for my entire family to travel was inappropriate. The fact that she reimbursed the money says she knows she behaved questionably.
 
I don't understand why she would reimburse Alaska the money if she did no wrong. Surely she's not backing down to "liberal criticisms"?
 
Back
Top Bottom