Here’s a couple of interesting, old articles:

Editor’s note: Originally published 12/10/07)

The Palin administration, citing a need to improve the state’s credibility, plans to ask Alaska’s congressional delegation for far fewer earmarks in the coming year.

“We really want to skinny it down,” said Karen Rehfeld, Gov. Sarah Palin’s budget chief.

Rehfeld recently wrote a memo to all state commissioners telling them that to “enhance the state’s credibility,” federal earmark requests for money should be only for the most compelling needs.

They should have a strong national purpose, Rehfeld told the commissioners, not just to fill funding gaps in the state’s budget.
>snip<

A favorite target is the so-called “bridges to nowhere” for Ketchikan and Knik Arm, inserted by Alaska Rep. Don Young into the five-year transportation bill in 2005. Congress later stripped the earmarks directing that spending, but let Alaska keep the money to use on the bridges if it wanted. Palin, to the delight of budget watchdog groups, earlier this year abandoned the Ketchikan bridge and said the bridge money would be spent elsewhere.

Palin has said Alaska needs to change its national image, change that includes trying to become less dependent on the federal government.

http://www.adn.com/politics/story/210308.html

Palin: Setting the earmarks opinion straight

Published Friday, August 29, 2008

Newspaper column by Gov. Sarah Palin, published March 5, 2008

http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/aug/29/palin-setting-earmarks-opinion-straight/

(WP) Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin employed a lobbying firm to secure almost $27 million in federal earmarks for a town of 6,700 residents while she was its mayor, according to an analysis by an independent government watchdog group.

There was $500,000 for a youth shelter, $1.9 million for a transportation hub, $900,000 for sewer repairs, and $15 million for a rail project — all intended to benefit Palin’s town, Wasilla, located about 45 miles north of Anchorage.

In introducing Palin as his running mate on Friday, Sen. John McCain cast her as a compatriot in his battle against wasteful federal spending. McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, hailed Palin as a politician “with an outstanding reputation for standing up to special interests and entrenched bureaucracies — someone who has fought against corruption and the failed policies of the past, someone who’s stopped government from wasting taxpayers’ money.”

McCain’s crusade against earmarks — federal spending sought by members of Congress to benefit specific projects — has been a hallmark of his campaign. He has said earmarks are wasteful and are often inserted into bills with little oversight, sometimes by a single powerful lawmaker.

Palin has also railed against earmarks, touting her opposition to a $223 million bridge in the state as a prime credential for the vice presidential nomination. “As governor, I’ve stood up to the old politics-as-usual, to the special interests, to the lobbyists, the big oil companies, and the good-ol’-boy network,” she said Friday.

As mayor of Wasilla, however, Palin oversaw the hiring of Robertson, Monagle & Eastaugh, an Anchorage-based law firm with close ties to Alaska’s most senior Republicans: Rep. Don Young and Sen. Ted Stevens, who was indicted in July on charges of accepting illegal gifts. The Wasilla account was handled by the former chief of staff to Stevens, Steven W. Silver, who is a partner in the firm.

Palin was elected mayor of Wasilla in 1996 on a campaign theme of “a time for change.” According to a review of congressional spending by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group in Washington, Wasilla did not receive any federal earmarks in the first few years of Palin’s tenure.

Senate records show that Silver’s firm began working for Palin in early 2000, just as federal money began flowing.

In fiscal 2000, Wasilla received a $1 million earmark, tucked into a transportation appropriations bill, for a rail and bus project in the town. And in the winter of 2000, Palin appeared before congressional appropriations committees to seek earmarks, according to a report in the Anchorage Daily News.

Palin and the Wasilla City Council increased Silver’s fee from $24,000 to $36,000 a year by 2001, Senate records show.

Soon after, the city benefited from additional earmarks: $500,000 for a mental health center, $500,000 for the purchase of federal land and $450,000 to rehabilitate an agricultural processing facility. Then there was the $15 million rail project, intended to connect Wasilla with the town of Girdwood, where Stevens has a house.

The Washington trip is now an annual event for Wasilla officials.

In fiscal year 2002, Wasilla took in $6.1 million in earmarks — about $1,000 in federal money for every resident. By contrast, Boise, Idaho — which has more than 190,000 residents — received $6.9 million in earmarks in fiscal 2008.

All told, Wasilla benefited from $26.9 million in earmarks in Palin’s final four years in office.
…

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/01/AR2008090103148_pf.html

So much for ’standing up against government waste’.

Also, TPM tells us Steven W. Silver is an Abramoff associate.

McCain is at the top of the ticket, HE is running against Obama. Democrats re-elect Robert Byrd time and time again yet the party of Robert Byrd is trying to portray John McCain as having one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. It’s McCain vs Obama, Palin vs Biden, that’s the way the debates will go. If elected, he goes to the WH, she goes to the Naval Conservatory. She is not up against Obama, McCain is.

Of course Obama’s handlers would rather play the Obama vs Palin game because they are trying to hide the obvious fact that Obama is a light weight compared to McCain. They know Palin has more executive experience and spunk than Obama will ever know but they want to put a negative spin on it. Would be fun watching her debate the messiah on energy though.

however.. I’m no McCain fan and I do like Palin even with her faults….
The leftards hate her so that is a big plus in my book… the more they squeal the more I like it…

I really believe in the long run she will be an asset…
The one conservative woman I know is very excited by Palin… and she is much more intelligent than I am..

Plus, it’s not just the democrats that are calling it “wreckless”, a “gamble”. Listen, after the 5 minute mark, to Tucker Carlson:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV7tW5pkwlA&eurl=http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

Let’s see, Nancy Pelosi won the speaker of the house position in 2006 with the promise to clean up GOP corruption.

Sarah Palin also won her position in 2006 with the promise to clean up GOP corruption in Alaska.

Nancy: 174 resolutions, 300 + earmarks, partial budget, minimum wage increase, and $50 – $100k personal investment in T. Boone Pickens plan that she intends to have voted on in the house after the election. 14% favorable rating.

Sarah: tax cut, $1200 rebate, killed earmarks, personally halted the bridge to nowhere, oil and gas pipeline agreement with Russia & Canada, been to Kuwait to visit her troops from AK and didn’t trash the US while there, 80% favorable rating.

I’m part of the demographic he’s after, even though I’m a man. I’ve got a lot more in common with her than I do with the predatory law firm of Obama & Biden.

McCain now has the same challenge because selecting Palin says he’s the reform candidate and now he has to define what reform will mean and what Palin brings to the table. Both tickets have risk – Obama’s is well documented but McCain now has to ensure that Palin is not seen as a gimmeck. Once the hoopla subside, the race will turn back to Obama and McCain until the vice president debate.

The Obama campaign just has to not underestimate Palin and not make her the central issue in this campaign. The Democrat Party still has the advantage and has to maintain their focus. In their campaign stop in Ohio, neither Obama or Biden mentioned Palin. They should continue that strategy and let the pundits debate the risk and benefit of Palin to McCain.

In reading the reaction from Conservatives, I have to say that politically, McCain made a good decision. We will see how it pans out over the months because America will have only 60 days to get to know this woman. The question is how will conservatives respond when McCain starts to move to the center. He’s given the far-right their pound of flesh and probably feels as though that has given him the freedom to return to the McCain of old.