Comments

korotkov wrote on Dec 5, 2008 7:46 PM:

" Good post, thanks! "




Willie wrote on Dec 3, 2008 7:38 AM:

" It is amazing the extent to which you libs will go to, and the conclusions you jump to in order to paint Palin as a horrible person. You are looking for any shread of evidence for your case and jumping to conclusions all to support your agenda. Clearly, in your minds, Palin, Bush, etc can do nothing right, and they are evil and should be in jail or worse. Obama and Hillary can do nothing wrong...add to that the fact that you as a group are pretty clueless regarding the US Gov. "




gut check wrote on Nov 24, 2008 12:36 PM:

" Just in case anyone still cares: 1. Sarah Palin was mayor 1996 to 2002. The bill was past in 2000. During 1996 to 2000, only one rape was reported in Wasilla. 2. No record exists that any victim was ever charged for a kit in the town. 3. Reasonable discussion trumps snears and false information. We look back to 2000 from 2008 and think we know all the facts. Please. "




Shane wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:42 PM:

" Melanie -- why do you assume the people speaking out against Palin are liberals? The bottom line is this...If the police department isn't going to charge for their investigative services for, say, a burglary report, why wouldn't they pay for a rape kit? Basic logic, Melanie.

McCain/Palin '08 "




Melanie wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:27 AM:

" hey you libs, stop TALKING and take some ACTION.. If you REALLY CARE ABOUT THIS.. shut the heck up and start your own grassroots organization to pay for the freaking rape kits. If your golden child obama can raise 1 billion to fund his election think of what all you libs can raise together to pay for your causes. Why does government always have to be the end all solution? Again, shut up and JUST DO it. "




bomb alaska wrote on Oct 12, 2008 10:39 AM:

" Stupid, ignorant, backwoods racist misogynists - that's Alaska. Go ahead and succede from the US, you'd be doing the rest of real people a favor! "




MEH wrote on Oct 9, 2008 7:03 AM:

" Dave of Sept 30 -- if Palin is simply a figure head mayor then her claim of having "executive" experience is tossed out the window. You can't have it both ways, my friend. She should clear the air herself, but we all know she's afraid of getting real questions asked of her. Not a very responsible candidate. "




srw wrote on Oct 9, 2008 5:35 AM:

" To those who don't think rape kits should be a cost of law enforcement information and evidence gathering - You are essentially saying that someone violates a man's or a woman's home then the cost of evidence gathering is the responsibility of the local PD but if someone sexually violates a woman's body, the cost is of evidence gathering is the woman's responsibility? Yet if that same woman, or a man, is beaten and robbed on the street, the cost of evidence gathering is the responsibility of the PD. The only difference in the responsibility for evidence gathering is theexclusionofthemalefromthesecondevent. "




Chrystle wrote on Oct 4, 2008 4:03 PM:

" Evhershey, read it again!

"While the Alaska State Troopers and most municipal police agencies have covered the cost of exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece, the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests." "




evhershey wrote on Oct 4, 2008 1:40 AM:

" A few people here have said that Wasila was charging the criminal for the kit and that is ok because it is "tough on crime". That is simply not the case. They need to read the article again. In the article it says "the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests." "




a thinking person wrote on Oct 2, 2008 3:50 PM:

" Wow. Do people even READ anymore? "'Ultimately it is the criminal who should bear the burden of the added costs,' Fannon said."

So tell me how exactly does this mean that Sarah Palin--who wasn't mentioned in the story and couldn't have been a key figure--hates rape survivors? EVEN IF we can take the logical leap to assume blindly that she (a)was aware of Fannon's position and (b)shared his point of view, all this tells us is that Fannon/Palin were so Tough on Crime that they believed rapists should literally pay for their sins. "




dave in texas wrote on Oct 1, 2008 10:22 AM:

" Here's a dumb question, but does Jo C. Goode still work at the Frontiersman? If so, it seems to me the obvious question to ask her is HOW she KNOWS that:

"...the Wasilla police department does charge the victims of sexual assault for the tests."

She just sort of states it, matter-of-factly, but doesn't quote anyone or cite any facts to support the statement. Could some kind soul at the Frontiersman (or someone in Wasilla who knows her) please ask Ms. Goode to clarify?

Thanks! "




Dave wrote on Sep 30, 2008 4:20 PM:

" I was wondering if anyone could educate me on how town government works in Wasilla? In my hometown, the Mayor has no authority over budgetary matters. Rather than crucifying Palin, you people need establish she is responsible for or has authority to implement or change the policy.

In other words, its called responsible journalism. "




murrieta mom wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:29 AM:

" Alan, I think you are the one missing the point. The police chief said he "intends to" include the costs as part of victim restitution-not that he did. What he did do is charge victims. After the bill passed, he was forced to pay for the exams and seek restitution in the event someone was convicted of the crime. "




Alan wrote on Sep 29, 2008 7:17 AM:

" Umm, the Wasilla Police Chief wanted the criminal to pay for rape kits, the State wanted society to pay for the crime. How is it possible Obama-ites miss the whole issue? "




eac wrote on Sep 25, 2008 9:52 AM:

" Sure, it's possible Palin didn't know. But if she didn't, in a town of Wasilla's size, then she was an incompetent mayor. Either way, it doesn't look pretty for her. "




TW wrote on Sep 24, 2008 7:41 AM:

" I think it's plausible (but still possible) that Palin didn't know about this practice before it was banned state wide. However, it would be near-impossible for her to not know after the ban.


I suppose ignorance and incompetence on the happenings of a small town of 7,000 are slightly preferable to sheer callousness. "




Franki wrote on Sep 24, 2008 7:07 AM:

" On another note, I wonder if male victims of rape were/are required to pay for their rape kits? "




Franki wrote on Sep 24, 2008 7:05 AM:

" Palin probably thinks that it's God's will if a woman is raped, and that she must bear the consequences (including the costs and the baby). "




1more- wrote on Sep 23, 2008 2:04 PM:

" Palin knowing about the rape kits being billed to the victim is bad ..not knowing about this practice is worse. If she didn't know, Palin must have been in a "cone of silence" while she was mayor. "




mindovermatter wrote on Sep 23, 2008 8:44 AM:

" Wow how incredibly selfish. How could any rape victim not want to pay a small fee to help rid the community of a criminal rapist? "




Steve wrote on Sep 22, 2008 3:55 PM:

" It's hard to imagine that she didn't track this news when she was mayor. If she didn't, then how will she ever keep track of things in the White House? If she did, shame on her for not intervening. "




JW wrote on Sep 22, 2008 2:01 PM:

" If you happened to read the Obama Tax Plan, most everyone making less than 250K will have LOWER TAXES than when the champion of the GOP, Ronald Reagan was president. Who gets their taxes raised...? The top 1% of wage earners. I doubt most people make enough coin for their taxes to get raised. "




Henry wrote on Sep 22, 2008 12:01 PM:

" It is being reported that Palin's true reason for charging for the kits was that they include emergency contraception, i.e., the morning-after pill. In fact, Palin's spokeswoman recently went on record to carefully state that Palin is against charging for "evidence-collecting" rape kits - that is, she's distinguishing between just collecting specimens, and the kits that were actually available. Her personal views about whether rape victims should carry a child influenced her policy and rape victims had to pay the price. "




bob wrote on Sep 22, 2008 11:47 AM:

" The budget up to 1998 included the cost of rape kits. Wasilla records indicate that nobody was charged from 2000-2007. I find it very unlikely that they didn't charge at the beginning and end of her term but did in the middle.

Someone needs to get all these facts in order. "




Sandy wrote on Sep 22, 2008 11:21 AM:

" For crying out loud... she was the mayor at the time. Is she so above the law that she doesn't need to take responsibility for her actions? It makes me sick to think there are Americans out there that think this was okay???? "




Mark wrote on Sep 22, 2008 10:03 AM:

" So, apparently Mayor reports to Police Chief, who dictates city policy and budget. Funny, I thought it was the other way around. Palin's reputation was to can anybody who didn't think like her. She's just as much to blame as the Police Chief. "




Dave Mason wrote on Sep 22, 2008 7:34 AM:

" No William Perron and "Bro," this is not made-up stuff. These are actual facts that matter in an election. All republicans do when faced with the truth is claim they are being smeared. "




William Perron wrote on Sep 21, 2008 6:06 PM:

" When folks with a shallow agenda makes acusations that are transparent half truths, an intelligent person should ask themselves why would someone do that. In this instance it is obvious that fear of Obama not getting into office is their reason. Both parties are guilty of this sort of treachery but it seems the Demoncrats have turned it into an art form. Look folks if you want to pay more taxes that is fine with me, but I don't want to so please vote McCain and we will all save a few bucks. "




Bro wrote on Sep 20, 2008 9:04 PM:

" I didn't see Palins name in this article. Obviously this is another smear against an American woman. "




cj Orlando wrote on Sep 20, 2008 7:52 PM:

" According to a U.S.News&WorldReport article, Palin fired the Chief of Police of Wasilla, Irl Stambaugh, for including forensic rape kits in his budget. She then hired Charlie Fannon, mentioned above, who eliminated the forensic rape kits from the budget--and charged victims. Palin said hiring Fannon was one of her best decisions as mayor. "




Filecabinet wrote on Sep 20, 2008 3:13 AM:

" UNBELIEVABLE. Obviously Palin could have leaned on the police chief to shell out an extra $5K to 10K a year, and especially when she was putting Wasilla 22 million into debt for a SPORTS ARENA.

I used to like Palin when she was first announced as McCain's running mate, but this is disgusting, frankly. She just lost my vote. "




D.Simms wrote on Sep 19, 2008 11:03 AM:

" Leanna said, "As the mayor of a small town, it's not my decision... So why blame Palin?"

Well, because she was responsible for this policy.

According to a U.S.News&WorldReport article, Palin fired the Chief of Police of Wasilla, Irl Stambaugh, for including forensic rape kits in his budget. She then hired Charlie Fannon, mentioned above, who eliminated the forensic rape kits from the budget--and charged victims. Palin said hiring Fannon was one of her best decisions as mayor.

So how did she leave Wasilla with $20million long-term debt when she left office?

article:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/erbe/2008/09/18/sarah-palin-and-her-outrageous-rape-kit-policy.html "




Victoria Placeo wrote on Sep 18, 2008 7:43 AM:

" There has been so much on the issue and I've read so much that I just said hey address this one.

As a recent rape victim here are my thoughts

http://rape-and-sexual-assault.blogspot.com/2008/09/rape-victims-view-of-palin-and-rape-kit.html


Victoria Placeo "




Leanna wrote on Sep 16, 2008 8:59 PM:

" As the mayor of a small town, it's not my decision, but that of a group of selectmen to vote on budgets and on what the city does and doesn't pay for. Here mayor's are only allowed to vote in case of a tie , and I can tell you, those are few and far between. The bottom line comes down to the men and women elected by the majority that makes the decision. So why blame Palin? Do you think she could've changed the rule? Was it going on before her election? Go after the facts! "




Linda Kissel wrote on Sep 16, 2008 9:16 AM:

" The expense of a rape victim should be charged to the person or parties who commited such a horrible act.
Also, if proven guilty, such person or persons should be heavily sentenced.
Our system can fine the person or persons and make them cover this cost. "




Roo wrote on Sep 14, 2008 7:00 AM:

" "This isn't health care, so such billing is fraud. Under federal HIPAA legislation, such fraud is a federal felony"

What a load of crap. It is considered a "medical examination", hence a billable examination LEGALLY.

To weed out the false accusations women make with respect to sexual assaults, many towns have and are charging for rape kits. I have worked enough rapes to know when the town ho cries foul just to be vindictive and YES she should be charged. "




sanity wrote on Sep 14, 2008 12:06 AM:

" to LogicReason who wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:19 PM with:

" Stop it you idiots! This story is over 8 years old. Why are you responding now? Get the current facts before you start your with your comments. "

Of course this story is relevant LogicReason, as the person under whose watch implemented this backwards practice is now being considered to become this nation's next VP. Show some logic and reason, LogicReason. "




teresa wrote on Sep 13, 2008 2:20 PM:

" Your Mother--Sarah Palin wasn't mayor of Palmer, the town that DIDN'T charge rape victims.

She was mayor of Wasilla, the town that DID. The decision to do so was made on her watch.

Maybe you could actually, ya know, use a little reading comprehension, before you call people Nazis? "




Your Mother wrote on Sep 13, 2008 10:54 AM:

" Alright, huffpo smear nazis - did you actually read this article or are you just so bloodthirsty you'll promote anything you can in your disingenuous campaign to smear Palin. Palmer police chief Laren Zager said that to his knowledge, no sexual assault victim has ever been billed by the city of Palmer for an exam to collect evidence of a crime. Zager, who has been police chief since January, said he would never expect a victim to be burdened with the cost of a police investigation. "




Irene wrote on Sep 12, 2008 1:19 PM:

" Why? I just don't understand how any investigation into ANY crime can charge ANYTHING to a victim!!!
It figures that something like this happened in the state that gov. palin is from.
Do we need her to be VP? Not just NO, but HECK NO!!!!!!!!!! My DOG would make a better VP than her!!! "




Mark wrote on Sep 12, 2008 1:12 AM:

" This is so out of hand, an attack on Sarah Palin is now at the point of using sexual assault victims as a political football. This was not a Wasilla problem, it was a State and National problem at the time. If you go look up the House minutes on HB 270 from the 21st legislature, it will provide background. No idea why Fannon was quoted with such out of the ballpark figures, BUT the current election cycle has taught me that you have to be a skeptic. Out of room here... "




SteveMDFP wrote on Sep 11, 2008 7:01 PM:

" Health insurance companies were billed for the kits and forensic exams, according to Fannon in this article. This isn't health care, so such billing is fraud. Under federal HIPAA legislation, such fraud is a federal felony. Mayor Palin had to have been aware of this billing. This makes her guilty of conspiracy to commit insurance fraud, even if she was oblivious to the claims being criminal. The statute of limitations is 6 - 10 years, depending on circumstances. Gov. Palin could be "on the hook" for up to 10 years in prison. "




lleonka wrote on Sep 11, 2008 2:19 PM:

" Everyone has a right to their own opinion and if those opinions are backed up by fact...then I would say they have a compelling argument. It seems many women are trying to protect Sarah Palin. Why? She is running for VP of the US. Do you think Putin is going to cut her slack just because she is a hockey mom with a special needs child? Wake up people. We americans deserve to know who is going to represent us in the white house and if I can help it, it won't be Palin. "




LogicReason wrote on Sep 11, 2008 1:19 PM:

" Stop it you idiots! This story is over 8 years old. Why are you responding now? Get the current facts before you start your with your comments. "




Tami wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:39 AM:

" First of all, as a survivor of sexual assault, I am appalled to learn that any city in this country would do such a thing. But more importantly, based on the figures provided in the article, do you realize that Wasilla has a 1 in 400 to 1 in 600 sexual assault rate. That means that in a 10 year period of time, nearly two thirds of the city would be victims of sexual assault. Not to mention the state's rape statistics as a whole. Yeah! Palin cares about women! Whatever! "




MandyW wrote on Sep 11, 2008 11:29 AM:

" People, have a little sense of proportion! This is a really unfortunate policy. It certainly suggests that Palin is somewhat insensitive to the problems and feelings of people outside her circle of family and friends. (Recall how she chided Hillary Clinton for "whining" about sexism last spring, but is singing a different tune now that the equivalent media spotlight is shining ont her.) Making rape victims pay for their own rape kits seems to lack Christian kindness, but it's not the worst sin anybody ever committed in the history of the world. "




DC wrote on Sep 11, 2008 9:51 AM:

" For all these people noting that this was or has been a widespread practice - does this make any difference about the decissions that Palin made? Would it have been against US or Alaska law to pass a city ordinance [over the objections of the police chief she appointed] banning this practice?
I know that I [a man] would be deeply offended if I was aware of this in my own community. "




No rocks just facts wrote on Sep 11, 2008 7:56 AM:

" nurse in texas wrote:
"You people on here throwing rocks at Palin and Wasilla DO KNOW that it has only been in the last few years that states have not charged for rape kits? Check VAMA 2005."

And just who was responsible for drafting this bill to stop charging victims? That's right, Senator Joe Biden. When will this issue come up again? In 2010, when the bill comes up for reauthorization. Do we really want Sarah "Pitbull" and her soulmate McCain to be in charge then? "




Erik wrote on Sep 11, 2008 12:34 AM:

" People keep asking if she knew about this policy. Her appointed Chief of Police made his statement in a published newspaper interview.

If she did know, it must be assumed she supported the policy. If she did not know, it must be assumed that she was a inept administrator. "




NDeeZ wrote on Sep 10, 2008 6:38 PM:

" Ronnie wrote (Sep 9, 2008 5:30 PM)
" Can someone please ask Palin to explain this?

Who?

Who would ask her? The McCain campaign has sealed her off from the press, whose job it is to ask these question.

Finally--access to ONE media guy, Charles Gibson. Whose first question will be something tough like: Which of your kids is more adorable? "




nurse in texas wrote on Sep 10, 2008 5:37 PM:

" In fact, it was going on in Missouri until just last year:

http://www.joplinindependent.com/display_article.php/admin21179504908

What now? Hypocrites. "




nurse in texas wrote on Sep 10, 2008 5:23 PM:

" You people on here throwing rocks at Palin and Wasilla DO KNOW that it has only been in the last few years that states have not charged for rape kits? Check VAMA 2005. To this day, there are MANY cities in MANY states that DO charge for rape kits, especially if the victim does not file a police statement.

Go check your own cities and states and see whats really going on, especially if your state is one of those who has let thousands of rape tests sit without being tested, before you go off on your high horses "




Debbie HM wrote on Sep 10, 2008 5:14 PM:

" It was Sarah Palin's responsibility as Mayor and fiscal manager to know the facts about the Wasilla budget. Don't kid yourself - she knew the policy and said nothing. But "a sin of omission" is still a sin - one might call it a crime against victims. Sarah Palin has thrown her family under the bus by taking on the role of VP candidate - why wouldn't she throw women victims under too? "




V wrote on Sep 10, 2008 4:28 PM:

" Wow. SO many outsiders coming in and telling Alaska we're doing it wrong. Please. This article is over 8 years old, its about a law that CORRECTED the problem. And all you people can do is come in and postulate that Palin did something horrible.

The fact of the matter is Alaska leads the nation in sexual assaults of adults and children, its sad, but we are trying to remedy the situation.

Obama for President "




yo wrote on Sep 10, 2008 3:57 PM:

" the statement was:
"In the past weve charged the cost of exams to the victims insurance company when possible. I just dont want to see any more burden put on the taxpayer, Fannon said."

it doesn't say the victim was ever charged. "




John Lloyd Scharf wrote on Sep 10, 2008 2:27 PM:

" I see this being used to support irresponsible, unreliable, unverified, and untrue yellow journalism. It is not the first and will not be the last against Palin and against McCain in the dirty politics by the Democratic party and its adherents. "




alex wrote on Sep 10, 2008 1:51 PM:

" >Did Palin appoint this Charlie Fannon?

Yup. The former police chief was popular enough that when she fired him she was actually looking at a recall vote for a while.

She's also been a vocal supporter of fallon since she left office. This story is more then a rumor and it doesn't smell very good. "




Joann wrote on Sep 10, 2008 12:06 PM:

" I guess paying for your own investigation is the price you pay for Palin cutting taxes as she was boasting about. What kind of police protection is offered in Alaska? Thank God that a law was passed eliminating the charge for rape victims.We can't elect a person like Sarah Palin who has so little regard for women. "




NDeeZ wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:28 AM:

" Whaddaya mean, Brenda???
(Sep 9, 2008 5:07 PM)

"Can someone please ask Palin to explain this? Does she even know about it? "

SHE AIN'T DOING INTERVIEWS!!! WHO would ask it? WHO would report it, because the McCain campaign is keeping the PRESS FAR away from her (except, of course, for tightly-crafted photo ops and same-speech repetitions!)

There's LOTS of positions and statements I'd like her answer on: AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!!! But I guess if you trust good old affable Charlie Gibson to dig right in there... "




Jessica wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:02 AM:

" DID SHE KNOW? She was the MAYOR and this article was published in the NEWSPAPER. If she didn't know we're in even bigger trouble... "




mary wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:39 AM:

" That is just revolting. Did the city of Wasilla send you a bill, or tell you you couldn't get a rape kit done unless you paid upfront? Ugh, I have never been so disgusted in my life. "




Bob LaRue wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:29 AM:

" Rev Harvey wrote:
"...I would like to know when the Wasilla law was passed..."

Where you get the idea that this was a law? Departments make their own policies. It's doubtful that the mayor was even aware of this. "




Jes wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:13 AM:

" Palin was mayor from 1996-2002, and this story is from 2000. So even if she wasn't responsible for putting the policy in place, it is clear she did nothing to change it.

This is just further evidence that Palin has never made the rights and progress of women a priority. "




John Loki wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:09 AM:

" Paying for a rape kit depends on the city and the health insurance you currently hold. Some cities pay for the rape kit if a police report is filed while others require you to go through your own health insurance and then billed back after conviction of perp. There are also other sources for payment in most communities to pay for the rape kits, if you cannot afford it. The idea of a rape kit is that it be done as soon as the incident by a professional so that the evidence can be used in a trial. "




skyking_ wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:08 AM:

" There were 4000 murders in Chicago from 1998-2004 Barack Hussein Obama turned a blind eye the the carnage. Not a single bill was introduced by him to stop the violence while he was representing the south side where most of the murders took place. Most victims were black. "




moni wrote on Sep 10, 2008 7:11 AM:

" Apparently, most STATES do not pay for rape kits, unless the victim files a police report . . . . In fact, only beginning in 2009 will states have to pay for “Jane Doe” rape kits, meaning, whether or not you file a report, the state will pay for the rape kit. This means that Wasilla (a VERY small town) was not necessarily an anomaly in this nation. And “making them pay” is a bit of a harsh term. Victims were not told “pay up or no rape kit,”

See the facts. Read the article from MSNBC
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24600171/ "




lemonfemale wrote on Sep 10, 2008 7:03 AM:

" Wasilla averages 7 or fewer rapes per year, usually fewer. Did Palin know about this? I can see where she would not because who would think the police would charge for rape kits. The story needs more work. Slapping Sarah's name on it atthis point is just preaching to the choir. "




NJ GOP wrote on Sep 10, 2008 6:30 AM:

" If she didn't support the police chief, it's amazing she was silent. And if she was silent, it leads you to believe she supported the police chief. Scary. "




Rev Harvey wrote on Sep 10, 2008 3:10 AM:

" My understanding is the legislature passed the state law to supercede a Wasilla ordinance that prevented the city for paying for rape kits. I would like to know when the Wasilla law was passed, and whether Mrs. Palin was involved in it being enacted? BTW, Wasilla was the only jurisdiction in Alaska with such a law on the books. "




Larry Gussart wrote on Sep 9, 2008 11:00 PM:

" Thank you for making this available to everyone. This is a shocking story. Did Mayor Palin ever step up to stop the city from billing rape victims? The story is from 2000, but she had been mayor for more than 4 years by then. This kind of policy is wrong on many levels. Please tell us Sarah tried to stop it. "




J from Tucson AZ wrote on Sep 9, 2008 8:59 PM:

" Soooooooooooooooo,
just how many rapes does this small town have a year? Is it a high percentage? "




Entertained wrote on Sep 9, 2008 6:32 PM:

" Boy you guys are terrible at math, not to mention whining about an article that carries very few facts.

Heck, how does it feel to convict Palin on without even knowing the entire story.

But hey... you guys keep yourselves entertained all night trying to compute numbers.. "




Gerald Fnord wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:31 PM:

" I think Sarah Palin's self-righteous, authoritarian, and corrupt. The affection and enthusiasm for her among many of my fellow-citizens fills me with shame and a mild terror.

However, I don't think the article alone makes a persuasive case that Palin initiated or backed the policy. Given how easily a couple of false or hinky accusations can insulate a candidate from further criticism (thank Dan Rather for GWB-II), I'd hold off on this one a bit.

The more a rumour fits your preconceptions about a person, the more sceptical you should be. "




Ronnie wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:30 PM:

" Can someone please ask Palin to explain this?

Does she even know about it? "




Brenda wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:07 PM:

" I did not think I could possibly have a lower view of Sarah "Barracuda" Palin than I do but this is further proof that she is the lowest form of vermin in existence and that there is no telling what she will do next. She really is what she said she was: a pit bull with lipstick and that is probably defaming pit bulls.

I do hope the voters of this country wake up and save us from the fascist disaster that her being vice president will mean for so many. "




Bela wrote on Sep 9, 2008 4:33 PM:

" If the police is charging the victim of rape because they don't have enough many to buy for the rape kid, that is the mayors resposability to fund the police properly. she is not going t get my vote

ciao "




SLSmith wrote on Sep 9, 2008 4:21 PM:

" I guess the only people that have the CHOICE to say NO in Wasilla are MEN - hey Sarah? "




Tony wrote on Sep 9, 2008 2:55 PM:

" I guess liberals can't add...

Where in the world did you get "over 100 rapes"?

Pathetic. "




Fidelbogen wrote on Sep 9, 2008 2:40 PM:

" "Remember, rape is a crime against society, not just against the victim. So why should the victim pay? Was mayor Palin against charging the rapist? "

Crime against society, you say? Remember, that is an ideological agenda which not everybody shares. In other words, it is arguable.

As for "charging the rapist": the fallacy embedded in THAT, is that we don't yet know who the rapist even IS. We cannot (monetarily)"charge" somebody who has only been (judicially)"charged" but not yet "convicted", can we?

Paradoxically you might say, the "charge" must come AFTER the conviction. Get it? ;) "




ol cranky wrote on Sep 9, 2008 1:31 PM:

" " http://www.city-data.com/city/Wasilla-Alaska.html
is a website that gives Wasilla stats. Though the town has about 4 times the national crime average, they list 2 rapes in 2001. Not sure how the police came up with $5,000 to $14,000 estimate. "

Maybe only two victims were able to pay for their rape kits (or the rest figured they weren't believed if the police planned to bill them) "




Yukon Cornelius wrote on Sep 9, 2008 1:05 PM:

" Blood in the water and the majority of commenters can't add and know nothing of what small towns across the nation face budgetarily. Charging insurance companies for a medical exam after rape is not unique to Alaska. And why are the Obama supporters so quiet when it comes to the rumor that while at Columbia University he was charged with sexual assault? "




Greetings from NC wrote on Sep 9, 2008 12:53 PM:

" Hmm.. millions of dollars in earmarks culled from my taxes, and they can't pay for a rape kit? According to Palin, a mayor is different than a community organizer because a mayor has actual responsibility. "




Marie wrote on Sep 9, 2008 12:28 PM:

" I agree this article needs at least some clarification, if not complete updating. I'd love to know precisely what Palin's role was in this law's genesis.

I must say, the more I learn about Alaska, the less I want to visit there. "




Melissa Houle wrote on Sep 9, 2008 11:45 AM:

" Not that it was hers to lose, but if Palin thinks rape victims should be billed for their forensic exams, she has lost my vote for all eternity. Can she BE any more cold or heartless??
Wasilla seems to have a shocking rape rate,with very little done to stop it. Why aren't the people of Wasilla more upset about this????? "




Garrett wrote on Sep 9, 2008 9:50 AM:

" http://www.city-data.com/city/Wasilla-Alaska.html
is a website that gives Wasilla stats. Though the town has about 4 times the national crime average, they list 2 rapes in 2001. Not sure how the police came up with $5,000 to $14,000 estimate. "




Ankhorite wrote on Sep 9, 2008 9:17 AM:

" FRONTIERSMAN, please do an update on this story that goes into detail about when the Wasilla policy BEGAN. Was it when Palin fired the old police chief and hired the new one? Or did it exist before she took office? In fairness to her, before people assume the worst, this story needs more detail. THANK YOU FOR KEEPING IT ONLINE! "




J. Malsbury wrote on Sep 9, 2008 8:53 AM:

" The Latest Palin Smear: Making Rape Victims Pay

What is it this time? Supposedly, then-Mayor Palin is to blame for charging rape vicitms for their medical exams.

The smear relies on a story in The Frontiersman, a Walssila newspaper, about passage of an Alaskan law that banned police departments from chargin insurance companies for the cost of a medical exam after a reported sexual battery.

http://thenextright.com/mikewas/the-latest-palin-smear-making-rape-victims-pay "




Lily wrote on Sep 9, 2008 7:36 AM:

" Palin fired the police chief when she was elected in 1996, so Fannon must have been hired by her.

Can someone please ask Palin to explain this? "




Pam Siegfried wrote on Sep 9, 2008 7:35 AM:

" Did Palin know? The Fronteersman should put in more links to this story. Even though it is an old one, you are going to get lots of people reading it in the next few days. "




Exurban Mom wrote on Sep 9, 2008 7:08 AM:

" You all realize that Alaska has THE HIGHEST rate of forcible rape in the nation, per government crime statistics? As in over TWICE as high as the national average?

And what has Sarah Palin done to address this crisis? To quote the RNC delegates: ZERO. "




JC wrote on Sep 9, 2008 6:39 AM:

" " Based on the numbers provided:
"exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece"
"the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year"

That means Wasilla had over ONE HUNDRED rapes in 2000?


By my maths it's between 11 and 16 .... not over 100. "




Proud-D wrote on Sep 9, 2008 6:18 AM:

" Hey guys if you saw C-SPAN today I was the second to last caller and I brought this up. I was very nervous! If any of you guys saw it what did you think? "




Walt wrote on Sep 9, 2008 6:00 AM:

" There is an easy explanation for the opposition. At the end of the article it mentions that "emergency contraception" coverage was included. Ms. Palin does not believe in abortion. "




Jamie Bees wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:28 AM:

" I strongley disagree with legislature that charges victims of any crime to acquire evidence. How many rapes were filed and how many collected evidence? One statement 100 rapes in a town of 5,000. My math doesn't reach those proportions. I got a worse case senario of 46. I guess my point is it doesn't help to embellish facts it only adds fodder to the real issue here. No matter what the number the fact remains something there stinks! What is the real message Wasilla is sending to their woman? Where does Palin stand on this? "




BetterMathPlease wrote on Sep 9, 2008 5:18 AM:

" "exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece"
"the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year"

That means Wasilla had over ONE HUNDRED rapes in 2000?


~Or 4, way to take the highest number possible (which is not even right 14000/300 is 46) learn Math or at least how to use a Calculator before making crazy statements. "




chaos wrote on Sep 8, 2008 11:37 PM:

" Based on the numbers provided:
"exams, which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece"
"the new law will cost the Wasilla Police Department approximately $5,000 to $14,000 a year"

That means Wasilla had over ONE HUNDRED rapes in 2000?

In a town of barely over 5000? Doesn't that scare anyone else? "




Ellen McLean wrote on Sep 8, 2008 11:35 PM:

" Who appointed this police chief? Is he still in law enforcement? Does he propose charging burglary victims for fingerprint dusting?

Did Sarah Palin know of this policy? Did she actively lobby the state legislature to pass the 2000 law? "




The Harbinger wrote on Sep 8, 2008 9:47 PM:

" Behold, the thunderclap before the torrent. McCain built his house on the river plane. It had such a pretty waterfront. Now he will find; Katrina was just a sprinkle. "




shalca wrote on Sep 8, 2008 8:56 PM:

" Did Palin appoint this Charlie Fannon? "




Anna Belle wrote on Sep 8, 2008 6:21 PM:

" "Remember, rape is a crime against society, not just against the victim. So why should the victim pay? Was mayor Palin against charging the rapist?"

Apparently her police chief was in favor of continuing to charge the victims. It's not clear what the mayor herself thought about it. "




serena kitt wrote on Sep 8, 2008 5:26 PM:

" Your former mayor and governor is running for VP now. Would you care to ask the man at the top of her ticket if he supports the policy of charging rape victims for their own forensic exams, or charging their insurance companies (assuming they have insurance-- why would that be covered-- no one in their right mind would bill such a thing)?

Remember, rape is a crime against society, not just against the victim. So why should the victim pay? Was mayor Palin against charging the rapist? "