This is completely and utterly indefensible and completely nauseating.

I'd love to see the GOP spin try to spin this as "fiscal conservatism."

Hilzoy, are there any woman voter PACs or 527s that could turn this into an ad? I got a woman to donate to the Obama campaign after she heard about the rape kit billing.

What do you bet Palin's rape kit position and Biden's sponsorship of the Violence Against Woman Act don't come in their debate or any time before?

$14,000 a year? Aren't those kits about $400 each? That's a lot of rapes for a really small town. I heard Wasilla is heaven on earth.

Even worse, the town is not full of wealthy individuals. About 10 percent poverty rate (even with the socialized oil money checks) and per capita income about $21 k.

So a rape kit price really could make a difference to some of those families.

Ron — don't reflexively defend Obama-Biden.

Why isn't Sen. MBNA ALREADY talking about this?

He created the damn bill, and he knows that's why Alaska had to pass that change in state law.

So, where is he? Not "at the debates," but right now?

Keori — No. "Control freak" Obama (that diagnosis per Scholars and Rogues) long ago said, "thhe campaign football is mine and mine alone."

And, now, he's being hoist by his own petard.

It's painful to think about the rationale behind such an abhorrent position -- but most folks, however twisted, usually have some ideas behind their positions and decisions. A pattern.

What I'm seeing here from Palin is pretty compelling evidence that she believes that most women who report being raped are either (1) lying about it, or (2) somehow responsible for being raped in the first place. There's simply no other way to rationalize invoicing a victim for the forensic tool needed to prove that a crime may indeed have taken place.

Add to this Palin's cutting the funds for shelters for unwed young mothers, anti-choice in all cases (even rape and incest, anti-contraception & sensible sex education -- what I'm seeing here is a woman who believes other women are inherently bad, and who deserve what they get -- even if it's being the victim of a violent rape.

A woman can be a misogynist, too, you know. I've met them.

Sarah wouldn't pay for forensic exams to apprehend rapists, but she would put Wasilla millions of dollars in debt because she wanted to assert her "authority" in an eminent domain land grab for an ice skating rink.

Her priotities stink to high heaven.

Speaking of heaven (and related), her patterns of behavior remind me of Matthew 7:22-23:

On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

Becca - I've met them too. However, the vast majority of them stayed in their self-imposed proper place in the kitchen and didn't run for national office on any premise, let alone a reformer who cares about the populace.

Whether these problems are the result of mismanagement or a sick moral philosophy it may never become a major story.

Many in the public and press will assume something this awful just can't possibly be true.

The McCain campaign will react in three phases:

1) The McCain campaign, Fox News, and the NRO all insist loudly that these are sexist slurs being spread by the Obama campaign.

AP headline: Obama campaign pushes controversial claim that Palin punished rape victims.

2) The McCain campaign, Fox News, and the NRO insist that the media has a double-standard; would anyone even care if Obama had charged rape victims for their medical exams?

AP headline: Has media obsession with Palin-rape connection finally gone too far?

3) The McCain campaign, Fox News, and the NRO loudly proclaim that Palin took on rape-kit special interests, that she opposed rape-kit earmarks, and that when the state government tried to send them rape-kits she said "No Thanks".

AP headline: Palin reforms save town money but upset state lawmakers.

It's on AP. We'll see if it goes anywhere from there.

I'm sorry, but this is a myth.

I'm sorry, but it's not. The state of Alaska had to pass a specific law because the town of Wasilla was charging rape victims to have evidence of the crime against them taken, and it happened while Sarah Palin was mayor. It's not even disputed in the article you linked to -- the writer's only argument is that the police chief interviewed said that he would have liked to charge the perpetrators, but he seemed to think that rape victims should pay out-of-pocket for evidence collection and then be reimbursed by the courts. Not a word in there about how the rape kits cost $15,000 but Palin's sports complex -- the one that she raised the sales tax to build -- cost $16 million. Couldn't Palin have found a measly $15K out of that $16 million to pay for the rape kits?

Please...layoff the VP nominee. It's ridiculous.

If Palin can't defend her noxious policies, she shouldn't be running. Either she approved of the policy or she was so clueless about what was going on in her own town that she had no idea what her police chief was doing until the Alaska legislature passed a law forbidding him from charging rape victims for evidence collection.

Which is it: is Palin clueless or heartless?

The "it's a myth" link is already down for some reason....

don't worry, here it is!

http://townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2008/09/11/the_palin_rape_kit_myth

The best part is that Townhall calls it a "myth" but confirms all of the facts!

When Palin became mayor she fired the police chief...
check

Replacement chosen by Palin begins charging victims for rape kits....
check

Policy continues for 3 years under Palin administration....
check

State of Alaska has to create new law in order to protect rape victims in Wasilla....
check

The counter argument:
Palin spokesperson says she opposed the "outdated" policy.

hmmm..

The outdated policy was established under her administration and she opposed the policy but as mayor apparently didn't know how to change it.

or

Palin isn't responsible for the policy because....
she says so! Yay!

Say.....that costs less than what the state paid to fly the little Palins around, and for the Family Palin to eat out when they were at home.

You can bet if Obama or Biden did that, it'd be all over the news and the Repubs wouldn't let it drop until they had something juicy to replace it. Still, it's encouraging to see at least two big outlets (NYT and WaPo) reaming McCain/Palin. I bet whoever wrote that line for her, "I'm not going to Washington to impress the media...." is at a black site in Syria by now.

Oh.ome on! Don't you know that any woman who gets raped was some "slut" who was "asking for it" - as opposed to some "chaste" Christian woman?

Why would a woman like (you can contact her at that address) who believes in a judgemental god not want that god to be able to judge those found wanting?

Christian, Jew, Muslim - great nouns that describe great religions. Put "fundamentalist" in front of them and they become adjectives, describing the shade of brown of the shit being peddled as "truth."

This is the kind of thing that needs to be got out in public view- to gain traction and get beyond the superficial bluster that the republicans are using as a defense. That cute smile hides a mean, nasty, ruthless streak.

I'm still trying to work out why the Dems haven't got their act together yet re Palin. My conspiracy theorist says that it's because the dems have decided to run dead until 2012 because they know that the economy will tank for a couple of years yet, so it's better to let the Repubs take the blame. I hope she's wrong.

"$14,000 a year? Aren't those kits about $400 each? That's a lot of rapes for a really small town."

Sadly, no. That's 35 rapes per year in a town of 8,000 people. That sounds like a lot of women aren't reporting rapes (understandable). I'd expect the real number to be higher. Around 130, maybe.

The Dems need to make sure that this is cast as Palin requiring crime victims to pay for the police investigation, not crime victims paying for their own medical treatment. Enough people watch CSI, so they will understand that, but I know that some McCain person is bound to point out that victims of regular assaults who are injured have to pay for their own medical treatment. Hilzoy makes the distinction clear and all the rest who comment have to keep that distinction up.

Next, rape kits can cost anywhere from $300 to $1200. Given the most generous interpretation of the numbers thrown out by the police chief, Wasilla was seeing more than a dozen rapes reported each year in 2000. In 2005, according to the FBI uniform crime reports, non-suburban towns of less than 10,000 population were reporting a forcible rape rate of less than 30 per 100,000 population. For Wasilla that would mean that they should have seen about 1.5 rapes each year. What the EF was going on in that town while Palin was mayor. Their rate of forcible rapes was higher than NYC.

As of January, the Violence Against Women Act had not been adopted by all 50 states. I know this, because I lobbied the state of Virginia in January to enact the laws necessary to come in compliance with the act. One of the laws Virginia FINALLY passed was the one saying the state would cover the test kits.

States have to come in compliance of this law by 2009 or they will lose federal funding.

And -- not to defend Ms. Palin -- a number of other states were also not in compliance as of this year. I've read about two, North Carolina and Illinois. I'm sure there were more.

The USA Today article says,

"WASILLA, Alaska — In 2000, Alaska lawmakers learned that rural police agencies had been billing rape victims or their insurance companies $500 to $1,200 for the costs of the forensic medical examinations used to gather evidence. They quickly passed a law prohibiting the practice."

"According to the sponsor, Democrat Eric Croft, the law was aimed in part at Wasilla, where now-Gov. Sarah Palin was mayor. When it was signed, Wasilla's police chief expressed displeasure."

It is heartless and cold to think that municipalities would require victims to pay for their own tests, but apparently the problem has been wide spread. And, the police chief seems like a jerk, but I would bet you a dime to a donut that Palin didn't even know the town didn't pay for the kits.

It would be interesting to find out if Alaska passed the rape kit law in 2000 so that the state could come into full compliance of the VAWA that year, or was the law passed on its own. VAWA has been a law since 1996.

That was I at 7:17. Correction, VAWA passed in 1994.

What I'm seeing here from Palin is pretty compelling evidence that she believes that most women who report being raped are either (1) lying about it, or (2) somehow responsible for being raped in the first place. There's simply no other way to rationalize invoicing a victim for the forensic tool needed to prove that a crime may indeed have taken place.

Sure there is. Looking at her record as a whole, not just at angles affecting women, a pattern emerges: she always wants what she wants when she wants it and simply doesn't pay much attention to the people who get hurt along the way. Her entire record involves bullying, claiming credit and authority when it's convenient, shifting blame when it's not, and getting everybody else to pay for the work that needs to be done--or, in the case of her porkfest, work that may not be based on need but that her little heart desires at that moment.

In other words, I don't think we need to attribute to active malice against strangers what can be explained by basic, mind-blowing self-centeredness and indifference. It's never about anybody else. It's always about Sarah.

By the way, McCain's vote against the VAWA wasn't a one-time deal. As recently as 2007, he voted against funding for this.

Actually another angle that could be used here is the famous Palin line, "Thanks, but no thanks."

It appears that she changed the policy in Wasilla after VAWA was passed, so she was, in essence, saying she didn't want the federal money that was contingent on her being in compliance with the federal law. She said, "Thanks, but no thanks."

Now claiming that she started charging rape victims for their forensic exams in order to thumb her nose at federal earmarked funds would be stretching the truth to the breaking point, but it wouldn't be the type of bald faced lie that the McCain campaign seems to be dealing in, like Obama will raise taxes on all Americans, Obama passed a law mandating sex education for Kindergarten children, or Obama called Sarah Palin a pig. But I don't think that the Democrats can actually sink to that depth.

So where's the ad? This writes itself. If in some alternate universe the same scenario existed about Democrats, the GOP would have an ad in contested states overnight—or at the very minimum, release one to the press. I can't believe that Democrats are still not playing this game with what it takes to win.

Where is the fucking as?

And where's the fucking ad, too!

It's mind-boggling, or as Casey Kasem says "fucking ponderous"- how women can identify with a female candidate who is anti-feminist.

By requiring the victim of a crime to pay a price for justice, Sarah Palin was lifting up the "patriarch-uber-alles" mentality that saturates her dangerously-Dominionist worldview. To Palin, women are to be "subservient" top their male counterparts, and not "quibble" about such things. Obviously, a rape victim merely got what she had coming to her---so sayeth the Book of Palin.

A woman cheated, or paid a lower wage, or physically assaulted, or perhaps even murdered "got what she had coming to her"---so sayeth the Book of Palin.

"Man is always right, and Woman is only right when she kowtows to Man"---So Sayeth THE BOOK OF PALIN.

While I'm on this little "jaunt of a rant," might I also point out that, by requiring the victim to pay for forensics---knowing full well that the victim may, for any number of socioeconomic reasons, be unable to pay---Sarah Palin was in effect (a) committing an act of obstructing justice by intentionally impeding the investigation of a crime, (b) tampering with evidence by making that evidence unavailable through economic subterfuge, and (c) willfully aiding and abetting the rapist.
Those three issues, in the end, make Sarah Palin both an accessory to, and a willing accomplice to, multiple counts of felony rape, felony sexual assault, sexual imposition at both the felony and misdemeanor levels of criminal prosecution, and participation in what may well be defined as "domestic terrorism."

Nail Sarah Palin as a "willful participant in myriad felonies" and as a "domestic terrorist"---and you'll drive a stake the size of a California Redwood through the heart of the Palin/McCain campaign....

As I have been saying on this issue for several days in several places, beyond being a heartless policy, this sheds a quite unflattering light on Palin's grasp of what the basic functions of government are. One thing that even the most wingnutty of wingnuts have never tried to claim is that law enforcement is not a proper role for government. What could possibly be more central to law enforcement than gathering evidence? In what parallel universe would anyone claim or believe that funding for gathering the evidence needed to prosecute criminals is not a legitimate use of public money? It's not the responsibility of victims or their insurance companies to pick up the tab for something so basic and necessary for enforcing the law. It's the responsibility of the state (the people collectively) to pay for all aspects of law enforcement, since it is the state (the people collectively) who make the laws that are intended to protect us all. In Palin's Wasilla, this whole notion was turned on its head - protection of law was available to those who could afford it; everyone else was on their own - regardless of the fact that they also paid the taxes that support basic government functions. It's just a really sick example of the logical extension of Bush's "Ownership Society" to all aspects of life.

Look, for years the Republicans have been telling us that most of what government does it shouldn't do: education, social welfare, etc etc etc. Apparently Sarah Palin's view was/is that the government also shouldn't be responsible for enforcing the law.

That is a very, very, very big deal, and it goes way beyond the heartlessness of expecting a crime victim to pay for gathering the evidence needed to prosecute those who committed a crime against them.

Proof that any minimally adequate copywriter could toss this off in minutes. Here's my amateur version just using Hilzoy's text from above:

SCENE: Woman opening mail with return address: Wasilla Police Dept.

VOICEOVER: When Sarah Palin was mayor, Wasilla used to charge rape victims for their forensic exams.

CLOSEUP of invoice page: Rape Kit............ $1,200.00..... Make check payable to Wasilla Police Department...

VO: Sarah Palin had no problem raising money to build a sports center...

CUT TO: Montage of articles and pictures of Palin in Alaskan newspapers on sports center earmarks.

VO. ... but drew the line at paying for rape exams.

CUT TO: Woman with mail looking like she's been punched in stomach, she sits down at kitchen table looking dumbfounded.

VO: Sarah Palin finally had to stop charging rape victims in order to qualify for funding under the Violence Against Women Act. Who sponsored this law? A Democrat. Joe Biden.

SHOT OF JOE BIDEN w/ OBAMA

VO: Who voted against the Violence Against Women Act? John McCain.

SHOT OF JOHN McCAIN w/ SARAH PALIN

VO: One Vice Presidential nominee turned her back on past and future rape victims. Another was looking out for them.

CUT TO Woman at kitchen table, tears in her eyes.

VO: John McCain and Sarah Palin: Wrong for women. Wrong for America.

Back in Counter-Reformation Italy they would put thumbscrews to rape victims to test their testimony (this happened to the artist Artemisia Gentileschi). This is a form of the same: force the victim to prove that she is not lying before even beginning to gather evidence or prosecute the perp. Is there some doctrinal basis for this in Palin's Pentecostal church?

If a Democrat had done something like this it, the Repbulicans would make it dominate the news cycle for a few days. It is shocking that calling McCain's policies "lipstick on a pig" has gotten more attention from the press.
This story is potenitally huge since it displays the Republican notion of reform and values. Waiting for the press to change its ways is futile. The Democrats need to make an ad and have their candidates and surrogate talk about this.

If a Democrat had done something like this it, the Repbulicans would make it dominate the news cycle for a few days. It is shocking that calling McCain's policies "lipstick on a pig" has gotten more attention from the press.

Yes, and as a commenter above noted, Joe Biden should be all over this, and a campaign ad should have already been produced and sent to every MSM outlet, with various surrogates hammering the issue home on every talk show. But what do I know? Maybe they'll get around to it in December when they have more time.

How nice: a rape tax. I thought Republicans were against taxes?

I will say that on the state and local level, voters are responsive to the economic message and all, but the MSM doesn't care about that--it's not sensational enough.
But this, this is the kind of story they love--but they won't cover it unless you bring it to their attention and make it the only thing that your campaign is willing to talk about. You also need to produce a quick ad and submit it to the news outlets, which McCain has been doing very effectively. WAKE UP!

How nice: a rape tax.

Bingo!

And, the police chief seems like a jerk, but I would bet you a dime to a donut that Palin didn't even know the town didn't pay for the kits.

So she's micro-manager enough to harass the librarian about the books in the town library, but on the other so clueless that she didn't even know about an issue that even state legislators from out of her town knew about because they passed a fucking law to make it stop.

Doesn't inspire confidence in me. What about you?

Her entire record involves bullying, claiming credit and authority when it's convenient, shifting blame when it's not, and getting everybody else to pay for the work that needs to be done--or, in the case of her porkfest, work that may not be based on need but that her little heart desires at that moment.

I cannot possibly think of which recent American president from Texas this reminds me of.....

The other thing to emphasize here is that Sarah Palin is objectively pro-criminal: by forcing women to pay for their own rape kits, she hampered evidence collection which let criminals get away.

Regarding the rape kit issue, you're framing it as if the Wasilla PD were saying "Okay, you poor thing. We'll get this guy. Now, can I have your credit card?" The only original material I've seen - a quote from the police chief appointed by Palin - is that the Wasilla PD was submitting charges to a victim's insurance. I don't think there's any reason to believe the PD was doing this during the traumatic processing of the victim. I inferred the submittal of charges to the insurance company as something done after the fact, and I didn't see a reason to believe they'd go directly to the victim for cash if she weren't covered. Further, you infer the test wouldn't be done if the victim didn't pay. Where'd you get that? Can you cite a direct fact to support this accusation?

I'm not saying the policy isn't crass and heartless, not to mention tin-eared for a smart politician, or that it doesn't deserve to called out. I'm not suggesting that this wouldn't be a good basis for a smart attack ad. But we have to attack what's supported by the facts. As soon as you start criticizing something for what it isn't or for more than it is, you're fighting strawmen and the opponent can say you're just making stuff up. That's the other side's game.

The only original material I've seen - a quote from the police chief appointed by Palin - is that the Wasilla PD was submitting charges to a victim's insurance.

A rape kit isn't personal health care! It's police evidence collection for a crime. It's a public cost -- why the fuck would you even think to charge it to the victim's private insurance? If your house is burglarized and the police come to dust the place for fingerprints do they bill your homeowner's insurance for their time? No they fucking do not.

I inferred the submittal of charges to the insurance company as something done after the fact, and I didn't see a reason to believe they'd go directly to the victim for cash if she weren't covered.

Where'd you get that? Can you cite a direct fact to support this inference?

nd, the police chief seems like a jerk, but I would bet you a dime to a donut that Palin didn't even know the town didn't pay for the kits.

What about when the Alaska state legislature passed a law targetting her town and her police chief was in all the papers whining about how he wouldn't be able to charge rape victims for evidence collection done by his police department anymore? Did she know about it then? And if so, why haven't we seen any record of quotes from her denouncing the policy?

You owe me a donut.

This can't have been a budgetary issue, so perhaps Palin supported this because of her stance on abortion. If a rape victim could not prove that she was raped, might it make it that much more difficult to obtain an abortion? This is what drives Palin's politics.

I inferred the submittal of charges to the insurance company as something done after the fact, and I didn't see a reason to believe they'd go directly to the victim for cash if she weren't covered.

Then why were there so many complaints to state authorities that the legislature felt compelled to pass a law to prevent Wasilla from doing this? You don't complain about being charged if you're not charged.

I suspect the ad isn't out yet because the Democrats are trying to find someone this happened to who's willing to go on camera.

...the Wasilla PD was submitting charges to a victim's insurance.

I just got off the phone with my insurance agent. She fell off her chair laughing at the idea of such a thing as "rape insurance"---and wanted to know who the idiot was who even imagined dreaming up such a fear-based scam. I hope you don't mind, Russie; I gave her your email.

She has an inherently evil streak to her, Russie. Be afraid. Be very afraid....

Coincidentally, this week's article on Conservative-Truths is about conservative states having higher rates of forcible rape than liberal states, and Alaska has the highest rate of forcible rape in the country.

Here's the link: http://www.conservative-truths.com/

-Derek

Sarah Palin: Objectively pro-rapist.

I guess some McCain supporters think it's not just black people who should avoid getting "uppity".

Some one please help me. Just how many rapes occured in Wasilla in the last ten years any way??

Second, Alaska had to ban this practice in order to qualify for funding under the Violence Against Women Act, which was, of course, sponsored by Joe Biden

Biden absolutely needs to jump on this. The MSM will love the Biden vs Palin idea, and we dont even have to worry about false equivalencies. It's right there - Palin wanted one thing; Biden wanted the opposite. Which do YOU agree with, America?

So the democratic vice presidential candidate wrote the legislation, Violence Against Women Act, and the republican presidential nominee, McCain voted against it and women and the republican VP nominee,Palin was running the only town in Alaska that was abusing women by making them pay for their own rape kits, and since the state of Alaska wanted that money from Biden's bill, they forced the dog with lipstick Palin to accept these changes that she and her police chief scoffed at and mocked and sneered at like republicans seem to do about anything that is actually good for the citizens. These republicans sound like they are fucking monsters.

As others have said, this fact - the Biden sponsorship - makes it so easy for this issue to break through to the MSM. It makes it a simple Biden vs Palin issue. One supported one position; one fought specifically to have that position outlawed.

Yes, in terms of simplicity and power of message, this is as good as McCain not remembering how many houses he has. And don't forget that McCain voted against Biden's legislation and as recently as last year was voting against funding it. Someone has to do an ad.

I wonder which cost Alaska more, Palin charging Per Diem for being home or paying for rape kits for the poor victims of Sarah lipstick pig's rape policy against women.