palin's a reptile.

Other programs affected include "weatherization, energy efficiency grants, immunizations, air quality grants, emergency food assistance, homeless grants, senior meals, child care development grants, nutrition programs, homeless grants, arts, unemployment services, air quality, and justice assistance grants."

I guess Palin's plan is to invite Evangelical missionaries to deal with poverty.

I thought we learned in the case of the similar picky pose of SC Gov. Mark Sanford that the law mandates that a state take all the allotted funding, or none?

God I hope Romney runs in '12. If we even get the chance, I can't wait to crush that son of bitch like a bug.

Well, golly, gee and gosh, how could such an attractive woman be so ugly??? Or maybe she just needs to read "A Modest Proposal" by Swift to figger' out how ta' take care of those pesky kids...

...oh wait, she's already read it. As she said when asked what newspapers she reads: "All of them". So I guess her favorite bedtime book is also "all of them".

Too bad she can't see poverty from her front door...

Wow, and she herself has a special-needs kid.

That's one cold bitch.

Country First!

dabodius, I think in Sanford's case, it's not that he wanted to reject certain funds; he wanted to take all the money he was offered and use it to pay down state debt. If your state takes the money it has to be used for the reason it was allocated, or you can reject certain funds & thus give the state legislature the chance to override you (which is a strong poosibility, but it does give those governors wiggle room with their base: "Hey I TRIED to do the right thing."). I admit, I could be wrong

because nothing says "i'm a republican running for president" like turning down money for public schools.

I'm no fan of Gov. Palin (and give nightly thanks that it isn't VP Palin) but the cynical view is just one way of looking at this. She does seem to be embracing a principle -- no temporary money for permanent obligations. Of course she might be embracing it for its marketability but she might also feel that she can accept construction money and not other monies. And the fact that she has a special-needs kid and yet is rejecting education money (including for special-needs kids) -might- make her a "cold bitch". Or it might be that she's anguished but feels her office and her principles force her hand.

I don't know if that's true. But it's possible. As soon as we begin to reflexively demonize "the other side", we'll start -becoming- them.

At some given point dont humans gain a conscience as they progress through life.

Thanks, Magoo, but remember this from last month?

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/02/24/schumer-multiple-choice/

Sen. Chuck Schumer wrote to OMB Director Peter Orszag: “No one would dispute that these governors should be given the choice as to whether to accept the funds or not. But it should not be multiple choice...
As you know, Section 1607(a) of the economic recovery legislation provides that the Governor of each state must certify a request for stimulus funds before any money can flow. No language in this provision, however, permits the governor to selectively adopt some components of the bill while rejecting others. To allow such picking and choosing would, in effect, empower the governors with a line-item veto authority that President Obama himself did not possess at the time he signed the legislation."

How was that resolved?

As soon as we begin to reflexively demonize "the other side", we'll start -becoming- them. - Bernard HP Gilroy

Good point, though Palin is a tough place to make it, especially when she has a history of saying thanks, but I'll say I said no thanks.

This, I promise, is same ol' Sarah... She's line-item vetoed funding to earthquake-proof the schools in Kodiak for three years in a row (once, I believe, the day after the devastating earthquakes in China).

But hell, who needs safe schools, special ed, and clean air when the Governor just sends you a check for $3,000 at the end of the year, right?!

What a scheming, steaming, cynical skank that woman is ...

Anyone else find it hollow that she is rejecting 30% of the funds, but apparently taking the other 70% of whats being offered? Youbetcha...

Yes, who needs safe "principals", when one has such principles.

She's also a raging hypocrite:
http://bleakonomy.blogspot.com/2009/03/hoo-boy.html

She's got a history of being a pathological liar, so I'm waiting to see where the catch is regarding this 'refusal.' Things are never what they appear with Palin.

What happened to the idea "The stimulus is not a la carte"? I thought the states were bound to all or nothing? Actually, this political posturing by moron governors (looking at you Guv Perry) is fascinating. They are insisting that there constituents not accept the money for the plan they pay for. When does this slow motion crash that is the Republican party come to a stop?

Strictly speaking, Trig Palin would not benefit from stimulus funding for IDEA teachers -- because the funding will run out before he gets to preschool. So it doesn't affect the governor's family personally.

Other families, not so much.

Have you ever heard of unfunded mandates ? That is what is being refused. The bill requires permanent changes in state law that will result in unfunded mandates.

I think it's amusing that you folks are still obsessing on Palin.

I would like to think that this might put a dent in Palin's stupidly high approval ratings. Sadly, there is a significant portion of the electorate that will applaud Palin. However, communities across the state have a long list of needs and the Governor has been unnecessarily stingy with state funds.

The Legislature is dominated by the GOP, but they aren't all Friends of Sarah and they can't have enjoyed seeing there districts' needs get axed. Alaska Democrats and others need to get on this a talk a lot about what could be done with this money for Alaskans.

Mike K: Nothing is permanent about changes to state law. That's why we have legislatures.

Come 2012, Palin, quite unlike a fine wine, will not have improved with age and will be no more palatable to the the majority of the country than she was in 2008. Of course, one has to admit that there is a certain segment that seems to appreciate her, but I think they just might not mind Ripple either.

Well mike k I have a solution that should satisfy you and the rest of those rightwing genius governors. Send all the money they don't want to Ohio and Michigan. I'm 100% certain that the governors of these two states will figure out how to deal with it.

If I recall correctly, Palin made a big deal in the campaign last fall about how concerned she was for special needs children, and how that would be a priority of a Palin-McCain administration. Can't imagine what would have caused this change of heart.

Knees are still jerking whenever they hear Palin.

I'm amused.

Refusing unfunded mandates is smart politics in an age where people are about to be swallowed by massive federal tax increases.

But we shouldn't hold our breath for her to return the $250 million that ended up going to AK anyway even though the bridge-to-nowhere got deep sixed. Funny how her aversion to federal money has emerged now.

So who's more EVIL?

Sarah?
Rove?
Rush?
AIG?
Blackwater?

Vote here:
https://act.credoaction.com/bracket/

I have read articles that indicate that the GAO believes it to be unconstitutional for federal legislation to allow state legislatures to override state governors turning down all or parts of the stimulus funding.

I suggest a compromise that will maintain this integrity. Let governors decline any and/or all of the stimulus money directed to their states. Take that money and apply it to other states. It is ridiculous to let these assh*le rethug governors 'get the credit' for standing up to the feds and still 'get the money'.

Let the unemployed in Texas rot. Let the schools in South Carolina continue to fall apart. Let the citizens of the states whose governors turn down stimulus money explain to their constituents that they don't give a shit about them or their problems.

Eventually, these rethug toads would actually have to pay a price. That it would be at the cost of their citizens is a shame, but that is the price they should pay for electing the sobs in the first place.

Then, the federal government should reevaluate how fed money is distributed to states. Historically, more goes to the cracker states than elsewhere. If the sh*theads in the south want to complain about the federal government, let them contribute to a solution by getting less money from the feds.

Sigh, once more the trolls show up with their false talking points.

There are NO unfunded mandates in the stimulus bill. Nothing in the bill requires states to continue the programs after the federal funding runs out. It might turn out to be unpopular to cancel them at that time, but if so, it probably means they are worth continuing. Either way, it is the governor and state legislature can decide that when the time comes.

Frostbite Barbie is turning down money for homeless grants.

Think about being homeless in Alaska for a minute.

A petro state is one that depends almost completely on oil sales for its financial support. Examples of this are Saudi Arabia, most of the emirates, Iraq, and Iran to a large extent. Texas used to be one a long time ago. In very few cases do these entities use the money to diversify their economic base, but instead live off their oil money in luxury. When the oil runs out or the price goes south, they are stuck in a bad situation. (Ask the old-timers in Houston about that.)

Sarah is now following the well-trodden path to destruction for Alaska by not even trying to diversify their base. The oil money goes to individuals (>$3,000 per person per year) instead of going to projects to expand the economic base. When the oil runs out, Alaska is going to be in a bad state of hurt. This business of rejecting money that would help to develop an educated population that may be able to turn things around is par for the course.

Some snarky people have suggested that her fundamental religion may have a lot to do with her distaste for education. I can't argue with that. There must be a reason that a fundamentalist is much more likely to lack education than a normal Christian. The two situations seem to go together.

Unfunded mandate: No Child Left Behind (Bush)

Stimulus money: Support for programs already in place so they can survive during the economic downturn. Unemployment benefits for people to weather the downturn, and once the downturn upturns no more need for said benefits...I could go point by point, but really there's no reason.

Frostbite Barbie is turning down money for homeless grants.

Yeah, she is turning down money earmarked for desperately needed social assistance and labeling it money intended to "grow government" to make it appear odious and unnecessary.

Alaska has close to the highest percentage of child homelessness in the nation, and in the past year homelessness and poverty and hunger have skyrocketed due to the poor economy and high fuel costs in Alaska. In Anchorage, hungry people are eating in shift at the soup kitchens.

The dire problem of economic collapse, particularly in rural Alaska, has been one that Palin has been particularly disengaged from. The Mudflats blog has done a lot of good reporting on this issue.

But I'm sure Matthew Marler thinks the real crime here is that his tax dollars went to keep the global economy from collapsing, thereby disproving some pet theory of his.

I stopped by to demonstrate my embarrassing lack of comprehension of the stimulus bill's contents while pretending that lefties are "obsessing" over a 2012 presidential nominee frontrunner who keeps calling press conferences to keep herself in the spotlight, but I see my work is already done.

Unbelievable when it's been documented that people in her state are cold and hungry. What a cold-hearted unChristian b*tch Palin is.

The POTUS sure seems to do a "Special Olympics" job himself.