I would urge someone close to members of the editorial board of the Boston Globe to let them know that the world is not flat, the moon is not made of green cheese, and Elvis is, indeed, dead. I say this because obviously the Boston Globe is way behind the times in discovering facts that debunk rumors and it's clear they have no capacity to do any research. I mean, they must not be paying attention to reality because in today's editorial, the Globe again raises the thoroughly debunked claim that Sarah Palin charged rape victims for their rape kits when she was mayor of Wasilla. The claim is a straight out lie that has been demolished by many writers (including myself), yet the Globe obviously took no efforts to research the facts before they revealed their incompetence to the world.
It's no surprise that this proven lie against Palin is being whipped up again just before the VP debates by the Obama flacks at the Globe. They want her to be tagged with this lie to distract her from real issues, it is plain. And that isn't just my opinion because they justify the re-raising of this long ago debunked charge as one that should be asked of her during the debate on Thursday.
ONE QUESTION that Sarah Palin should answer during tomorrow's debate is why, during her tenure as mayor of Wasilla, the town started charging rape victims or their insurers for hospital emergency-room rape kits and examinations.
And the answer for the Globe's edification and education: she didn't charge anyone anything. Further, she wasn't even aware it was going on because it was never an issue brought to her attention as far as anyone can tell.
But one lie in the first paragraph wasn't enough. The Globe had to fill the second paragraph with another one.
The policy so outraged the Alaska Legislature that in 2000 it passed unanimously a bill forbidding such fees. But Palin has never explained why, under her leadership, the town stopped picking up the cost of the swabs, specimen containers, and tests.
It is absolutely untrue that the town of Wasilla was the one town that caused the Alaska Legislature to ban the fees in question. As reported in multiple sources, the records of the debates about the 2000 bill in the Alaska State House shows not a single mention of Wasilla or Sarah Palin. Further there is no mention at the time of either Wasilla or Sarah Palin in any of the media from the rest of the state outside her own town newspaper. If the Alaska Legislature were "so outraged" at Palin, why did neither her name nor that of her town show up in the debates or the rest of the media at the time?
The FACTS behind this issue are diametrically opposed to the claims the Globe makes. There is no evidence Palin ever knew about this rape kit policy during the time the issue was being debated in Juneau, no rape victim was ever charged for a rape kit being administered, Wasilla was only one among several Alaska towns with the policy under question, the Alaska Legislature did not have any conflicts with Wasilla nor is Wasilla mentioned anywhere in government records, and no mention of Mayor Sarah Palin was raised at any time during the 2000 debate on this policy.
The rest of this Globe piece contemptuous of truth isn't worth bothering with as it is all predicated on the lies in the first two paragraphs.
Obviously the lazy, incompetent writers at the Boston Globe have allowed the DailyKos to do their writing again. Or maybe they already know that they are perpetrating a lie? If that's the case, if the Globe knows that their editorial has already been proven a lie, doesn't that make them something worse than merely incompetent?
Either way, this editorial is proof that the Boston Globe is useless as a source of real news as well as in the tank for The One.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Once again, you all at NB
October 1, 2008 - 00:43 ET by jdhawkOnce again, you all at NB are giving the liberal press a pass. For example, you state, "it's clear they have no capacity to do any research." That's baloney.
The liberal press is a propaganda organ of the DNC. They purposely put out lies and typically on page 1 while putting out retractions when readership overwhelmingly disagrees buried in the middle of the paper.
The writers at the Boston Globe are not incompetent writers, they are skilled propagandists. Heck, they even have all of you fooled!
If you view the liberal press as skilled propagandists for the left and not misguided dolts, you come away with a completely different view of their efforts and what it means to our body politic.
??????
October 1, 2008 - 00:58 ET by TheSterummm....jd...u've been registered here for...over 2 years....right???
If you need a lesson in SARCASM...LET ME KNOW...
...IT'S JUST ANOTHER FREE SERVICE I OFFER!!! :)
Ster.
The problem with your charge
October 1, 2008 - 00:58 ET by Warner Todd HustonThe problem with your charge is... it can't be proven without admission by the propagandists in question. So, to be true to honesty, we have to leave the door open that they are just stupid and not necessarily outright propagandists.
After all, they AREN'T going to admit it openly.
And, to be fair to me I DID raise the possibility that they are just as you say they are -- posed as a question near the end of the piece.
YEAH!!!
October 1, 2008 - 01:20 ET by TheSterWarner...I would have said that...but I can't type! :)
Ster.
Jim: The Waco Kid:
What did you expect? "Welcome sonny," "Make yourself at home," "Marry my daughter." You've got to remember, that these are just simple farmers, these are people of the land, the common clay of the new west. You know . . . morons.
Warner, the stance you and
October 1, 2008 - 09:47 ET by jdhawkWarner, the stance you and the other writers on NB is typical of conservatives. That is, always give the other side the benefit of the doubt.
Nevertheless, I really enjoy and reguarly read the articles here on this web site and everyone's input here. It is one of the best sites of its kind on the Internet.
Thank you!
Shameless plug alert
October 1, 2008 - 06:20 ET by Indiana JoeFeel free to expand on that here.
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
UCR Stats
October 1, 2008 - 01:10 ET by Dan_WatsonThe UCR is a reporting tool for "crimes reported". It does not take into account if they are prosecuted, jugded, or even if the crime actually occured. These are based on reported crimes only. 10 reported rapes in 10 years is a high number, but accordingly there are a reportedly higher number reported in Alaska statewide.
So while certainly rapes occured under Sarah's tenure as mayor, the investigitory tactics of her police chief would not neccesarily have been brought to her attention. The last time I checked a rape kite is an investigitory tool provided by the medical community to law enforcement. Where does that fall into the purview of the mayor?
Sorry for any grammatical or spelling errors.
Sexual Assaults averaged over 10 a year in Wasilla
October 1, 2008 - 03:16 ET by factfinder44Dan,
The number of sexual assaults reported by the Wasilla P.D. was over 10 per year during the period that Palin was Mayor. See http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=103
I agree with you that 10 reported rapes in 10 years is a high number, but 10 per year is ridiculous for a town of 5,000 to 7,000.
Now you know why Wasilla has been called the rape capital of Alaska.
UCR Stats
October 1, 2008 - 04:02 ET by Dan_WatsonOk factfinder, I see your data. Mine comes from the UCR report itself which breaks it down from Sexual Assault (Which can be innapropriate touching) to rapes. Check out this link.
http://www.disastercenter.com/alaska/crime/35.htm
Still good info. That is pretty high statistical data for such town that size.
high for a little town but...
October 1, 2008 - 04:51 ET by BadassBuckeyethose statistics are on par with Alaska period.
I bet if you fact finders look those numbers are on par witht he rest of the state. Its a dark state sparsly populated with a low female population density. It aslo has a high alcohalism rate. It doesn't surpise me the SA numbers are high.
Excellant Points
October 1, 2008 - 05:01 ET by Dan_WatsonExcellant Points
"Sexual Assault" v. "Rape"
October 1, 2008 - 12:52 ET by elHombreFactfinder44:
FBI Uniform Crime Reports include only actual "rapes."
"Sexual assaults," as reported in the Wasilla PD stats, would include unlawful sexual touchings that fall short of rape and would not be relevant to the bogus rape-kit controversy.
Your statement: "I agree with you that 10 reported rapes in 10 years is a high number, but 10 per year is ridiculous for a town of 5,000 to 7,000," is based on incorrect interpretations and is factually erroneous.
As nearly as I can tell the "rape capital of Alaska" is derived from moonbat blogs and is just more Obot propaganda.
Your "factfinding" does rival that of the NYT and Boston.com. Are your motives the same too?
Liberal Hate
October 1, 2008 - 01:23 ET by West Coast MinorityIt is hysterical watching the liberal media get all bunched up over
Gov. Palin.
I have to work with an office full of liberals everyday and
no matter how many facts are presented to them, their "group think"
always takes over and they propagate all of the lies from the Huffy
Post and Kos babies. They were told to hate her and they do.
I try not to engage in debate for my own safety, but today I started to
take up for the next Vice President of the United States and when I
debunked one rumor, they had a list at the ready. Mostly it turned into
their self-important, self-righteous indignation that she is a Christian
and believes that the reason dinosaurs are extinct is because they
didn't have room for them on Noah's Ark. Seriously. They believe she
believes that. "She BELIEVES the Bible!!!" said one particularly
hateful idiot.
Oh, the humanity.
So, it doesn't matter if they find out
otherwise. It just feels too good to hate. They are getting good
at hating. Real good. And they are just warming up. Some of this will stick for four more years. It's the price we pay.
They would know better if they read anything but the Boston Globe and the other "intellectual sources", but they don't want to know.
Huston Debunked
October 1, 2008 - 03:22 ET by factfinder44In the article in which you claim to have debunked the claim that Palin's Wasilla charged victims for the costs of rape kits, you made a big deal about the fact that the Uniform Crime Reports for Wasilla only showed that a single rape occured there prior to 2000. You wrote that, "According to the Uniform Crime Reports for Wasilla, up until 2000 only one rape had been reported to police in Wasilla."
However, you conveniently ignored "Crime Stats" provided by the City of Wasilla, even though they are made available to the public for online viewing. If you merely google "Wasilla + Crime", you will get a hit the years 1994 through 2007. If I am permitted to post a direct link, it is http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=103 The number of reported sexual assaults for the respective years, beginning with 1994, are 8, 5, 11, 18, 10, 10, 10, 10, 15, 11, 5, 10, 7, and 12.
Next time you resort to lying with statistics, I suggest you meke sure that better statistics aren't available to put the lie to your own.
One other comment on those stats from the Wasilla P.D. They just don't look right. Except for 4 years in a row for which 10 sexual assaults were reported, the number varies from year to year from a low of 5 to a high of 18. It almost looks as if the good City of Wasilla cooked the books for four of the years that Palin was mayor.
Ha, ha
October 1, 2008 - 03:23 ET by Warner Todd HustonYou are correct that I did not compare rape stats from Wasilla to other cities. That particular stat did not have any bearing on the story itself at all. Whether Wasilla is worse in the amount of rapes that happened there is a completely, unconnected story to what was being addressed with the rape kit claim.
But, I love how a liar like yourself likes to point fingers at everyone else...
Look who's making up their own "facts" now.
Come on back when you want to be spanked again.
Huston enjoyed his spanking
October 1, 2008 - 03:53 ET by factfinder44Huston, So what is your excuse for claiming that there was only one rape reported to the Wasilla P.D. before 2000, when Wasilla's own online records show over 60 sexual assaults reported from 1964 through 2000? http://www.cityofwasilla.com/index.aspx?page=103
If I was wrong, well, I was
October 1, 2008 - 04:15 ET by Warner Todd HustonIf I was wrong, well, I was wrong. I used the chart I had and that is what it said. A "sexual assault," though is not necessarily a "rape," it should be observed.
And, yet again, the stats here are MEANINGLESS to the story otherwise. The story was about RAPE KITS not rape stats. The story was about the left claiming that Alaska passed a bill despite Wasilla and Sarrah Palin. The story was about legislation.
Again... and I will write this real slow so you can follow it...
The large incidents of rapes that may or may not have happened in Wasillia between 1995 and 2006 have NOTHING to do with the story we were talking about.
It is a separate issue.
Away from.
Different.
Not included.
Immaterial.
Way, way out there.
Undiddly, doodly unconnected.
As in pointless.
You know pointless? Sort of like your posts?
Have a nice day.
So.....
October 1, 2008 - 04:24 ET by Dan_WatsonI like it. Mr. Huston you are the MAN!
NoBama-NoBiden NO WAY to steal a line.
McCain-Palin 08
And you were flat wrong, Huston
October 1, 2008 - 04:41 ET by factfinder44Or are you just an idiot? Which is it, idiot or liar. Anyone but an idiot would have read the old Frontiersman article and realized that there were several rape kits being used per annum in Wasilla. Realiazing that, they would have looked behind the numbers reported in the UCR and would have easily discoverd that there were many sexual assaults per year in good old Wasilla. Even were they to split hairs as to the difference beteween a sexual assault and a rape, they would have known there was more than one rape before 2000. By the way, I don't think you are an idiot.
As for your claim that the number of rapes has nothing to do with your article, then why did you include the misleading stats from the UCR if they were irrelevant?
Regardless, the single most important fact of which I am aware is the refusal of Palin or her campaign to say when she first learned of Wasilla's practice regarding charging for rape kits.
I also note that some of your chums are concerned that this is being brought up a few days before the debate. That just isn't true. The rape kit story has been in the media for nearly a month.
In other words you have no
October 1, 2008 - 04:59 ET by Warner Todd HustonIn other words you have no clue. In other words you are taking what the Chief said in an article where he was trying to puff up his budget and extrapolating that into "proof." In other words you have no ACTUAL numbers, no REAL costs, no exact budgets.
That's fine. I understand.
But, I ALSO still need for you to stop being a partisan twerp and try really, really hard to actually address the point of the article Mr. 6 days registered at NB.
Do you have proof that Wasilla WAS the main subject in the 2000 bill debated in Juneau? Do you have proof that Palin had become aware of the rape kit issue and talked about it to answer these mythical critics? Do you have any proof at all... ANY... that this rape kit issue had anything to do with Palin's Wasilla, the legislation, or the man in the moon for that matter? Because, you see, the little point you keep braying about really wasn't germane to the issue.
Come on. Focus like a laser beam. I know you can do it lil' fella.
So Palin knew nothing
October 1, 2008 - 18:09 ET by factfinder44Your argument is amazing. For it to make any sense, we first have to believe that Palin didn't know about the change in policy insitgated by Chief Fallon, although the Palin campaign refuses to say when she learned of the practice of charging the victims for rape eams. Then you would have us believe that he was lying about how much impementing the new state law would cost Wasila.
Does this have anyting to do with Palin's Wasilla? Her Mayorship is a major part of her claim to having the experience needed to serve as Vice President and potentially as President, but she either didn't know about her little fiefdom's policy in regard to rape exams or, worse, she sanctioned it. So she was either not paying attention to what was going on in her town or she sanctioned charging victims for evidence gathering exams. Which is it?
Look at it this way. If it wasn't related to the her qualifications to serve, then why did you claim that Wasilla only had one rape reported prior to 2000?
That's right
October 1, 2008 - 18:29 ET by CobraMan"Interviews and a review of records turned up no evidence that Palin knew that rape victims were being charged in her town."
That's from CNN. So, it looks like Sarah really didn't know about victims being charged for the exams.
According to the CNN article, Palin's deputy mayor, Judy Patrick, actually blames the state, and not (then) Mayor Palin.
"The bigger picture of what was going on at the time was that the state was trying to cut their own budget, and one of the things that they were doing was passing on costs to cities, and that was one of the many things that they were passing on, the cost to the city," said Patrick, who recalls enormous pressure to keep the city's budget down."
Source
It seems to me that the State created the problem, only to correct that mistake at a later date.
Obama: My job is above my pay grade
Silence is an admission
October 2, 2008 - 17:58 ET by factfinder44"Interviews and a review of records turned up no evidence that Palin knew that rape victims were being charged in her town."
Put that in context with Palin's evasive response, when specifically asked what the city's policy was during her tenure as Mayor regarding rape kits and if any sexual assault victims (notice that sexual assault is taken here to be synonomous with rape) were charged for rape kits. To say that it is crazy to charge the victim and that you have never believed that they should have to pay for the exams doesn't say what the policy was when she was Mayor of Wasilla.
Bear in mind that this is her considered response to an e-mail from Palin's home town paper, the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman.
"During your tenure as Mayor, what was the police department and city’s standard operating procedure in recovering costs of rape kits? Were any sexual assault victims ever charged for this testing while you were mayor?
The entire notion of making a victim of a crime pay for anything is crazy. (So she now realizes that Wasilla's policy regarding payinf for rape kits was crazy! What did she think of it when she was the Mayor?) I do not believe, nor have I ever believed, that rape victims should have to pay for an evidence-gathering test. As governor, (This is smoke screen. She wasn't asked about what she has done as governor) I worked in a variety of ways to tackle the problem of sexual assault and rape, including making domestic violence a priority of my administration."
better but no quite there
October 1, 2008 - 05:00 ET by Agnosticfair argument to state that the act of rape occured prior to 2000 and I've stated in another post why this occurs; however, it is not splitting hairs in noting the difference between sexual assault and rape. The diffence can be anywhere from minor to huge. Sexual assault can include Anything sexual in nature that offends a victim or makes a victim feel threatened. I think we have all met people that are overly sensitive and people that rude in their sexual remarks or gestures but that doesn't make a rude person a rapist.
I like that you make the point that the rape kit story has been in the media for nearly a month because that is 30 days more than the media has covered Biden's gaffes, Obama's brother, Ayres, Obama's connections with Fannie Mae, Rezko & Obama, Obama staff in Canada during NAFTA debate, Obama's attempt to derail troop movement negotiations in Iraq, etc... Thank you for helping point out the bias.
Whew. Talking about bias.
October 1, 2008 - 18:24 ET by factfinder44If you can't win an argument by sticking to the issue, throw all the mud up in the air and see what sticks.
By splitting hairs, I meant that while you were correct in pointing out that some of the reported sexual assaults may have involved rape, given Chief of Police Fallon's statement on how much Wasilla would have to pay for rape exams and given their cost, it was clear that their had to be several rapes reported in Wasilla per year.
Then again you can't even be factually correct. All those issues that you claim have been ignored by the media have been vetted over and over in the media.
By the way, this "biased" writer has been a registered Republican all of his live and has never voted for a Democrat for president. He is also a VietNam Veteran with an honorable discharge from the USMC and a past member of the NRA, who's family has a history of shedding its blood on foreign battlegrounds for this country. Moreover, on occasion, and when in the area, I worship at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church. In case you don't recall, Rick hosted the recent debate between Senators Obama and McCaine.
ff44,
October 3, 2008 - 08:01 ET by AgnosticWow!
I know this is a little late but I just ran across your reply and I have to say - WOW!
I made several replies to you on this post and on one I'm glib and you create an embarrassment of a post like this.
I stuck to the issue but took a segue on one post to point out an media inconsistency. I thought that was relevant at this site. If you saw those issues thoroughly covered in the press like the one month period you have admitted this has been out there then good for you because I never did. And to clarify I'm talking about MSM not blogs, talk radio, etc...
I do find it interesting that you take the Chief of Police's comment as gospel (admittedly I don't the circumstances of this quote) when he could have been pulling numbers out of his nether regions for an interview. But you willingly scrutinize Palin and refuse to believe that she wasn't aware of this problem.
Moreover, your last little screed was impressive. I'm not sure what it was supposed to accomplish. I commend you on being proud of your choices and your while I've never being fond of the 'shedding blood' phrase I would like to thank you and your family for their sacrifices for a truly great country. Myself, I'm registered NPA and served during the Gulf War and while I believe in voting I have, until this election, tried not to support the lesser of two evils and haven't voted for president for a while and I'm still not sure about this election either as I'm not sold on the Republicans but Obama's connections and the history of those who have paved his way to power scare the living crap out of me. However, I'm not sure where you became so insulted that you felt it necessary for the mini-bio since I in no way insulted you but actually thanked you for helping point out the differences in the coverage’s of the political candidates albeit a bit sarcastically but definitely not in a tone that would think would warrant such a defensive reply. My apologies if I offended you.
BTW, I believe abortion should be left up to the states but I would have a hard time voting to outlaw abortion 100% or even limit it only to ‘life of the mother’ situation but that is a longer subject and I’ve typed too much as it is. Just wanted to get this in to point out that it is not the abortion issue that I’m defending when I have made my previous arguments but the loose evidence of wrong-doing is a lot thinner than the lack of solid evidence that their was something unethical going on.
Read what I write
October 3, 2008 - 16:23 ET by factfinder44As or the MSM, and I assume that doesn't mean the Alaskan newspapers that covered the story back in 2000, I believe that the first one to cover the Wasilla rape kit story was USA Today in a story first appearing in early September of this year. Was it then "thoroughly covered in the press"? That depends on your definition of thorough but it was prette well covered in the ensuing few days.
You write that I take the chief of police's word as "gospel". I see no reason to doubt that Chief Fannon knew how many reported rapes his department handled per year on average or that he would have any reason to exagerate the number. Still, I should correct and amend my estimate of a minimum of 4 rapes per year based on Fannons statement of how much complying with the new Alaska state law would cost his department.
I said that there had to be a minimum of 4 rapes per year, given that the most expensive rape exam cost $1,200 and Fannon said that compliance would cost at least $5,000. That gives us the minimum number of rape kits the city would be forced to pay for per year, which is likely to be less than the number of rapes reported. This assumes that some victims don't want to go through with the exam.
As for your statement that I refuse to believe that Palin was aware of the problem. If I were shown some evidence to that effect, I might believe the woman, but her continued silence does her no good.
There is one point where I believe the story about Wasilla charging victims for rape exams isn't wholly true. From everything I have now heard or read, I am pretty well convinced that Wasilla PD's policy was changed under Palin and the chief she hired. I also find it very hard to believe that Palin didn't know at least know of the change in policy.
The part of what some call the "myth" that may be untrue concerns who was charging the victims. I question whether Wasilla PD ever charged anyone for the cost of a rape exam. It seems that the change in its policy under Palin was that it went from paying for to not paying for rape exams.
While WPD did not charge for rape kits, and arguably did not make victims pay for exams, I think it fair to say that Wasilla indirectly forced victims to pay for exams under Palin. While neither Wasilla nor its PD charged the victim, the change in policy forced the hospitals to the cost to the victim and that left uninsured having to pay for the cost of their rape kit. (The same is true for insured victims who's insurer denies payment for evidence gathering.)
It is also true, as many have pointed out, that at about the time this was happening many other jurisictions didn't pay for rape exams. For that very reason, Illinois law was changed by legialatures including State Senator Obama, just as Alaska state law was changed. Both permitted insured victims to be billed, but Illinois forbade billing women for exams that were not coverd by public assistance or insurance. Wasilla let the victim pay even if their exams were not covered by public assistance or health insurance.
One last little thing about Illinois, victims of sexual assault are reimbursed for financial loss up to $27,000. Wasilla had the funds to redecorate Palin's office at a cost of $50,000 and additional bucks to provide her with a Chevy Yukon, but nothing for rape kits.
factfinder isn't a fact
October 1, 2008 - 06:06 ET by liberal_bug_zapperfactfinder isn't a fact finder after all, you're a simple human who can't even read properly and seems to have zero capacity for true investigative research.
Do the true fact finding you dolt and you can see that sexual assault has more than one meaning... in fact, there are currently between 30 and 50 different acts that can be classified under the moniker of 'Sexual Assault'. They even classify outing your gay partner without his or her consent as sexual abuse and could be classified under an assault in the books if reported. For gay couples, there are more than 5 distinct abuse or assault charges that can be made.
In fact, when Mr. Huston reported that only one rape occurred that year, he was probably correct, and that the other 9 sexual assaults were among the other 30 to 50 other sexual crimes. Crimes like indecent exposure and groping or fondling a co-worker are also considered sexual assault. What's worse, in a domestic dispute, the wife can claim rape and if they had sex the night before... guess what... the police still have to report it as a rape since she claims that it was. So a spousal fight gone wrong also falls under the sexual assault category.
Heck Mr. factfinder, if you were a real factfinder instead of a worthless troll, you'd have found the website called ANDVSA or Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault which has a very interesting set of data on their site which shows that Alaska has the highest rates of sexual assault in the nation. So it's not just a Wasilla problem... it's an Alaska problem and has been for many years.
As a fact finder... you suck. As a human, you are pathetic. Why don't you just go away. Unless you think you might actually be able to offer something that isn't contrived and basically fabricated out of your demented mind.
____________________________________________________
"I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." ~ Ayn Rand
Whoopee!
October 1, 2008 - 06:27 ET by Indiana JoeAnother new troll, still wet behind the ears, inventing facts, ignoring replies, calling names, and trying to derail threads. Can't rebut the post, so starts twisting. Classic.
Fresh meat.
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
Fresh meat? More like meat
October 1, 2008 - 06:30 ET by Warner Todd HustonFresh meat? More like meat head.
;)
Yeah, with a "clever" s/n
October 1, 2008 - 06:39 ET by Indiana JoeI'm just having fun. I finally had enough of NN the other day, and went all over a thread tearing him up. Felt good. In reference to a former tag-line of mine, smelled good.
I'm developing a taste for it. ;^)
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
Warner, please attend a bullying workshop ASAP!
October 1, 2008 - 09:28 ET by SickofLibsTake it easy on the lil fella... he registered a week ago and only just now summoned up the courage to make a post.
SoL,
October 1, 2008 - 10:35 ET by Indiana JoeWell then, maybe he should have tread a little more lightly, and not thrown around terms like "liar" and "idiot" so casually.
Stupid is as stupid does, after all.
(I know you're kidding)
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
are the apples, apples or oranges?
October 1, 2008 - 03:37 ET by AgnosticWhile a horrible act a sexual assault is not the same as rape but rape is included as a sexual assault.
Partial Definition - Sexual assault is against the law and is defined as sexual misconduct that is forced or coerced against the will of the victim. The same definition applies regardless of whether the assailant is a stranger or an acquaintance (i.e., date, friend, or someone known casually). This type of threat may involve physical violence, coercion, or the threat of harm.
Sexual misconduct is vague, all-encompassing phrase used to charge any crime even remotely sexual in nature. The additional requirement that it is forced or coerced against the will of the victim does not make it rape. In an extreme instance (and not saying this is the case in any official statistic) the act of 'mooning' someone could be considered a sexual assault if the victim was overly sensitive.
I'm not trying to trivilize the crime but their is clearly a difference between sexual assault and rape so I don't understand the point of your analysis. Please let me know if I am misunderstanding your point.
Fair enough
October 1, 2008 - 04:18 ET by factfinder44Check with the Wasilla P.D. It is possible and admittedly probable that some of the reported sexual assaults involve something other than rape. My point is that Huston's assertion that there was only one rape in Wasilla before 2000 is laughable.
If there was only a single rape reported in Wasilla before 2000, how does Huston explain the fact that Wasilla's Chief of Police, while opposing a state law outlawing charging victims for rape kits, estimated the annual cost of those kits to be between $5,000 and $14,000. Bear in mind that the cost of kits and forensic exams per victim ran between $300 and $1200. Sure sounds like there were several rapes reported per year.
Check yourself,
October 1, 2008 - 06:32 ET by Indiana Joe"factfinder." You lay claim to the title, earn it. And your "fact" has absolutely zero relevance to the lie that Palin charged for rape kits. It never happened. It's been proven.
Anyone with any interest in "factfinding" would have no reason to try to defend a proven lie. And it's not up to anyone here to re-prove it over and over just because you are, or play, stupid.
Which is it? Are stupid, or just playing stupid? Come back when you actually find a "fact." Or a clue.
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
Indiana Joe
October 2, 2008 - 18:03 ET by factfinder44Since you are so certain that I have the facts wrong, and I readily admit that I don't know everything, be so kind as to enlighten me as to what the policy of Wasila was concerning payment for rape kits under Mayor Palin. Also, please be so kind as to tell us what Mayor Palin knew of it, when she learned of it, and what she did about it.
TIA.
much ado...about not much
October 2, 2008 - 18:18 ET by porpoiseboyi believe it was hospital policy. what was the city policy that palin inherited was that the police dept did not reimburse the local hospital for the kits making it the hospital's responsibility whether to fund the kits themselves or charge the victims. how the mayor should have been aware of this obscure thing is beyond me. how many rapes a year do you suppose are reported in wasilla? i admit i have not researched this...but i do live in a small town in the middle of nowhere where most people have guns and i can tell you our crime rate is EXTREMELY low here. i imagine wasilla is the same.
Ecclesiastes 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.
The policy that Palin inherited
October 3, 2008 - 16:28 ET by factfinder44The policy that Palin inherited was just the opposite of what you say it was. The policy she inherited was Wasilla paid for rape exams. Palin fired the chief and hired a new one who stopped the policy of paying for rape kits.
Your assumption that there were few rapes is just wrong.
Well said
October 1, 2008 - 04:17 ET by Dan_WatsonWell said AG. I made the same point, before I saw your well thought out response. Truly factfinder44 is a bit off point or do I say off target a bit to the left? Also to the 1 Warner Todd Huston mentions comes from the UCR. It is one of the most the recognized crime statitical tools used today.
Cheers
Junk in Junk out
October 1, 2008 - 04:27 ET by factfinder44The UCR is only as good as the data provided to it. If you understood it, you would realize that a problem occurs when crimes are reported in more than one area. For instance, check to see whether Wasilla P.D. covered areas besided Wasilla proper and if many of the crimes it considers to have occurred in Wasilla are reported in the UCR as occuring elsewhere.
Regardless, that there were several rapes per year reported to the Wasilla P.S. is clear from the amount of money the cost per annum and the number of "sexual assaults" reported in city crime stats.
"Regardless, that there
October 1, 2008 - 04:31 ET by Warner Todd HustonAnd how much was that?
Fannon said $5K TO $14k per annum
October 1, 2008 - 04:52 ET by factfinder44That was in 2000. Given that the costs per victim was $300 to $1200, it appears that there were at least 4 per year (4 X 1200 = 4800 which approximates the lower cost of $5000 per annum.) If the average cost was closer to $800, and I don't have the actual number, that is over 8 reported rapes a year even at the low end figure of $5000 per annum. If you are talking $14,000 per annum even at $1,200 per, you are talking over 11 rapes per year.
I will hand you this. It is possible that Palin was not aware of the policy for charging for rape kits. Especially since she delegated much of her duties to a city manager. If that is the case, why doesn't she issue a statement to the effect that she was unaware of the policy?
RE: Junk in Junk Out
October 1, 2008 - 04:40 ET by Dan_WatsonI agree in principle with that concept, yet you even "debunk" you own argument with "For instance, check to see whether Wasilla P.D. covered areas besided Wasilla proper and if many of the crimes it considers to have occurred in Wasilla are reported in the UCR as occuring elsewhere".
That means "didn't happen here".
Go find another untenable position. You are growing stale and old here.
Sorry Charlie
October 1, 2008 - 05:04 ET by factfinder44If you think the City of Wasilla budgeted for the cost of rape exams committed outside of the city, I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you. You are correct in that it would have been a mistake, if that is what happened, for those rapes to have been reported elsewhere if they happened in Wasilla. Aganostic's explanation sounds more likely; that crimes were not included in the UCR for reasons you should read form his post.
ff44,
October 1, 2008 - 05:12 ET by AgnosticHonest question:
If Wasilla forced victims to pay for the cost of rape kits then why were they included in the budget expenses for the city?
DAMN!
October 1, 2008 - 06:34 ET by Indiana JoeRight down the smoke-stack, Agnostic.
Must have hit the magazine. ;^)
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
The budget cut rape kits out
October 1, 2008 - 13:46 ET by factfinder44"If Wasilla forced victims to pay for the cost of rape kits then why were they included in the budget expenses for the city?"
The budget for rape kits was cut to next to nothing after Wasilla stopped paying for them. I believe actually payments against the line item that included rape kits and other miscellaneous expensed dropped to under $300.
The $5,000 to $14,000 was what Fannon estimated it would cost Wasilla if Alaska passed legislation requiring it to pay for those rape kits.
ff44,
October 1, 2008 - 04:47 ET by AgnosticI will grant you that the UCR has limitations but that those seem to be more along the lines of crime definitions. For example did you realize that Chicago and much of Illinois has no rape statistics for many crime surveys because they have refused for years to conform to the federal standards for reporting the crime of rape. It is possible prior to 2001 (or whatever year you have a contention with) the reporting method in Wasilla didn't meet standards and the UCR will not publish those results but at least some efforts were made to conform since they are reporting the statistics now. I don't know that this is the case but I wanted to throw out that bone before making my next statement since it is somewhat circumstantial.
Rape is a problem in Alaska in general being almost three times the national average and this is going back two decades. That fact would mean that any mid-large city (by Alaskan standards) would be negligent if they didn't put considerable resources toward this problem, regardless of the number of actual rapes.
Thanks Agnostic
October 1, 2008 - 04:56 ET by factfinder44It sounds as if you know something about this. Certainly more than me. Generally, I just thought there was a problem reporting stats to the UCR.
State reports pdf
October 1, 2008 - 05:09 ET by Agnosticmany states, including Alaska, have posted their crime reports online via pdf files. The problem is that every state has their own way of reporting and use various names for their reports so they are not always easy to find but I'm sure you could verify some statistics in this manner but I wouldn't know how many years back Alaska has posted their crime stats.
"Sexual assault" v. "Rape"
October 1, 2008 - 13:08 ET by elHombreFactfinder44:
FBI Uniform Crime Reports include only actual "rapes."
"Sexual assaults," as reported in the Wasilla PD stats, would include unlawful sexual touchings that fall short of rape and would not be relevant to the bogus rape-kit controversy. (Alaska hs four degrees of "Sexual Assault.")
Got that, "fact"finder. Sexual assaults are not necessarily rapes! In order to determine the number of "rapes," unless Wasilla PD has that specific category, you have to refer to the FBI UCRs.
You other commenters need to stop backing down to this guy. He doesn't know what he is talking about.
Again, you ignore the plain facts
October 1, 2008 - 13:55 ET by factfinder44The confusion between rapes and sexual assaults has already been acknowledged. Your problem is that you readily assume that the number of sexual assaults in the Wasilla stats include many crimes besides rape, when you have no proof that they are not all rapes. Moreoover, you conveniently ignore Chief Fannons statement it would cost Wasilla $5K to $14K, if it were compelled to pay for rape exams at a cost of between $300 and $1,200 per victim.
Gee. Do you know what could clear this confusion up? Sarah could simply issue a statement as to what the average number of rapes were on her watch and what the policy was as to who paid for forensic exams?
More Double Lib Standard
October 1, 2008 - 05:46 ET by NoMoreClintonsGeez, if you libs had scrutinized 0bama the way you're doing Sarah you would have never chosen him for your Dear Leader. And Hillary would most likely have a commanding lead right now and a female VP on the GOP side would be either non-existent or totally neutralized.
Worried much?
The Boston Globe is useless for actual factual news
October 1, 2008 - 07:08 ET by c5thenIt is however very useful for the DNC to distribute their propaganda and lies.
The Typhoid Mary of Liberal Derangement
October 1, 2008 - 08:13 ET by needleThe Boston Globe is a hideous publication responsible the spread and intensification of Liberal Derangement throughout New England and especially eastern Massachusetts, via its carefully crafted liberal distortion, bias, and dishonesty effected by not reporting information that would disrupt or embarrass its agenda.
I should know, I live in the Boston area.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Included in the budget??
October 1, 2008 - 07:21 ET by XJ.JonI don't see much stock in considering the government's budget cost for rape kits, as some of those kits very well could have been used for training, or educational demonstrations. Not to mention any flawed or broken kits that had to be thrown away prior to use.
As a volunteer firefighter, I know that we go through disposable medical/emergency equipment in training so that we are better prepared on the scene.
The government's cost for rape kits is an extremely unreliable source when trying to prove the amount of rapes that happened in any given location.
"Don't drop Obama on me" - Random bumper sticker.
"No you can't! No you can't!" -me
As long as you are listing the possibilities
October 1, 2008 - 18:30 ET by factfinder44Maybe Governor Sarah used some of those rape kits to knock some of the Russian planes flying in Alaskan air space.
By their standards John Edwards is responsible
October 1, 2008 - 07:22 ET by w3... for the entire state of North Carolina billing rape victims for evidence collection during their hospital stay.
http://www.newsobser...
And that's what I posted on that awful editorial. My guess is they are responding to the Boston Herald's endorsement of McCain.
Boston Globe scared of the truth
October 1, 2008 - 07:30 ET by w3ATTENTION: Obama cares nothing for rape victims!
Illinois bills rape victims for their evidence kits:
""[F]eedback from the field indicates that sexual assault victims are
still being billed." Knecht says she's recently heard from caseworkers
in Illinois, Georgia, and Arkansas reporting that rape victims continue
to be charged for their forensic exams."
http://www.usnews.co...
w3,
October 1, 2008 - 07:38 ET by Indiana JoeGREAT link! And it pre-dates the Palin BS! This should be put up on every comment NBers make on other sites.
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - H. Poincaré
Obama's Rape Bill
October 1, 2008 - 07:34 ET by w3Someone might say, "But w3! Obama introduced legislation in Illinois so that rape victims would not be billed for the tests and evidence collected during their hospital stay." And to that I would say, "Course not!"
"According to the Sexual Assault Emergency Treatment Act, the
Illinois Department of Public Aid will reimburse the costs of ER
treatment if you do not have public aid or private medical insurance.
RE.IM.BURSE. And only if you're not insured.
Google it.
Reimbusment is better than being stuck with the charges
October 2, 2008 - 18:16 ET by factfinder44At least in Illinois, charges were reimbursed. In Wasilla, the uninsured was stuck with the bill for their rape exam.
By the way, the Obama legislation went further. It will reimburse a victim of sexual assault for financial loss, such as lost wages and medical bills, up to $27,000.
Clowns
October 1, 2008 - 14:34 ET by factfinder44You people are clowns clinging to your belief that there weren't any rapes in Wasilla duirng Palin's mayorship.
As for what Illinois does under legislation sponsored by Obama, try to get the correct act. Google it if you really think that has anyting to do with the subject, which is what Palin did, what she knew, and what was going on in Wasilla.
Watch the debate.
FF44
October 1, 2008 - 14:43 ET by MrShyYou're still going off the rails on this non-issue?
The P -- not the VP -- on that "other ticket" continues, after 19 months in that oh-so-warm and fuzzy media spotlight, to have an endless list of unanswered questions regarding his accomplishments (or lack thereof) in the Senate, the many bills he voted on that were damaging, his shady associations with a whole number of corrupt organizations and radical activists, etc., etc..
And here you are going bonkers over this. No surprise, of course.
NOW PLAYING:
Governor Palin Get Your Gun
No one said there were not
October 1, 2008 - 22:04 ET by liberal_bug_zapperNo one said there were not any rapes. What we said is that sexual assult does not equal rape. However, unless you can prove there were rapes, you are the one with no facts on your side. Just like all libs, you come to the table with innuendo and supposition, but nary a fact or a proof. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. You are pathetic.
____________________________________________________
"I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." ~ Ayn Rand
The facts are there
October 2, 2008 - 18:21 ET by factfinder44You just chose to ignore them.
There are the Wasilla crime statistics on "sexual assaults." Why we don't have the breakdown as to how many incidents reported to be sexual assaults were rape, we know that, given the cost of rape exams and what Wasilla's Police Chief said it would cost the city to pay for them, there were at least 4 rapes per year in 2000.