But the Washington Post provides the
"The governor's daughters and husband charged the state $43,490 to travel, and many of the trips were between their house in Wasilla and Juneau, the capital city 600 miles away, the documents show."
First of all -- does anyone understand that Juneau, AK is not accessable by car or train? She's not able to hop the Amtrak like Saint Joe Biden.
What's more fun is that they attack the Palin family for writing off their childrens' travels as State expenses:
"In separate filings, the state was billed about $25,000 for Palin's daughters' expenses and $19,000 for her husband's.
Flights topped the list for the most expensive items, and the daughter whose bill was the highest was Piper, 7, whose flights cost nearly $11,000, while Willow, 14, claimed about $6,000 and Bristol, 17, accounted for about $3,400."
So let's see.
Youngest daughter has the highest expense. Second youngest, second highest. Eldest? Lowest expense.
Do we see a correlation? You elect a mother to office with young children you bet your eye that those kids will travel with her. And if Sarah Palin flies somewhere on State business (in Alaska, where air-transport is basically the only way to get around the State, no less) her children fly with her.
So what is this? Sexist double-standard. You want mom to be with the kids, but cry foul when the State -- whose population elected her knowing she's a mother -- pays to have the kids tag along.
Give me something real. "Sarah Palin uses taxpayer money to send Piper Palin to boarding school," or something real. Then we talk.
"Piper Palin flies around with mom," is a non-starter. That line is sexist, anti-woman, and anti-working mother.
In a world where "progressives" think that the private sector should afford day-care services to mothers (on their own dime) it's now suddenly fair game that a mother elected to office dare bring her children with her for the same reason.
But, it's okay to attack on this angle. After all: Sarah Palin is a Republican! And as the Obama-Left warrants: the wrong kind of woman.
Give me a break. You elect a family, you pay for a family. You elect a working mom? Working mom brings the kids. What's the "progressive" alternative? A glass ceiling for working-mom politician? "Working moms must PAY THEIR OWN WAY?"
I don't see that double-standard for working dad politicians, or the media scrutinizing their wives' travels, or his children's travels.
But then again: in the "real world" of politics, mom stays home, smiles, bakes cookies, and doesn't need to travel. Well, unless it's travelling from the kitchen to the restroom for a "short break."
But the Kos diary puts it best:
"This isn't the magic bullet, but it's yet another in the line of drip-drip mini-scandals that, framed correctly by the Democrats, should completely destroy Palin's claims of being a different kind of Republican.
Me? I think it's more in the line of the "drip-drip-drip" of sweatbeads running off the noses of O-Bots nationwide that are terrified of Palin-mania.