THE SARAH PALIN PER DIEM STORY: This didn’t get much traction, as it turned out that her travel expenses were legal, and much lower than Murkowski’s:

Gov. Palin has spent far less on her personal travel than her predecessor: $93,000 on airfare in 2007, compared with $463,000 spent the year before by her predecessor, Frank Murkowski. He traveled often in an executive jet that Palin called an extravagance during her campaign. She sold it after she was sworn into office.

On the other hand, as a colleague of mine emails:

Would you ever consider billing the state for taking your family on a business trip? If you decided to move to Nashville, would you really expect a per diem for the time you were there? The fact that it may be legal is relevant, but it doesn’t mean it’s right.

And, bottom line, when part of your defense is “I wasn’t as bad as Frank Murkowski” isn’t that a real sign of trouble?

Well, that’s gotta hurt. Though I believe that our state legislators in Tennessee do claim a per diem whenever they’re in Nashville, though I don’t think they get anything for their spouses or kids. The legal-vs.-right distinction is an important one, though it’s one that’s usually missed in political discourse today. Somebody should write a book on that phenomenon. Meanwhile, just remember what I got fussed at for pointing out yesterday: Like everybody else in the running, she’s a politician, not a saint.

UPDATE: Alaska reader Steven Wells writes:

I’ve lived in Wasilla for several years and in Alaska for longer than that. I appreciate your focus on Palin’s record and the political comments. Politically, I am libertarian and I don’t always vote. I did not vote for Sarah Palin because one of the big issues in the 2006 was the gas pipeline. I figured that Tony Knowles had better experience for handling such matters. Palin so far has handled the matter fairly well to my opinion. It is very dangerous to underestimate her. She has handled the Alaska legislature (which is rather like herding cats) and Big Oil deftly and capably.

One matter that has not gotten a great deal of coverage has been Palin’s judicial selections. Alaska follows the Missouri plan, so Palin’s picks for judges are not on a blank slate. Nonetheless, she has appointed a number of women to the bench, including some current and former public defenders. She has not seemed to really push a strong conservative agenda regarding her judicial appointments.

One other interesting matter: McCain has risen about 7 – 8 points on intrade.com in the last week. It’s been fairly consistent with Obama at ~60%, McCain at about 40% until the last couple of days. Now, Obama’s about 51% and McCain’s at about 48%.

I live up here because Alaska is very different and much more free than the lower 48 and I’m not sure I like the attention we’re getting with Palin’s candidacy. I’m also not convinced I am going to vote, let along vote for her ticket, but it is interesting to watch this political dynamic. Thanks for the updates. Keep up the good work.

Yes, as I’ve mentioned before, a year or two ago it looked like we’d be seeing a grim slugfest between Rudy and Hillary. Say what you will, this election has been a lot more entertaining.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Edward Tabakin emails:

The “I wasn’t as bad as Frank Murkowski” defense? 93,000/463,000 is 20%. Could a bean counter go over Palin’s charges and find a few that are questionable. Probably. But is that the standard you want? As you say, she’s a politician, not a saint. But the bean counter is applying a saint’s standard. Dismissing, as your colleague did, the difference between Palin and Murkowski’s pre diem charges throws out the main point, that Palin traveled at 1/5th the cost of her predecessor.

Bottom line: I think your “ouch” was unwarranted.

Could be. The “scandals” have been pretty thin gruel.