When our son was little, he formed the word “perfect” as “perftect.” So that’s how we still say the word in our house.

So, it was perftect timing for me when Mrs. Palin recently bowed out of our national consciousness (only for a while, I predict). For me it’s been six solid months of following her, without a break, and I need to move on.

In that time, we have collectively carved out new material and pushed this story forward in a unique way. Breathing life into a topic already well covered by a cadre of fabulous bloggers (any of ‘em, all of ‘em) you have all worked hard with me to analyze and re-examine the fascinating evidence before us.

Alone, I also too spent countless hours culling information, following up on leads, examining research, and phoning sources. For every five inches of copy you’d see on my blog, I spent upward of five hours working the story:  that is, eliminating the detritus and going with what I could.

But alas, I have neglected huge parts of my life and my work. And now that I have started a class and have looming deadlines of my own, I must reclaim my mental space and physical time.

That’s not to say that I won’t post on Palin if it becomes important. That’s not to say that she’s down or out. I think she’s too mentally ill to allow herself to do that (watch closely McCain’s seat when it comes up for re-election.)

But for now, I cannot forward this birth story. Yes, I’m sitting on some things, but it’s not in anyone’s best interest to publish them. And yes, I eschew covering certain topics for reasons I’d rather not say publicly. 

But you know what the saddest thing is about finding closure on this part of Palin’s life? That you all don’t know who you all are. And by that I don’t mean you are not evolved. I mean that I’ve met the most wonderful people through my blog. You are poets and writers and musicians and academicians and technicians and business and medical professionals. You are old and young and parents and childless. I know your real names, and where you live, and the fact that there’s someone who lives near you but I can’t share that with either of you! I know what one of you said to the ocean as you drove away this summer. How another met her husband and how still another visits her elderly father on a regular basis. 

Your lives are fabulous and I have loved that you have shared them with me. Perhaps we can continue to meet and converse about books, music, art, politics, health, and business. And skunks. Or this:

I have no immediate plans or schedule I can adhere to. I might write about this, or that, or post some of my writing as I try to “progress” my next mystery.

If you’d like to post something, you have my address. If you want to go OT and talk about Palin, give it a try and perhaps someone will be reading and they can chime in.

Of course there are always new blogs starting up and old blogs continuing the story.

And if something really wild happens from the queen of the wild ride, I’ll be on it.

For now, my profound thanks to you all that have made this such a special and fulfilling time. I think we’ve done good, as Mrs. Palin might say.   Rock steady.  Laura. 

When I think of Sarah Palin, a single image comes to mind. She’s on stage at the2008 Republican Convention, parading her shell-shocked pregnant teenage daughter and boyfriend before the world – forcing them to head down a path they aren’t ready for so she can advance her standing with the extreme religious right.

In promoting a right-winged religious agenda and sacrificing her own daughter in the process, Sarah Palin has spent the past three years shoving girls and women backward in an effort to advance her own career. And in doing so, I think she has also contributed to abuse and oppression for women and children.

My own experience with the religious right and the serious damage it can do came from my extreme Mormon upbringing by a devout Mormon mother who zealously obeyed every church suggestion and mandate. When I was four years old, she took me door-to-door to petition against the Equal Rights Amendment because church officials had come out against the ERA.  When my four-year-old brain couldn’t grasp the problem with having equal rights for women and I questioned my mom about it, her response was angry and automatic.

“Do you want to be forced to go to war and get killed?” She snapped, repeating the words she had been programmed to say. “Because that’s exactly what’s going to happen to you if this amendment passes.”

As a young child, I was taught that men had all the power and that it was our job as females to honor and support them.  I was also taught that sex was evil unless I was doing it in order to have a child. In junior high, I was banned from attending sex education class because my mother worried it would make me promiscuous.  And because women in the Mormon religion were told it was their responsibility to bring as many spirit children into the world as possible, my mother had children she couldn’t support with an absent father, and then rushed into an abusive marriage a month after meeting my soon-to-be stepdad in hopes of bringing at least one more child into the Mormon fold.

In my newly released memoir, Hippie Boy: A Girl’s Story, I illustrate how extreme religious doctrine can set up a perfect storm: in my case, a religion and political/social climate (I grew up in Northern Utah) that gives men ultimate power and control over women and children, a stepdad who exploited the  religious and cultural power bestowed on him to oppress and abuse my family, and a mother who so blindly followed the church doctrine that she felt powerless to protect herself or her children.

It takes only one look at the world around us to understand the horrific damage caused by extreme religious beliefs.  How many more people need to die in the name of religion? How many more women and children need to suffer as a result of extreme religious viewpoints?  One thing is certain: we don’t need women actively working to strip other women of their basic human rights and freedoms.

Bristol Palin might be able to ride her mother’s conservative religious coattails to bring in gobs of money for herself and her young son.  But even so, I wonder what races through her mind at night as she lies in bed, thinking of the freedom and youth she sacrificed to take on the role of single mom.  I also wonder about all those other young teenage girls out there— the ones who can’t secure five-figure speaking engagements—who might have been forced to keep a pregnancy and a child they weren’t ready to have because Sarah Palin used her pregnant teenage daughter to advance her platform.

Mostly, I wonder how Sarah Palin can sleep at night.

About the author

Ingrid Ricks is the author of Hippie Boy:  A Girl’s Story, a compelling true story about a feisty teenage girl who escapes her abusive Mormon stepfather and the suffocating religion at home by joining her dad on the road as a tool-selling vagabond —until his arrest forces her to take charge of her own life. Hippie Boy:  A Girl’s Story is available as an ebook on Amazon HERE.

For more information, visit www.hippieboybook.com

The other day, Andrew Sullivan posted on the odds of success of conspiracy theories. Though I call myself "Rationalist," I am not by any stretch a numbers geek. Still, I thought it was very interesting, and I believe it is useful for examining the Sarah Palin pregnancy hoax. I especially like it because everyone keeps facetiously asking: "Come on, what are the odds she could have pulled it off?" It's pleasant to have a way of talking about this that doesn't involve subjective opinions about photographs. 

So let's take a look, statistically! 

Setting aside all preconceived notions about who should have or could have or might have known, as far as I can tell the number of people who absolutely had to be in on the conspiracy at the time is three:

1. Sarah Palin, because she was either pregnant or was not. 

2. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, Palin's doctor, who either delivered Trig at the time and place claimed or did not.

3. Todd Palin, because he likely saw Palin's belly during the seven months she claimed to have been hiding her pregnancy from the public. Even if he did not, he traveled with Palin to Dallas and back while she says she was in labor.

(I'll explain below why no one else logically must have been in on it. But first let's look at these three through the lens of the article Sullivan posted.)

According to this thought-provoking formula, there is an average six percent chance that each conspirator will not fail due to disloyalty or incompetence. (Very easy to see why this makes the chance of success of most conspiracies infinitesimally small.) The formula assumes the conspirators have some incentive - financial or otherwise - to break their silence.

So let's look at this case. Do the odds hold up?

Sarah Palin has zero incentive to tell the truth. Her political identity is tied to being, by choice, the mother of a child with special needs, and she has greatly benefitted politically and financially from this identity. (Some argue that the child with Down syndrome was the clincher for Steve Schmidt in convincing McCain to choose Palin in order to shore up the support of the Republican base.) To reveal she had lied about this defining life event - and wiped tears from her eyes in front of Right to Life groups recalling it - would be political suicide. I would say there is nearly a 100% probability Palin will never willingly confess.

Cathy Baldwin-Johnson - Despite the fact that Palin secured several high profile awards and appointments for her, I cannot see why a respected doctor would have intentionally staked her professional reputation on a hoax, except that as the founder of A Children's Place for abused teens she may have initially become involved from a desire to help a teenager - perhaps Bristol - in trouble. I suspect she was as shocked as anyone when Palin suddenly announced she was seven months pregnant. However, when Palin claimed to reporters that her doctor had advised her to travel for thirteen hours by plane while leaking amniotic fluid, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson joined John McCain and the citizens of Alaska as victims of Palin's propensity for unexpectedly "going rogue." At that point, the doctor was forced to either publicly call the Governor a liar or to admit to malpractice-worthy behavior. Dr. Baldwin-Johnson spoke to a reporter with an attorney present and said only that it was "not unreasonable for her to fly back." Since that time she has refused all interviews and, two months later, rescinded her privileges at the hospital where the delivery supposedly took place.

Regardless of the reason for or degree of her involvement, Dr. Baldwin-Johnson has what might be called a professional imperative to keep the secret, and cannot be legally compelled to speak because she is protected by HIPAA. Like Palin, I put Baldwin-Johnson at close to 100%, as she will likely lose her medical license if the truth is revealed.

Todd Palin - though there have been many rumors of marital discord between the Palins, so far Todd has remained resolutely loyal to the Palin brand. Considering the non-anonymous revelations in McGinnis' book, if anyone ever cracked I would think it would be Todd. But so far the personal and financial benefit has remained high enough not to. Regardless, Todd is protected by the spousal privilege, so unless he decides he's had enough, he can't be compelled to rat. How much can one man take? I give Todd odds of 50/50. We shall see.

Okay, so back to the formula. According to my math, there is about a 17% chance that one of the conspirators will cause failure, or an 83% chance it will succeed. I'd call those odds pretty good for the conspiracy. Add to it a media completely unwilling to look critically at Palin's tall tale, and the odds improve even more.

Still, people ask, "How could no one have talked all these years?" 

Well, who exactly would be doing the talking? Just for fun, let's look at everyone else. Forget, please, what would usually happen in most families. Let's just look at what is possible.

The kids. According to Palin herself, Sarah Palin's children were in the dark about the pregnancy for seven months. Setting aside the likelihood that not one of her kids saw her belly in a nightgown ever during those seven months, this shows that a secret of the magnitude of a pregnancy (or lack thereof) is possible in this family.

If Bristol is indeed the mother of Trig, it's even possible she is not in on the conspiracy. She could have given a premature child up for adoption in early 2008, and it could have been in an NICU or foster care until Palin presented it. 

Palin's parents. Both Chuck and Sallie are on record as saying they never know what Sarah is up to and anyway, according to Palin, she did not tell her parents she was pregnant. She claims she also did not tell her siblings. So she could easily have not told them she was not pregnant.

Palin's staff. It's hard to believe not one of them would have noticed her pregnancy at the time (regardless of who may now say that they totally knew). Palin's staff handled her entire life - from coffee to per diems for her children to jogging strollers for photo shoots. But there is not one calendar entry for a prenatal appointment and not one email demonstrating a visit to Dr. Baldwin Johnson in the emails that have been released. There is no reason to believe any of her staff was in the loop. 

The Johnstons. Whether or not Levi, his sister or his mom were aware of any Bristol pregnancy, there is no reason to think they would have been privy to Sarah Palin's plans, especially if even Bristol was not.

The staff at Mat-Su Regional Medical Center. How could an entire hospital be hoaxed? That is a very good question, and there is an excellent discussion of it here. I won't repeat it, but under very specific circumstances in a small rural hospital it is possible. Regardless, any paperwork relating to the birth - or lack of paperwork if there was none - is protected by HIPAA.

More to the point: if the pregnancy is as Palin described - pre-term, premature rupture of membranes, fetus with Down Syndrome and a hole in his heart, mother of advanced age with a history of miscarriage - how is it possible at all that the baby was admitted to Mat-Su, a facility that is not licensed for twin births? Add to this that Palin says that when she arrived labor was induced, and there is zero chance that if she walked in the front door she would not have been immediately transported to the NICU at Providence Regional Medical Center. There is no chance that the admitting nurse would have jeopardized his or her job by violating the hospital's license.

However, if there are Palins walking the halls with a baby at 7:00 in the morning just after shift change, and Palin's personal physician (who is on staff and a member of the hospital's board) says the baby was delivered during the night and the Governor of Alaska is not to be disturbed in room 11A, would the clerk at the front desk or the nurses who just came on shift have any reason to question it? Further, the baby Sarah's parents showed to KTUU on April 18th is a bruiser. Premature? Hole in his heart? Jaundice? Those conditions would have required extra staff attention. No way would an infant with those symptoms be allowed to be passed around the hallways by relatives and the patient's daughter's boyfriend. The staff at Mat-Su could not have been aware of the conditions Sarah Palin claims her child to have had.

Everybody else: If it's possible - and I believe I've shown it is - that Palin managed to keep her secret from her children, her parents, her staff and the employees of Mat-Su, how likely is it that anyone outside that crucial circle would be any wiser?

So! What I think we have here, is the exception that proves the rule.

I have worked as a social worker in my state for 15 years. In that role, I determine eligibility for financial assistance and help clients apply for SSI when appropriate. This is why I found Palinoia’s excellent post on the Palins and a possible insurance dilemma so fascinating. Her research was terrific, and I hear there is more to come. But for now, I want to add my two cents, and reveal what I think is a fascinating find, something I alluded to in an earlier comment.

Consider this:  Palinoia theorized about Medicaid/Denali care, and that because of her parents’ income levels, Bristol would not have qualified for coverage as their minor child if she were pregnant.

I am thinking that had Trig not been born with Down syndrome, Palinoia would be correct. But in my experience, due to Trig’s medical condition, he was at birth categorically eligible for Medicaid. For example, any new born weighing less than 2lbs 5ozs is SDI eligible. Other medical issues, such as under developed lungs, prematurity and birth defects can also qualify a newborn for coverage.

But first, a little background on Medicaid. The program is a joint State/Federal entitlement program. Each state has a lot of discretion on how the program is administered, however, there are a few federal rules that all the states must adhere to. Federal statues and laws always supercede state statues and laws in the administration of entitlement programs.

There are a few situations where federal law mandates that the only criterion for Medicaid eligibility is the medical condition.

It would not matter who Trig’s birth mother was, his medical cost would be covered, in my experience. On the day Trig was born, a hospital social worker would have filled out an application and sent it along with the doctor’s note and diagnosis to the Social Security Administration. If there was private insurance, the hospital would bill it first and then bill Medicaid for what the private insurance did not cover.

Now here’s where it gets really interesting. In my professional life, I have access to the Social Security administration database. SSA database covers all your personal information with the exception of credit history and credit scores. While doing a non-related search, I discovered that the Palin family file (Sarah,Todd, all 5 kids, and Bristol’s son Tripp) is locked with an alert in place. This means that the file is password-protected and if someone tries to break the password an alert will be generated up the chain of command. If you get caught, you get fired.

In my experience, having a file locked is a rare occurrence. A few exceptions would be the President of the United States and his extended family. For FBI and CIA field officers and some other high-ranking federal workers, the locks are in place to protect the families.

I do not live in AK so I cannot speak in absolutes, but where I live, only the Governor and the head of DSHS can order a file locked on the state’s system. And there needs to be a very good reason for a lock to be put in place. Makes sense when you think about it: most state employees would request a lock if they could! After all, who wants their co/worker’s to have that kind of access to their private information.

But I did an experiment and looked up 30 out of 50 United States Governors. And guess what I found? I found zero locks. Zero. And I feel fairly certain that the other 19 Governors would not have a lock - only ex-governor Sarah Palin.

So what does this mean? Well, to me it means that Palin went to some trouble to lock her file and to add an alert.

There is something there she doesn’t want anyone to know. And anyone who tries to find out gets tagged and fired. That’s a serious deterrent. And a real safeguard.

My copy of The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin by Joe McGinniss has arrived. 

I just tore through Chapter 19.  I will read the rest of the book as soon as I can this weekend. 

For now, I'm glad to see Andrew Sullivan given the credit he deserves for vociferously and repeatedly questioning the very questionable story of Baby Trig's delivery. 

I am reassured to read that those who knew Sarah the most, believed her the least. 

It is also, too, good to know that real Americans possessing common sense will see the details that we've followed so closely these three years. What did YOU think of this chapter? And the rest of the book? I look forward to this discussion of any of 'em, all of 'em books about Mrs. Todd Palin.  

BS: Laura, what better place to start our interview about your book than with the phrase “Sarah Palin with a penis!” Wow! The floor is all yours!

LN: That is actually my favorite sentence in my novel!  I have a pivotal character that speaks in word salad much of the time. He is in over his head in many situations and resorts to talking in scrambled sentences and with a loftier tone than the occasion requires. So, my protagonist, Clari Drake, at one point narrates that he is “Sarah Palin with a penis. I could have told anyone that.” I cracked myself up with that one.

BS: Congratulations on the publication of your novel on Amazon Kindle. I found it to be a great read, full of laughs and suspense and compelling characters. You are racking up fabulous Five Star REVIEWS on Amazon with heaps of praise and enthusiasm for your book. It is a very impressive debut for you in the world of fiction. How exciting is this?

LN: You have no idea! Or maybe as a writer and PhD who has published lengthy articles, you do understand. But I am very, very excited to be on Kindle. My book has wide appeal, especially to this blog community. 

BS: Let’s talk about Finding Clarity. There is much that reminds me of our own struggle to “out” Sarah Palin over the past 3 years. Am I imagining that?

LN: Not at all. The last three years of work on Finding Clarity dovetailed with my following the blogs and the turmoil surrounding Palin. Coincidently, I had already crafted a plot with these basic themes:  you can’t always trust people in power to do the right thing; people are not always who they pretend to be. I also like the idea that life is full of quirky people who sometimes follow false leads and suffer slow starts but are determined to right wrongs and see the truth prevail. That reminds me a lot of our blogging community.

BS: The long title is fascinating:  A Mom, A Dwarf and a Posh Private School in the People’s Republic of Berkeley. It’s really what made me want to read the book. But subtitles aren’t common in fiction. How did you decide on that?

LN: This book is about a fish-out-of-water woman, coming of age in her 40’s, who decides to try and become the hot-shot reporter she once was. With a rag tag posse, she sleuths out the wrongs and tries to make them right at her son’s posh private school in Berkeley, where the elite, who in theory aren’t supposed to exist, are up to no good. Those factors are worth teasing on the cover of the book.

BS: Clari Drake suspects that the wealthy power brokers running her son’s little corner of Berkeley are going to destroy the world she loves to hate. Financial malfeasance, dubious hiring choices, ill timed firing of a beloved employee…Clari’s all over it. With her odd, misfit friends, she goes for broke trying to reveal the truth and bust the bad guys. You’re right, this sounds so familiar!

LN: Right on! It truly is as if I wrote a book about me and you and the many commenters here and at the other blogs who have been walking into a head wind for 3 years, digging into documents, listening in on conversations, observing liars and cheats. It’s in my blood to love a story that stinks and want to dig like a dog for a bone until I can figure out the truth. Clari Drake is no different.

BS: A major theme of the book, as you said, is that people aren’t always who they appear to be. And things aren’t always as they seem. Again, it sounds like Palin land to me.

LN: You’re absolutely right. There are so many similarities to what we’ve been doing on these blogs and what goes on in Berkeley in my book. Some people honestly aren’t yet sure who they are in this life, or what they are supposed to be. Others live lies and will do anything to mask the truth. Sarah Palin is a metaphor for all of that.

BS: You’ve spent your career as a journalist – that is, a writer of nonfiction. How difficult was it for you to switch gears and start creating stories instead of reporting them?

LN: It is the antithesis of my training, you’re right. How great it is to be able to make stuff up (much to Mrs. Palin’s chagrin.) There is real freedom to writing fiction. You don’t think the priest would really have said that to Clari? Well, I do. You don’t think the Board of Trustee meeting would have gone quite like that? Hang in there, and see how it all plays out. Unlike in real life, I don’t have to be fair to these characters. I have to breath life into them. There’s a big difference.

BS: But did you like your characters? I found them so loveable and complicated. Even Dick DeNutti, bad guy extraordinaire. Only it gets much more complex than that doesn’t it?

LN: When I finished the final draft, I said to a friend, “Wow, I miss them all.” I had spent so many years with these characters, getting inside their heads, dressing them in their various wardrobes, knowing what they stare at when they are in bed or how they hold their fork. They became real to me and I liked them all. Even the ones I hated!

BS: In real life, we know that people really are composites. No one is any one way all the time. Are these characters representative of people you know? In particular, how much of Clari Drake is you?

LN: The characters are total creations in terms of their personalities and actions. As far as appearances go, one looks a little like an old boyfriend. Elspeth Waldron is fashioned after my 7th grade English teacher who was a state teacher of the year and the most wonderful woman who really encouraged and channeled my energy and abilities. The Goth is drawn from someone I once sat next to on a train. I wanted to create a story for that person. Really, no one is any one person I know. But the science book incident in the beginning? That really happened. I still see her at the grocery store.

BS: And Clari? She’s the star of the show. The super sleuth who goes on to be in other mysteries. Does she remind you of anyone?

LN: Clari and I both passionately love our families. We are devoted mothers, wives, school moms, and volunteers. We hate bullshit and phonies. We seek the truth and want things to be right. And we’ve both made mistakes in our lives. I only wish I had her sass and ability to say what I am really thinking! And we both grapple with trying to accept that we are decidedly mushier, more fragile women than we were as young reporters in our 20s and 30s.

BS: And related to that, how much of the novel is based on stuff that really happened? Is your son, really a dwarf?

LN: No, my son does not have achondroplasia. But I once worked with an editor whose child was a little person. The mother was one of the nastiest woman I’ve ever worked with. A truly disagreeable person. I wanted to re-write that story and make her loving and loveable. I also want to show Zach as a big person in a little body. His beauty shines from the inside out. My son, on the other hand, had serious medical complications inside his body, but looked perfect on the outside. I decided to play those two themes off one another with the understanding that any mother, no matter who she is as a person, suffers tremendously when her child is suffering.

BS: You also touch on all the hot topics of the day:  gender, race, and religion. You weren’t afraid to go there.

LN: Gay issues, racial slurs…the horrible things people say and think are all over this book. It is important to me to highlight the ignorance that I see even among the wealthy. Just because people are progressive or elite doesn’t always mean they are always right or proper. Clari sees through them and does her best to undermine their ignorance.

BS: Your characters are so colorful! They jumped off the page. How did you do that?

LN: I saw them so clearly. Sydney is Queen Latifah hands down. Her voice, stature, movements were in my head the entire time I wrote. Same for Dick DeNutti. He’s James Gandolfini. I wrote that part entirely with his voice and mannerisms in mind.

BS: What’s up next for Clari Drake?

LN: Well if her writer could sit still in the chair and keep writing…I have about 100 pages of Murder at the Mailbox already written, and the rest of the story mapped out on a huge board. All the characters are color-coded and the plot is pretty much worked out. Question is, how much of that first draft do I want to keep and how soon can I get to work on it! What time is it anyway?

BS: Again, I’m very excited for you, Clari Drake and all the crazy characters at the Bidwell-Coggin school in Berkeley. I hope everyone here will buy a copy HERE and spread the word to their own social network. Independent authors like you need the word to go viral. And anyone who has enjoyed dissecting the Sarah Palin birth story, will love to see how Clari Drake finds clarity, and hilarity, in Berkeley, the city everyone loves to laugh at.

LN: Thanks so much, Brad, for inviting me to talk about Finding Clarity. I’m so glad you liked the book and laughed out loud. It’s meant to be a fun ride.

BS: And the ending? It blew me away. Never saw it coming. And that alone is worth the price of admission. 

Kindle is available as a fast, free download for Mac, PC, iPad etc. Buy Finding Clarity in seconds, or send to someone as a gift.

Who paid for Trig's Medical Costs? Some possible answers, and as always, more unanswered questions (surprise!), Part I

Presented by Palinoia who has worked for the past 27 years in some area of healthcare, with most of those years within the range of health insurance benefits and coverage in the following settings:

Acute care / hospitals; skilled nursing facilities; case management and discharge planning; major insurance carriers and insurance brokerages dealing with insurance benefits, eligibility, authorizations, claims, and sales.

Updated Insurance Info, September 2011.

Original research completed: January 2009.

To date, I don't believe there has ever been a comprehensive deep-dive examination of the insurance questions around Trig. I believe that insurance coverage or lack thereof, may have played a significant factor in the birth of the pregnancy hoax - which is the only birthin' Sarah did, in my humble opinion. When you are done wading through this very lengthy post, I think you'll see WHY no comprehensive posts have been made regarding the insurance and coverage questions!

Before diving into the potential unpaid medical bills and the AFT connection, the bulleted information below is the basis on which this connection rests. There are some things to remember as you read along (supported by photographic evidence and preponderance of circumstantial evidence, and well documented statements by Sarah Palin that strongly contradict reality):

1. Sarah Palin did not give birth to the child known as Trig Palin on 4/18/2008, nor any other date.

·       Review all the shape shifting photos of the 3 week pregnancy

·       Review the ludicrous "Wild Ride" story

·       Review all of Sarah's revisions to the "Wild Ride" story

2. Sarah Palin appears to lie with ease, proven time and time again, even over inconsequential things (like the weather!)

·       Way too many instances of lying to document fully/reference here

3. Sarah Palin seems incurious and uninterested in learning, and routinely makes up her own reality of any given situation, including Paul Revere's Ride.

4. Sarah Palin has a sense of entitlement and no regard for ethics, personal boundaries, laws and regulations, i.e., "I'm the mayor, I can do whatever I want until the courts tell me I can't."

·       Again, way too many instances to document here

Assumptions (based on the preponderance of circumstantial evidence)

1. Bristol Palin may have given birth to child known as Trig Palin.

·       Rumors of her being pregnant during the suspect time frame, well ahead of Palin's VP candidacy

·       5 month absence compatible with pregnancy time frame of Trig

·       Proof per her My Space comments and her own ghost written narrative of being sexually active starting at age 15.

2. Trig Palin was likely born much earlier than the stated 4/18/2008 DOB. Possibly January, February, or early March. I lean towards a late January / Early February 2008 date of birth, prior to Bristol's auto accident 2/8/08.

·       We now have proof that Sarah "pre-wrote" her "Heavenly Creator" Trig letter, well before his stated date of birth. She wrote it and sent it to herself on 4/7/08, 11 days before he supposedly arrived. This lends more credence to her knowing all the details and his condition prior to 4/18/08.

·       I believe she knew his condition because he was already born, not because of pre-natal testing.

3. Trig Palin was born prematurely, and possibly very premature, and may have had significant health issues, requiring an NICU stay.

·       It would not be hard to believe the pre-maturity assumption if "Ruffles" was the original baby born to Bristol, based on his/her delicate fragile appearing condition, and birth defect ear.

·       One photo seems to show the lines of a nasal canula on Trig, and it appears this is a photo of the baby called "Ruffles".

4. Trig Palin may have been adopted by Sarah & Todd Palin (or not).

·       Levi says she "nagged" him and Bristol about adopting their child. He states she wanted to adopt Tripp, but there may be reason to believe it was actually Trig she was trying to adopt, since the timing of a Tripp adoption didn't make sense to many of us.

·       Sarah may have had insurance reasons to adopt Trig, aside from all the political bonus points of faking the pregnancy, explained later in this document.

5. Neither here nor there, but my assumption: if Bristol is the birth mother, then I also believe she did not know of the DS diagnosis prior to his birth, and it came as a surprise to all.

·       It would not be common to have anything other than the routine pre-natal testing done due to Bristol's age and certainly not an Amnio.

·       Hardly any of Sarah's DS diagnosis narrative lines up re: ultrasound thick neck statement; having an Amnio at all, much less at 13 weeks, etc.

With the assumption that Bristol is the birth mother and that Trig was born prematurely prior to 4/18/08, I'll outline how I arrived at the possibility of large uninsured medical bills for Trig. Not everyone will buy into this line of thinking but after a very long career in health insurance, I feel I have at least some level of expertise in reading insurance summaries, requirements, etc. I will reference all the documents and/or web links so you can read for yourselves.

First, I will talk about "industry standards" for health insurance, particularly employer group insurance. Even though group insurance contracts and benefits can vary from state to state, there are some common elements to every group insurance contract. It is VERY common for employer group insurance to provide maternity benefits (some/most states require this for group coverage). Because of that, plans that cover maternity also cover maternity/delivery costs for pregnant dependents. This means that when your 16-year-old daughter turns up pregnant, their maternity and delivery will be covered by your group plan, provided she is already on the plan as your dependent child. What 99% of insurance contracts will NOT allow is adding the newborn of your daughter (or son for that matter) to your coverage without you, the grandparent, having legal custody/guardianship/adoption of said grandchild. In my entire career, I have yet to come across an individual medical plan or employer group plan that allows adding grandchildren as eligible dependents absent the legal arrangements outlined above. Granted, there could be some plans in some states that would allow it, but it would be way outside what the industry standard is for definitions of eligible dependents. Please remember, also, too, Trig was born before the healthcare reform bill, so none of that would have applied at the time Trig was born (like requiring coverage to age 25, etc).

With that said, I did lots of research in early 2009 regarding the potential health insurance coverage options for Trig if he was born to Bristol.  I'm not going to bore you with the full on details, as you'd probably go cross-eyed reading it all and probably will anyway. I investigated the following potential insurance coverage for him: 

1. Todd’s Union BP/USW Coverage (United Steel Workers)
2. Medicaid / DenaliCare
3. ACHIA (Alaska's State High Risk Pool)
4. IHS / Native coverage
5. Sarah’s State of Alaska Health Insurance Coverage

What follows is the shortened version of my findings, and outstanding questions.

1. Todd's BP/Union Coverage via United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial & Service Workers International Union (USW) (multiple sources via Google cite Todd Palin as a member of this union):

We simply do not know if Todd had their children covered on his plan. I did find documentation that he took a leave from BP when Sarah started her Half-Governorship, but he returned to work later in 2007, so I think it is safe to guess that if he didn't waive coverage in lieu of pay, he was probably covered by his Union plan. That still doesn't answer whether the kids were covered on his plan or not. I was able to find the USW (the main parent union of his subset union) plan document, and in it, the definition of “dependent”, Article I, Section 1.05, Page 3. It clearly does NOT include “grandchild” as an eligible dependent, so even if Bristol was covered on his plan, they could not have added Trig to his plan without some kind of legal action such as an adoption:

http://assets.usw.org/Health_and_Wellfare/Fund_Documents/plandocument.pdf

I also just found some more information right on BP's own website regarding their employee medical plan, which is probably what Todd's Union/BP coverage is patterned after. Since at least 2003, BP has contributed 80% of the premium cost towards employees and dependents, with the employee having a cost share of 20%. Additionally, I found more information on eligible dependents on BP's website, which does include grandchildren, but in this narrow circumstance:

"A grandchild who lives with you in a regular parent/child relationship for at least half the year and receives at least 50% of his/her financial support from you. This includes only a grandchild related to you by blood, marriage or domestic partnership whose parents do not live with the child and for whose daily care and guidance you are legally responsible."

That would seem to preclude adding Trig to Todd's coverage as a grandchild, since Bristol did live with them, and one could guess that BP would require proof of the grandparent's legal responsibility for their grandchild.

http://hr.bpglobal.com/LifeBenefits/Sites/Core/BP-Life-benefits/Employee-benefits-handbook/BP-Medical-Program/Eligibility-and-participation.aspx

2. Medicaid / DenaliCare:

This option would appear to be a dead end, as Bristol would have been a minor child, wherein family income guidelines to qualify for coverage would be followed. Without question, SP & Todd’s income level would disqualify Bristol from coverage, even if pregnant, and is evident if one reads the income guidelines shown here (2009 shown, but 2008 income levels would have been the same, or lower, not more):

http://www.hss.state.ak.us/dhcs/denalikidcare/pdfs_denalikidcare_misc/dkc09Incomeguidelines.pdf

3. ACHIA (Alaska Comprehensive Health Insurance Assoc) State High Risk Pool

Trig would not have had coverage through ACHIA due to their clear 6-month pre-existing condition language and his lack of eligibility under the Federally Defined Eligibility rules (Federally Defined Eligibility requires 18 months prior coverage, impossible for a newborn) that would have waived the pre-existing condition waiting period. Sourced from the ACHIA website eligibility guidelines.

4. IHS (Indian Health Services) Federally Sponsored Native Coverage

 

This section was the MOST difficult to research of all. More information has since come to light since I did the original research, namely the statement in Bristol's custody paperwork that Tripp is an enrolled member of the Curyung Tribal Council, and his medical is covered by IHS and the Alaska Native Medical Center. Of course, we would hope that this coverage for Tripp is factual since it was in legal documents, but who really knows? Sarah and Bristol didn't seem to have any problem with perjury (my opinion) when it came to Troopergate and the Kernell trial, so I have to wonder whether this was a true statement or not, in spite of being in court submitted legal documents.

We could assume that if Tripp (Bristol's son) is a tribal member, and Trig was also her son, then he could have also been a member and entitled to medical services. There is much to research about tribal membership / quantum blood requirements, etc. I have seen comments in one blog that there is no quantum blood requirement for membership in the Curyung Tribal Council if the dependent is a lineal descendent of a tribal member.  Maybe someone could actually research and get the definitive answer. If that isn't true and if there IS a quantum blood requirement, how much is required for membership in this tribe? Even so, would IHS / ANMC have covered Trig on a retroactive basis if he was entitled to IHS coverage as a tribal member, if it wasn't found out until later that he couldn't be added to any other coverage and was then added to tribal membership?

We have it fairly well documented that Todd is 1/8 Yup'ik per his own grandmother (ADN article quote). That would make Bristol 1/16, and Trig, if born to her, a mere 1/32nd. Many tribes require a minimum 1/4 Quantum Blood on a CIB card from the Bureau of Indian Affairs for membership. The requirement is up to the individual Tribal Councils. Again, is this a requirement or not, and if so, what is the Quantum Blood requirement for the Curyung Tribal Council? If they do have a Quantum Blood requirement requiring a CIB card from IHS, how long does it take to get a CIB card?

In spite of the questions regarding the native coverage outlined above and Tripp's apparent enrollment, I actually feel fairly safe in saying Trig was not covered by IHS, at least not initially, even if he was eligible. Why do I say this?

Let's go back to Sarah's work history for a moment, and Todd's as well. They both (prior to Quit Date) have a fairly long work history in the private / government sector that afforded each of them employer group medical insurance. Per IHS rules, ANY other insurance will be primary over the Native Coverage, including Medicaid. That means that IHS coverage is always the last to pay if there is other insurance. One also has to seek care from an IHS facility or get approval from IHS to go to a contract facility. Let's not forget Sarah's anti-Native stance, and underlying racist tendencies. She only threw out Todd's native heritage as a political ploy to paint a different image of herself, per her usual M.O. I think her record towards anything to do with the Native population is clear and the reality is much different than the image she has tried to put forth (think cookies on a plate).  I can completely see Sarah using hers or Todd's employer group insurance for Bristol and the rest of their children to avoid having to use anything that was "Native". Given this, and the likelihood that either (or both) her State plan or Todd's plan was covering Bristol's maternity care as a covered dependent, she would never have utilized the IHS coverage.

Let's also review Sarah's sense of entitlement and incuriosity and how that factors into the whole equation. Having spent so many years in health insurance, every year I get at least 2-3 calls wanting to know how policy holders can add a grandchild to a policy. "My daughter just had her baby", or "my daughter is pregnant and about to deliver, will she be able to add the baby to my policy", often at the last minute or after the baby is delivered when the claims start being denied. Many parents just assume that their insurance carrier will add the newborn for them, even if it isn't a grandchild, and is their own child - not true!  It varies by plan/insurance carrier, but to add your own child to your plan, at least a phone call at minimum is required, and more often than not, a dependent enrollment form is required. Again, that is when it is your own child, not your grandchild.

Why do people think they can add a grandchild? Because their daughter's maternity has been covered for the duration of the pregnancy, per plan benefits, and people just assume since the pregnancy/delivery is covered, so will the baby. Also, few people ever really read their insurance contracts/evidence of coverage (imagine Sarah reading her plan documents...yeah, I didn't think so...). The catch is that said baby has to be an eligible dependent to be added to the coverage. It just isn't that far of a reach to think that Sarah would assume she could add her first grandchild to her policy and not check into it before hand. Add in an unexpected premature birth and complications on top of it, and I am surmising that IHS/Native Coverage was never involved initially, and Sarah didn't worry about adding the baby until later...much later, once she found out there was a pile of unpaid medical bills and by then, to align with her official stated date of birth for Trig and cover her fake pregnancy.

On a side note, Alaska Native Medical Center does have an NICU, but I believe given the probable use of private insurance, Trig was not born at ANMC. He may have been born at Providence instead which also has an NICU. And if Providence or any hospital other than ANMC is where he began his life, then IHS probably didn't enter the picture until much later, if at all. I believe that Providence would be considered a CHS facility (Contract Health Services) and according to IHS, even eligible members have to contact their home tribe within 72 hours of emergency admittance to a CHS facility. How many of us think Sarah (or Bristol) would have done that if they had every intention of using private insurance? I think that may answer the retroactive coverage question. It could be they tried to enroll Trig much later than his birth (based on unpaid medical bills) to try and get IHS to cover the outstanding bills to no avail if they didn't notify within the 72-hour period.

See more info in the FAQ's here, the 72-hour notification information is in bold in the Health Care Away From Home Reservation:

http://www.ihs.gov/GeneralWeb/HelpCenter/CustomerServices/FAQ/

5. Sarah Palin’s State of Alaska Health Insurance

 

After scouring the web, I actually came up with pretty definitive proof that Sarah,Todd, and their children were covered on her State of Alaska medical insurance.

You can see the proof of their coverage in an excel spreadsheet that is still publicly available on the State's website. It is the Request For Proposal for the state's health insurance contract for 2009. This RFP was posted on 10/16/2008, along with a current census of state employees, their birthdates, and zip codes.Follow the link below and the document to open is on the right hand side attachment 9-1 TPA Census-Active - Redacted.xls  You'll find Sarah as employee number #3161, date of birth 19640211 (YYYY/MM/DD), Zip 99654, in the center list for Standard Medical. She also appears in the Dental and Vision tabs also, but with different employee #'s. Website linked below:

http://notes3.state.ak.us/pn/pubnotic.nsf/0/c793a11cec100748892574e40072a993?OpenDocument

Also, I located the actual premiums that Sarah would have paid from July 2008 to July 2009 for her medical, dental, and vision family rates. Important note: These premium cards (URL's are linked below) and the excel spreadsheet above are PROOF that her children were covered on her medical plan. Originally I was bummed because the Excel Employee Census above did not have dependents shown so I couldn't be sure if Todd and Sarah's children were covered on her plan or not, but then I noticed something else when reviewing the State's premium cards/rate information. Note that all premiums are for Employee AND family. There is only one single rate for the whole family and no other option. Some health plans (many or even most, in fact) would list an Employee only rate, Employee + Spouse rate, Employee + Child(ren) rate, and then the Family rate, for example. It is very clear that the State of Alaska does not offer employees any other choice than the whole family rate, which proves that Sarah would have had all of her children plus Todd on this coverage! I hate to even admit how long it took me to "see" this extra tiny little detail. I can't stress the importance of repeatedly going over every aspect of this pregnancy and unbelievable story, because you never know when you'll finally find something really important (like ears for example, or family rate only premiums) that you missed the first, second, third time around.

Her medical alone would have been $953.00 per month for the Standard medical plan. The rate for Standard Dental was $105.00 per month, and the Standard Vision was another $33.00 for a grand total of  $1091.00 per month for her family's medical, dental, and vision benefits. You can see the premium card for July 2008 to July 2009 showing the exempt/executive employee cost on the Wayback Machine (URL below). I could not locate the 2007/2008 Premium Card for exempt/executive employees, which is what she would have been paying at the time of Trig's arrival. I did find the 2006/2007 premium card and the total would have been $1054.00 for medical/dental/vision, so we can assume that 2007/2008 premiums would have fallen somewhere between the $1054.00 and $1091.00 amounts.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090501182548/http://www.state.ak.us/drb/ghlb/select-premcard-2008-2009.pdf

I also located the amount of benefit credits Sarah received from the state towards her benefit package. She received $851.00 per month in 2007/2008 as an exempt/executive employee (linked in the WayBack URL below). If the 2007/2008 premium costs were the same as the 2008/2009 premiums, she would have had to pay $240 out of her own paychecks to cover the difference. This would have been deducted on a pre-tax basis. Hey, think about it: this could have been yet another reason she collected so many days per diem for working in her house. That per diem money certainly would have helped offset most, if not all, of her extra benefits cost. Things that make you go hmmm....

http://web.archive.org/web/20080415185419/http://www.state.ak.us/drb/ghlb/2007-2008-benefit-credits.shtml

Now we'll continue looking into Sarah's actual benefits, and eligibility requirements on her State of Alaska coverage.

When I originally researched this option back in January 2009, I did find on the SOA (State of Alaska) website, actual eligibility requirements and required documentation to add dependents. In that document, it clearly stated that children added due to adoption, had to have their legal adoption paperwork submitted with their enrollment.  It also stated that natural children required a birth certificate. That document, as a stand alone document, disappeared from the SOA website a long time ago. Just as many readers remember there being a lot more photos on the SOA website that disappeared, I distinctly remember this document being on the website as well. Unfortunately, I didn't record the link I found it on, so I can't locate via the WayBack Machine. I did find the document again in two other locations. One was embedded to the state's special open enrollment paperwork for same sex partners; the other place was embedded to enrollment paperwork for Alaska Teachers.

Not too long ago, Blade at Sarah's Scandal's revisited the requirement of a providing a birth certificate to enroll Trig into Sarah's medical plan in a couple of blog posts. Several posters there doubted that a birth certificate was required because the Dependent Verification Document form was embedded to other documents, when I finally relocated it. See discussions at these links:

http://shesnohockeymom.blogspot.com/2010/12/email-revisited.html

http://shesnohockeymom.blogspot.com/2010/12/more-on-alaskas-birth-certificate.html

Yes!!! I just finally found the link where I originally found this Dependent Verification Form as a stand alone document, not embedded to any "special enrollment" forms. I believe originally it was right in the same section of the state's website that had the dependent enrollment add/change form. I had to scour Palin's Deceptions for my original "anonymous" post there and I actually did link to the document when it was a stand alone document on the SOA website. I originally posted it on Palin's Deceptions on January 11, 2009.

Using the WayBack Machine, you can view it here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090501182917/http://www.state.ak.us/drb/ghlb/dependent-eligibility-documentation.pdf

I fully believe, still to this day, that the SOA DID require birth certificates (in addition to the enrollment form) to add newborns and legal paperwork plus a birth certificate for adopted children, and that is why the State emailed Sarah for a birth certificate. More on the birth certificate requirement coming up in Part II. Let's review the rest of what I found with regard to Sarah's state health plan and whether Trig could have been covered if she had tried to add him as her own, as her grandchild, or as an adopted child.

First we will start with the language on the Dependent Enrollment Form for AlaskaCare SelectBenefits, the state’s health insurance.

“Your dependent children up to 23 years of age only if they are:

➢ Your natural children, stepchildren, children of your same-sex partner, foster children placed through a State foster

child program, legally adopted children, children in your physical custody and for whom bona fide adoption proceedings

are underway, or children for whom you are legal, court-appointed guardian (if the child is not your or your same-sex partner’s natural born child, please include a copy of the adoption paper work or court orders);

➢ Unmarried and chiefly dependent upon the employee for support;

➢ Living with you in a normal parent-child relationship”

This language for dependent eligibility is stated on page 2 of the enrollment form here:

Located via wayback machine here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090502135528/http://www.state.ak.us/drb/forms/ben032.pdf

Clearly, the language does not include “grandchild” or “dependent’s child”. Based on this, Trig is not eligible to be added to Sarah’s plan if he was really Bristol's baby, unless he was adopted, or had adoption proceedings in process, or court appointed guardianship by Sarah and Todd.

Also, there is a 30-day enrollment opportunity based on a “qualified event” in addition to the plan’s annual open enrollment period. The State of Alaska annual open enrollment is in May/June, for a July 1st effective date every year. The point being, if Trig was not added in the original 30 day period (from when he was supposedly born) where he would have been given a retro effective date starting with date of birth, the next available enrollment date would have been under the annual open enrollment for coverage that would begin on July 1st, 2008, subject to the same eligibility criteria for dependents as stated above.

“Qualified Events” are explained in the Enrollment Guide here on Page 2:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090510022757/http://www.state.ak.us/drb/ghlb/select/enrollment-guide-2009-2010.pdf

I also located the State’s SelectBenefits Insurance Handbook, and in it is some VERY interesting language. Page numbers referenced are the Adobe PDF page #’s, not the actual document page numbers.

From page 24 pdf / Page 4 document page number, Dependent Eligibility:

Your eligible dependents for health insurance benefits

include:

• Your spouse. You may be legally separated but not

divorced.

• Your children from birth up to 23 years of age only if they

are:

— your natural children, stepchildren, foster children

placed through a State foster child program, legally

adopted children, children in your physical custody and

for whom bona fide adoption proceedings are underway,

or children for whom you are the legal, court appointed

guardian;

— unmarried and chiefly dependent upon you for support;

—    living with you in a normal parent-child relationship;

This further confirms the information for dependent eligibility included on the Dependent Enrollment form. Grandchildren and dependents of dependent children are not allowed to be added to coverage, without benefit of formal adoption or legal guardianship.

From Page 66 pdf / Page 46 document page number, Pregnancy:

Pregnancy

Pregnancy and childbirth are covered like any other medical

condition as long as you are covered under the medical plan.

No pre-existing conditions limitations are applied.

Coverage is provided for a hospital stay for childbirth for at

least 48 hours following a normal delivery or 96 hours following

a cesarean delivery.

This clause means that Bristol, as a legally covered dependent on Sarah’s plan would have had her maternity and delivery costs covered, even if there were complications. This would have applied to Todd’s union coverage as well. It is standard insurance fare for dependent children’s maternity to be covered, if maternity coverage is provided by the plan and is not a plan exclusion.

From Page 67 pdf / Page 47 document page number, coverage of Newborn Care:

Newborn Care

Newborn care provided within the first 72 hours after birth is

covered. This includes nursery charges, physician’s services

and other routine care for a newborn child and is limited to 72

hours following the birth. Newborn services provided after 72

hours are not covered.

Charges for a newborn who has suffered an accidental injury,

illness, premature birth or other abnormal condition are

covered like any other medically necessary services.

This clause provides for Newborn Care / Coverage for 72 hours, including complications, even if the newborn is NEVER added/enrolled on the plan. So, this would mean that at most, Trig would have had 72 hours of coverage, provided the insurer didn’t enforce non-coverage because he was the “dependent of a dependent” vs. a dependent of the employee or employee’s spouse. The only way to get continued coverage for him after the 72 hours is over, is to have officially added him to coverage within the 30 day qualified event period.

This next section is where things get the most interesting of all. This next statement is HUGE, even if Sarah and Todd legally adopted Trig, or had legal guardianship.

From page 39 pdf / Page 19 document page number (and lots of other places in this document) regarding “Start of Coverage” (emphasis mine in the excerpt below).

New Dependents (emphasis added)

If you add new dependents, they are eligible for benefits immediately

unless they are confined in a hospital or a similar

institution (except for newborn natural children). Coverage

then begins when they are released from the facility.

So if you read this carefully, and JUST exactly as stated, imagine…. you have a premature baby (grandchild), whom you plan on adopting and who will be in the hospital facility for some time due to premature birth….Down Syndrome…jaundice…hole in his heart…and he is not your “natural” child…coverage would not begin until release from the facility…it sounds like a big fat unpaid hospital stay to me. If Trig was very pre-mature, this could have been hugely expensive. To read more about pre-mature NICU costs, here is a good case study and the cost involved to the family:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_25/b4089046084131.htm

As stated in the employee insurance handbook and according to AlaskaCare’s guidelines, coverage does not start until after discharge from the facility - “EXCEPT FOR NEWBORN NATURAL CHILDREN”. This clause clearly does not say natural OR adopted children, or children for whom one has legal guardianship. Only the words newborn “natural” children appears as the exception to this rule. This is extremely important language, because even if Sarah and Todd legally adopted Trig so they could add him as Sarah’s dependent, he would NOT be their “natural child”, and therefore coverage would not start until he was discharged from the facility. Just how long could he have been in the hospital? Do we believe Sarah’s version of events? Or something closer to the probable reality of a birth earlier than April 18th, with a longer hospital stay (possibly MUCH longer) including NICU time? Even if they had all the adoption paperwork in place almost immediately after his unexpected pre-mature birth, he would still not be covered until his release from the facility. OUCH!

I'd like to insert some additional food for thought here as well: Levi's claim that Sarah and Todd wanted to adopt Bristol's baby. If he was really talking about Trig (rather than Tripp), the fact that Sarah's grandchild could not be added to her policy without benefit of adoption could have been a compelling factor in her quest for adoption, especially if adopting would allow insurance coverage for otherwise uninsured medical bills. Again, I have to re-iterate here, once Sarah found out that the grandchild couldn't be added to her policy, and she needed to adopt instead so she could add him to coverage, this very well could have led her to start thinking up a fake pregnancy. This would allow her to present said infant as her own, save face of having an unwed teen daughter while she was on the short list for VP, as well as her reinforce her "pro-life" creds with the right wing since she knew of the DS after the birth. Also, too, the timing just makes sense. If Trig appeared late Jan/Early Feb, or prior to Valentine's according to Anon238, Sarah started her scarf wearing on 2/19. Just about the time she would have started finding out there was no coverage for Trig. Suffice it to say, I still can't see Sarah reading and interpreting the CLEAR language in her benefits booklet with regard to Start of Coverage and the requirement around "newborn natural child" vs. coverage starting upon release from facility, once she figured out the grandchild couldn't be added. I surmise she viewed the adoption piece as the be-all-end-all to get these bills paid...but as unaware as she is, she wouldn't have realized that wouldn't have worked until Trig was on his way home from the facility, after who-knows-how-long, still leaving her with a big pile of unpaid medical bills.

You can read all of these passages here in the SOA SelectBenefits Insurance Information Booklet. Please note, at the beginning of the document, all of the amendments made to benefits or language in this booklet since 2001 are listed. Nowhere in these amendments does it reflect any language change regarding the “start of coverage” clause with regard to the words “newborn natural children”. There is no evidence that this clause ever read anything else, so we can safely assume that it had the same language in 2008 just as it does now:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090509131535/http://www.state.ak.us/drb/ghlb/select/s_bw.pdf

My final conclusions regarding insurance coverage of Trig, provided he is Bristol's baby:

1. Based on documentation, Bristol's maternity and delivery costs would have been covered by either or both Sarah's or Todd's employer plans as a covered dependent.

2. Trig could not be added to either Sarah's or Todd's plans as their grandchild unless they made legal arrangements for guardianship or adoption.

3.  Trig would have had at most 72 hours of coverage per Sarah's insurance coverage.

4.  Even if Trig were adopted, coverage would not have started until he was released from the hospital.

5. There is every potential for some very large uninsured medical bills, depending on how pre-mature Trig was.

That's it for now. I truly apologize if your heads are swimming, but I'll leave final blame with Sarah herself for that, since we all KNOW she could have stopped all the questions a long time ago. Part II will be a dissection of the "birth certificate" email from the State to Sarah, and the possible AFT connection.

Sarah Palin is a fascinating study in human behavior and I've become enamored with her story. But my own curiosity leads me to wonder if she is performing merely as the distraction for what's really going on outside the media spotlight. This leads me to wonder what the awareness level of Sarah's real role is among the professional media. Do you think journalists like Ezra Klein see and understand more of the back-story and realize they must play along by turning a blind eye to the power plays occurring behind the scenes in order to remain semi-relevant?  

I agree with the theories on what's happening behind the curtain with the power brokers and king makers. But my feeling is that the attention span of folks is so short that their eyes will glaze over before they get to the point of understanding how power is centralized in our society among a small group who use the political process to further their agenda. Sarah is just a tool. She's a tool because she's been compromised so many times over throughout her political career. I believe that she might really think sometimes that she's in control of her mission, but to believe that she has to deny her limitations and why they exist. Or maybe she really is that "slow".

Regardless, Sarah is more of a symptom instead of the problem though, but I do hope she can be exposed for what she is at some point, because any political power she welds is in the hands of a crazy, erratic person without scruples. But in the big picture, if it is not Sarah, I'm afraid that it will be Rick Perry playing the same role on behalf of the same "powerful elite". In other words, the beat goes on and we can only do what we can do. 

I don't understand all of the dynamics of politics and power by any means, but I do know that in the economic/political power game, everyone acts out of their own self-interest, and that there is power in the hands of a relatively small group in our country and the world.  As our country's economy becomes more and more inter-dependent on the geo-political situations in other regions, the lines become more and more blurred as to what is right/wrong in terms of what is "best" for our country vs what's fair to all involved.  It's disheartening to me when I see that in order for our country's economy to thrive, that other regions and peoples of the world must pay the price of living in substandard conditions under a strongman of the choosing of our country's powerful elite. But it's naive to ignore that during the times of our economic growth and prosperity, dictators supported or propped up by our military are essentially raping their own countries of its resources and the US is a direct beneficiary. 

I'm sure that this stuff has gone on for as long as man has been around--- the exploitation of the many for the benefit of the few--- but I wasn't aware of the scope of it until I became interested in politics in the late 70's. Then again, to that point I was more focused on who I was taking to the prom or who our next game was against. Anyway, I was shocked when Reagan picked Bush as his VP running mate, because these two men were so far apart ideologically.  The more I've read and researched on what brought about their unholy alliance is what has given me a somewhat cynical or jaded view of politics and power today. 

Bottom line is that I wonder if our efforts are well-placed in terms of allocating our time and energy expended in bringing Sarah down.  She has been essentially neutered politically already. I can see why she would be a good puppet to have because she has such a low-level of self-awareness.  Actually, I believe she has an aversion to reality.  Anyway, when she's gone for good, IMHO, there will be someone else to plug into her place.  Whether Sarah realizes it or not, she (along with Michele B) has, in effect, been a stalking horse for Rick Perry. I don't know that has been the case all along, but that's where we are now. Perry is just about as inept and as compromised as Palin is, but the main difference is the awareness of the public to Sarah's weaknesses vs ignorance to Perry and all his warts. Perry has already been to the Bilderberg Group and Koch Bros. meetings, and they say that's where the kings ---and queens, almost (Hillary)--- are made.  IMHO, the Kochs are just a small, visible subset of the all the power brokers in the game.

President Obama appears to be vulnerable right now, but I can't see anyone on the GOP roster beating him. My gut tells me that unless he really digs in his heels on repealing the Bush tax cuts, that he'll "get a pass" in 2012. But if he makes that a major part of his platform, it's going to be very, very ugly. But that's the best we can hope for, because without some relief for the middle class, things will continue to spiral downward.  I was shocked, and disappointed, when he caved in and extended those tax cuts for 2 years in 2010.  I just hope I'm not completely naive in that extension of the tax cuts were in the plan all along. I can understand having to make a compromise, but I'm also aware that Pres. Obama has the same pressures made on him as every other candidate for national office. Hence, both he an Hillary had to have the blessing of the Bilderberg Group, et al., before either became a viable candidate.