Quick, and without warning, Sarah Palin used the Band-Aid technique to resign from her position as governor this past Friday.

Her minute-and-a-half explanation “I want to advance in a different direction,” to “effect more change outside government” so “I’m not a lame duck,” left many questions unanswered.

Like, what the heck did she just say?

And why now? Why quit the term with 16 months left to go?

With ethics violations heading downstream, including one issued today that says Palin pocketed per diem money she received for her 45-minute commute to work, many are wondering if she’s getting out to avoid further corruption charges. This latest allegation comes two weeks after Palin was forced to pay back the $8,000 she took for her children’s travel.

Then there’s the blogger who keeps purporting rumors of Palin’s involvement in shady business dealings with the firm Spenard Building Supply.

=> Read more!

You know those gift cards that have been lying around the house since last Christmas? Many of us have them. Indeed, a recent study shows Americans hold $5 billion in unredeemed gift cards!

The existence of that much available dough has not gone unnoticed. Recently, over a dozen cash-strapped state legislatures have passed laws declaring the gift cards “unclaimed property” and, as such, subject to government seizure!

So, to try and balance their bloated budgets, these states now require businessmen to sift through their records, identify the unredeemed cards, calculate their worth and write the government a check.

What won’t they think of next?

Washington has no such law… yet.

Spend your gift cards now.

This editorial will appear in Tuesday's print edition.

It’s take five for the University Place Town Center.

City officials, determined to salvage the $250 million project, have cut strings from their fourth developer in six years. Instead of relying on a single developer to create a true commons where people can shop, eat, live and just hang out, the city will sell off the 12 acres piecemeal.

A Seattle consulting firm will help find investors interested in developing or leasing out Town Center’s parcels. The city will retain the ability to choose tenants and to enforce design standards.
The new strategy is the latest twist for a project long frustrated by disagreements between the city and its developers and most recently by the credit crisis.

To critics, the change of course is further evidence of the city’s folly in betting on its ability to lure upscale development – a bet that we viewed as a justified gamble to expand the city’s threatened tax base.

=> Read more!

This editorial will appear in Tuesday's print edition.

Truth is a valid defense
in man’s defamation case

Examine these two scenarios as if you were a reporter. How would you handle them?

• A popular entertainer dies under suspicious circumstances at a relatively young age. It is widely known, and in fact was testified to in a court case a few years before, that the star had a serious problem with prescription drugs. Do you mention that problem in your article about his death?

• A child disappears from her home while in the care of a baby sitter. In checking out the baby sitter’s background, you learn that she was convicted several years ago in a child abuse case in which a toddler she was caring for almost died. Do you mention that case?

It might turn out that the earlier problems of the entertainer and the baby sitter had no bearing on either scenario. If you mention those problems in your article, are you tarnishing the subjects’ reputations by reporting facts that might – or might not – eventually be found to be pertinent?

That question is at the center of an important First Amendment case in Pierce County Superior Court. If decided in favor of the plaintiff, it could have a chilling effect on reporting.

=> Read more!