If speeches turned into results...

We have a regular troll who claims to be close to the Palins. She changes her username all the time, but as her ISP is in Brooklyn, NYC, I gave her the nickname she uses occasionally. This person posts very childish comments about Sarah Palin and her family and also indulges in bashing President Obama from time to time.

Not everybody reads comments on blogs, so I would like to post the following exchange. Mrsgunka's reply deserves a wider audience.

Brooklyn wrote:

Anyone can make speeches. America needs results. And in 3 years, that dream has been elusive.

Mrsgunka wrote, in response to Brooklyn:

You know Brooky, if you took the cotton out of your ears and stopped singing la, la, la you might really hear what the man has to say. He doesn't speak in word salad or say derogatory things about people. It took Bush/Cheney 8 years to run this country into the ground and it may take that long to get it back together again.

If he had some co-operation from the R's we may have been a lot further along than we are. The jobs were all outsourced before he got into office so the corporations could make more money but the CEOs pocketed that money and didn't put it back into their companies to grow and employ people.

He was left with two wars that were never paid for. 9-11 had taken it's toll and the country was on "fear" cycle everyday. We had one natural disaster after another, and the costs kept adding up. We were going broke because money just wasn't coming in.

The richest weren't paying taxes and the rest of us were drained dry. The housing market crashed and people were loosing their homes. The stock market crashed, taking peoples savings/investments/501's and they couldn't live in retirement because of past investments... homes, autos, business loans couldn't be paid.

Insurance costs were too high for people to make the payment or they were turned down for treatment. You are living at the poverty level if everything is gone but Social Security and small pensions, but you make just too much for Medicaid and Medicare doesn't pay for everything.

President Obama's first goal was to get the Health care passed so people could afford the medical bills. My husband's cancer treatment was over 2 million dollars. If we didn't have health insurance, he would not be alive and I would be living on the streets with thousands of others. My cancer treatment was $788,000. Without affordable medical care we would all end up on the street. The costs don't stop when you are cured. For 5 years it is constant tests and images that cost thousands of dollars.

You may be young and see a doctor rarely, but you better hope and pray cancer doesn't hit you and you have a limit on what your insurance will pay. President Obama had to settle for much less than he wanted for the people because the Republicans fought him every step of the way with money from the lobbyists of the insurance and pharmaceutical companies.

Sarah (Palin) claims she had a baby with DS. Do you know what the medical and treatment costs with a premmie with special needs? These babies usually happen to young parents that don't have the money to pay for them. This is the reason so many young women abort their babies and most are not adoptable.

President Obama was looking out for you and me when he wanted to get the bill passed. Single payer or what you like to call socialized medicine is what we really need so everyone can be covered. It would be like Medicare. And no, it isn't free, everyone pays into it. There are legitimate poor people in this country that can't even afford that. They are not the lazy, do-nothings you want to portray anyone who are on Medicaid. President Reagan closed most of our mental hospitals and these people are the ones from the many wars that just can't face life anymore, the drug addicts, the DS children that people had institutionalized. These are the ones we need to take care of with "free" help.

My husband has severe dementia as a result of his cancer treatment and he can't do anything. Most of the time he doesn't know where he is or what day it is. He worked 12-16 hour days for 30 years to keep you safe. Now I can't afford to put him in a nursing home as I would lose our home. It costs over $5000 a month and Medicaid pays for the first 20 days then you pay the full amount after that. There are young people in nursing homes from head injuries from accidents. Do you have $5000 a month for your care? Didn't think so.

And you want to throw out Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for trying to get this healthcare bill passed. You believe everything Fox News tells you or Rush Limbaugh spouts on the radio.

President Obama gives very clear and understandable speeches trying to explain what we need to do to get our country back on track. It will cost money, lots of money, because GW Bush didn't do what he needed to do. We went into Iraq for the oil and it cost us 1000's of lives and made Halliburton very rich.

It will take cooperation from the R's to pass the bills to heal what was taken from all of us. Why don't you read what he has done in the short 2+ years he has been in office? Look around your world if you ever crawl out of your chair and see just what the government does for us and keeps us safe. Sarah Palin has absolutely no idea what it takes to be a President. It's not just photo-ops and bendy straws!

President Obama makes speeches about his plans, only to have them thwarted by the GOP.

Sarah Palin derailed the debate about healthcare reform with her "death panels" rhetoric. There weren't any death panels in the bill, but they're very real and have been operating for many years, in the insurance companies. President Obama was trying to get rid of the real death panels. Sarah Palin was paid handsomely to mount her attack against the bill. She sold her soul to the companies that run private death panels to maximize their profits by limiting the treatment people receive or by refusing treatment altogether.

Teabaggers and other low-information voters attend rallies with posters saying no to "Obamacare." They would benefit from it. They stand to lose the most if the GOP wins the day and repeals what's left of the original healthcare reform bill, together with tinkering with Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security and other safety nets.

The politicians who make the decisions on these matters have a benefits package that insulates them from any of these concerns. Some have real servants' hearts and believe that government is for the people. Others have grifters' hearts and believe that government is for the corporations (and themselves).

GOP politicians make their own speeches, saying they don't believe in government, but they're all desperate to be part of it. They love to quote Lincoln about a government of the people, by the people, for the people. In their case, nothing could be further from the truth. They fight anything that would benefit the people, every step of the way.

Should one of them make their way to the White House, should they be able to turn their speeches into "results," I would like to see how long they would be able to fund government by taxing the majority of the people to give breaks to the so called "job creators" that not only don't create any jobs but send them abroad, where labour is cheap. No jobs, no revenue. No jobs, no healthcare. No jobs, no economy.

How long would it take them to turn the exceptional United States of America into a third world banana republic, with countless homeless people begging and dying in the streets?

Small government for the little people

The GOP and a certain undecided political celebrity have this weird mantra about small government and disparage the "Feds" at any given opportunity. And yet, they seek federal government jobs. The most vocal among them want the biggest federal job of them all, that of President.

"Keep government out of our lives," they chant. "Decisions should be made by individual states," they moan. But state jobs are not satisfying enough for them, they want to go to Congress, to the Senate or to the White House.

They twist the poor old Constitution, mangle the history of the country and make stuff up in the pursuit of power inside the bad, bad federal government they despise so much.

When the Bush administration was spying on "we the people," they didn't say boo. They didn't ask the government to stay out of people's lives. They want to repeal Roe vs Wade and invade women's wombs. They want to regulate people's sexuality, interfere in education and make some religions better then others.

Staying out of people's lives has nothing to do with the people. The translation of their chant is: "Stay out of the corporations' lives." No regulations, no taxes, no obligations for their masters. People only qualify as "we the people" when they have millions of dollars in the bank. The more money they have, the more "people" they become. Their servant's hearts want to serve these people.

Small government is for the little people: Less services and less benefits for their tax dollars. All the juicy benefits go to the other, "proper" people, the ones that don't pay taxes.

Take from the poor and give to the rich. The fiscally conservative mob want to balance the books by cutting services and entitlements so they can continue to give the corporations and the billionaires their daily blow-jobs. I'm sorry I used such coarse language, but what these politicians advocate is obscene.

So they want to go to Washington DC to screw the "little" people, interfere in their personal lives, squeeze every last little dollar out of them and reward them with no services, deny them the "entitlements" they paid for, so the big people, the so called "job creators" can have it all?

Invading the little people's lives and screwing them royally give these hypocrites a feeling of power. Staying out of the big people's lives gives them... $omething.

It may explain why they want to make the sacrifice of joining an institution they despise. They have servants' hearts that long to serve themselves and their corporate masters.

Serve "we the people?" What an obscene joke!

Sarah Palin's ignorance issues - Israel has a zoning problem

Zoning



A nonconforming use is when there's a conflict between existing property use and a new zoning law. It's common for the existing use or qualities of a property to conflict with new zoning regulations. Two ways a use may be nonconforming are:

- The nature or a characteristic of a building doesn't meet zoning laws
- The activity going on in the building doesn't conform to the law


OK, maybe Israel has a zoning issue after all, for nonconforming use of land. But it's not a local issue:


The establishment of Israeli settlements are held to constitute a transfer of Israel's civilian population into the occupied territories and as such are illegal under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

In 2000, the editors of the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Palestine Yearbook of International Law (1998–1999) said "the "transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside this territory" amounts to a war crime. This is obviously applicable to Israeli settlement activities in the Occupied Arab Territories."

In 2004 the International Court of Justice, in an advisory, non-binding opinion—noted that the Security Council had described Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in the occupied territories as a "flagrant violation" of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The Court also concluded that the Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (including East Jerusalem) have been established in breach of international law and that all the States parties to the Geneva Convention are under an obligation to ensure compliance by Israel with international law as embodied in the Convention.

Israel denies that the Israeli settlements are in breach of any international laws. The Israeli Supreme Court has yet to rule decisively on settlement legality under the Geneva Convention.

*****

Israel captured and occupied the territories [Gaza Strip and West Bank] in the 1967 Six-Day War. In 1980 Israel annexed East Jerusalem, but United Nations Security Council Resolution 478 declared it "null and void" and required that it be rescinded, stating that it was a violation of international law. The annexation lacks international recognition.

Israel's legal rationale for the annexation of East Jerusalem principally revolves around the notion that conquest resulting from a defensive use of force entitles the victor to unilaterally annex occupied territory. However, this reasoning has not been recognized by any other country, since unilateral annexation of territory conquered during war, even in defensive conquest, is prohibited by customary and conventional international law.


"I would take the opposite approach, by the way."

Well, well... the foreign relations expert doesn't acknowledge the Geneva Convention or the United Nations Security Council. Sarah Palin's whims would override international law and all the conventions agreed by the international community. [Does she think the 10th Amendment applies to Israel?]


Sarah Palin didn't know how to run Wasilla and had to hire a city manager. She didn't know how to run Alaska and had a shadow governor (marginally less incompetent then herself). She abused her power on more than one occasion and the ethics rules didn't apply to her...



Sarah Palin didn't know "what is it exactly that the VP does everyday day" and she definitely doesn't have a clue about what the job of an elected president of a country (any country) entails. Under Sarah Palin, the US would be a rogue state. Sarah seems to believe that the executive is the only power in the country, she wouldn't need a Secretary of State, the Congress, the Senate or the Supreme Court - "I would do this, I would do that" - all in the vacuum of her own deluded, misguided, ignorant mind...

Prisongate expanded

Last week I wrote about children in the care of the state in Alaska. Children grow up and may find themselves in the care of the state later in life. One example of this is prison.

Joe Schmidt was appointed by Sarah Palin to head the Department of Corrections and continues to fill the position under Parnell. Schmidt was third in line for the position of governor and would have become lieutenant governor automatically when Sarah Palin quit her job. He declined the offer and Lieutenant General Craig Campbell assumed that role instead.

The Alaska Correctional Officers Association gave the state corrections commissioner Joe Schmidt a “no confidence” censure vote on Tue, April 22, 2008. ACOA union members voted 514 to 19 against Schmidt.

Here's a link to a recent video about the state of the prisons in Alaska, so you can acquaint yourself with Joe Schmidt and some of the problems his department faces.

Alaska Prison Population Profile

Schmidt's department has "corrections" in its heading. What are they trying to correct? Primarily, prisons exist to isolate individuals from the rest of society when their behaviour is deemed inappropriate. Secondarily, prisons may pusnish and/or rehabilitate such individuals. Are prisons working as far as the "correcting" goes?

The United States as a whole leads the world in the number of its citizens living in incarceration.

(Source: Wikipedia)

Although the figures for Alaska lag behind the rest of the US, when we consider the size of the population of Alaska, these statistics become disturbing.

(Click here for Alaska statistics and for the rest of the country)

The cost of incarceration per inmate in Alaska range from approximately 44 to 49 thousand dollars per year (depending on the source) as opposed to an approximate average of 28 thousand dollars per inmate per year in the US.

The number of prisoners with mental health problems both in the US and in Alaska is also disturbing and add to the running costs of the prisons. One could argue that this is money well spent if it "cures" people and they may returned to society safely.

I found a case that appears to conflict with this argument:

Etta Bavilla was first subjected to forced psychiatric drugging in 1997 when she was 17. She killed her one year old son in July of 1998, while psychotic. It seems probable that if she hadn't been forced to take psychiatric drugs her son would still be alive. She entered a plea agreement for a 60 year sentence with 20 years suspended with the court to decide whether she was guilty but mentally Ill. The court did find her guilty but mentally ill and she was sentenced on August 14, 2000, to 60 years in prison with 20 years suspended.

This looks like a case from the previous post spilling into this one. Will 40 or 60 years in prison "correct" Etta's problems? The way her mental health issues were managed before Etta found herself in prison for life not only did not correct any problems she had, but very likely contributed to her subsequent incarceration. The treatment Etta was receiving in 2007 didn't seem adequate for correcting anything in the long term.

Etta's story is not unique. It repeats itself in men's prisons and some stories are horrific.

The powers-that-be in Alaska appear to be on top of things, working towards reducing the prison population through prevention programs and the reassigning of prisoners with mental health issues to other departments. It looks very good on paper, but previous research into the various state departments and other bodies involved in this project, including the Law Courts, makes me a bit skeptical, to say the least.



Regardless of the situation in Alaska, the chart showing the US as the top incarcerator in he world led me to a few questions.

Sarah Palin quoted Victor Hugo in her 2008 State of the State address: "He who opens a school door, closes a prison."

The size of the prison population in the US (a very large, modern democracy) reflects badly on the US education system, if Victor Hugo's quote is anything to go by. Is it because different states have different ways of addressing the same issues and the disparity in approach to education contributes to the appalling statistics?

The prospect of going to prison should act as a deterrent, so something is not working, as the prison population keeps on growing...

The high percentage of prisoners with mental health issues seems to indicate a defficiency in other departments and this creates a vicious circle. How can an organized, modern society fail so many?

Another factor that may contribute to the present state of affairs is the proliferation of private prison facilities with a focus on profits. The employment of prisoner labour, in conditions very akin to slave labour, has created a whole economy where output is guaranteed and the costs of maintaining such a workforce are absorbed by state governments that have to pay to house the inmates.

It may be argued that providing opportunities for work and for learning new skills assist prisoners in readjusting to life outside bars when they are released. A great number of prisoners serve sentences disproportionate to the seriousness of their crimes, so by the time they're released, they're hopelessly institutionalized or have little time left to contribute to society.

Margaret Thatcher famously said the there is no such thing as society. I beg to differ. In my opinion, government exists to see that in society we interact in accordance to certain principles and values. Government provides services that can't be left to individuals. Government organizes, much in the same way a community organizer does, only on a larger scale. Without society, there would be no need for government. Unless government existed only for the purpose of defending the borders and attacking other countries to force democracy down their throats. Oh, and according to Sarah Palin, to stay out of people's lives, in particular the lives of the people running the big corporations. In the world where Sarah Palin's is president, all that is needed is a vast army, huge prisons, a womb police to make sure every woman chooses life and society would look after itself, each person surviving according to their own work ethic in the middle of a chaotic free-for-all. No taxes and no services. The big corporations would get richer and if the little people really need help, they could turn to Sarah's good mate's Samaritan Purse and all would be fine.

If Alaska is, as Sarah Palin told Katie Couric, "a microcosm of America," the messy prison system, where mental health issues are mixed with crime, the problems of alcoholism, sexual and domestic violence, substance abuse and other factors may be (conservatively) extrapolated to the rest of the country. The percentages in Alaska for all these are much higher than elsewhere in the US. But in Alaska as in the rest of the country, services appear to be largely uncoordinated.

There are plans for prison reform in Alaska and the US and one of its proponents is none other than Newt Gingrich! Some of the proponents focus on costs, others on the welfare of the prisoners. If they come together in a fruitful meeting of minds, look at the prison system as part of a whole and strive to implement programs to prevent crime rather than simply "correct" the behaviour of prisoners, if they arrive at some answers on how to offer real opportunities for prisoners to readjust to life in their communities while retaining their dignity, maybe there is some hope not only for society, but for a civilized society.

If there is to be a civilized society in the US (or anywhere), those who lack vision and the will to serve all sectors of society should not pursue an office in goverment. Those who have a heart to serve only the interests of a very narrow section of this civilized society as well as their very own interests have no place in government at all. They should go home and remain silent. Now.

Please read all Prisongate posts on Palingates. (This post will appear at the top when you click on the link. Scroll down for previous posts)

This is a good video that shows the problems involving private prisons. (h/t to Say No to Palin in Politics)

[PLEASE NOTE - Comments are still coming through on Blogger and don't show immediately on Disqus (if at all). Please click on the title of the post and scroll down to comment on Disqus instead of clicking on "comments" at the bottom of the post.]

Alaska (and more)

I would like to address some issues about Alaska and dispel some misconceptions that are expressed from time to time.

Alaska has unique conditions that don't compare well to the states in the Lower 48. Several factors come into this, such as the size of the state, the climate and also the size, composition and distribution of the population, etc.

I had a good look at the statistics for employment in Alaska and studied the sources of revenue for the state. Here's a chart showing employment percentages, industry by industry, in Alaska and the rest of the country.

(Please click on the image to enlarge)

The largest employer in Alaska is the government, followed by retail and a combination of service industries, healthcare and social assistance, construction, some manufacturing, forestry & fishing, then oil and mining combined (under "mining").

Here's a map showing the concentration and distribution of jobs by sector in Alaska. Unfortunately, the colours for the farming and service industries don't appear on the map. Either they are too spread out to be pinpointed on a map (services), irrelevant (the farming industry is almost non-existent) or somebody missed them out when designing the map.

In 2000 Native Americans accounted for 15.6% of Alaska's population—the highest percentage of any state. Alaska Natives were estimated in 2000 to number about 98,043, up from 86,000 (16%) in 1996.

Although the Alaska Native population is well distributed around the state, the income and poverty maps below show interesting percentages in Western Alaska (where a big crisis hit in January 2009) compared to the rest of the state.

The size of the Alaska Native population excludes great numbers from most employement sectors and affects the size of the workforce overall, which is important, considering that the total population of Alaska is very small for the size of the state.

Employment alone doesn't reflect the health of the state in financial terms. We have to look at the sources of revenue. Many industries that provide employment are not self-sustaining and don't generate revenue (quite the contrary) and don't generate wealth. The sector which generates most of the self-sustaining wealth - manufacturing - is quite inexpressive in Alaska. The sector generating by far the most revenue is the one dedicated to the exploration and exploitation of some natural resources - oil and other minerals. 87% of Alaska's revenue come from this sector. The remaining 13% come from taxation, federal dollars and other bits and bobs.

As big oil companies contribute so much to the state's revenue, they feel entitled to set the political agenda and Alaskan politicians in general seem only too happy to do their bidding. Prominent Alaskan politicians fight to open up federal lands, as in the case of ANWR, they sue the federal government over the listing of some species as endangered, turn a blind eye to the pollution that devastates the environment, not to mention the many corruption scandals that involved a number of them.

Oil has been very good for the Alaskan economy, but it's a resource which is dwindling and other factors make it an unpopular source of energy these days. When oil becomes a thing of the past, what will happen to Alaska? Perhaps the people who have the power to make decisions should start planning for the future and looking into alternatives. The future has the habit of arriving, you can't stop the clock. Without some planning and some diversification, Alaska's future could be very bleak indeed.

What are the main priorities of the average Alaskan? They're exactly the same as anybody else's anywhere in the world: Food, clothing and shelter for themselves and their families. Once these three priorities are met, people start desiring other things, such as healthcare, education and leisure. The more people satisfy their priorities, the bigger their desire for material things becomes, as does their desire for power.

In a state like Alaska, where job opportunities appear to be limited or largely concentrated in a couple of sectors, it comes as no surprise that Alaskans are sometimes defensive about criticism of the oil industry or are reluctant to challenge and expose the largest employer in the state, the government.

Alaskans are not the culprits in any political or economical mess in their state any more than the citizens of any state are responsible for theirs. They vote and they hope, just like everybody else. I'm sure they would like to find long term solutions for their problems in the same way as the people in other states and countries would like to find for their own. I believe the way to change things is to talk to people and encourage them to go out and vote when the time comes. Apathy doesn't change anything, anywhere.

What role do Sarah Palin and the other politicians play (or played) in the state of the economy and the quality of life of the people of Alaska?

They make laws, formulate policies and approve budgets. Since Alaska became a state there have been several administrations with their own priorities. In the history of Alaska, before and after statehood, there have been major events that influenced many factors. The gold rush brought many people from out of state, as did the discovery of vast reserves of oil. These events changed the composition of the population, their desires and aspirations and also changed the behaviour and priorities of those in power.

Sarah Palin is no more to blame for any of the ills affecting Alaska than any other politician who came before her short stint in the top job. As a matter of fact, her record is inexpressive and mediocre when compared to others. The only difference is that she drew attention to Alaska and outsiders started asking questions about a state that didn't interest them before Sarah Palin, apart from being an interesting destination for adventurous vacations...

Why does any state (or country) raise revenue? Is it to stuff their coffers and say: "Look! We have a lot of money!" I don't think so. The role of government is very complex, but I like to believe that revenue is raised to provide services to the people living in the state and improve the quality of their lives. Defending the people and the assets of the state are important as well. Sarah Palin believes the role of government is to stay out of everything. OK, she makes concessions regarding defense. Is that it? Her record shows that providing services was not one of her priorities. Education? Healthcare? Preserving the environment and wildlife? The welfare and preservation of Alaska Natives and their way of life? No, none of the above.

Sarah Palin's record as governor and her Facebook notes, op-eds, speeches and interviews since going rogue point to a different priority: To carry the water for the big corporations. Spudnut and sputnik were added to her repertoire so she could pretend to be on the side of the little guys (and bash the Soviet Union). Small businesses make a difference to the economy when considered in the context of the economy as a whole, but it's the behaviour of the big guys that makes the most difference in the US. The marriage of the big corporations and the Supreme Court combined with various powerful lobbies for special interests in Washington, DC paint a pretty picture, eh? Sarah Palin plays a minor role in all this, albeit performed in a very loud and penetrating voice.

From Alaska to the US to the world, I tried to look at people's needs and priorities, the role of government and the priorities of the people in power, be it economical or political. I looked at Sarah Palin's role in Alaska and in the more recent big picture. My analysis and opinions are based on the new buzzword Sarah Palin loves so much: Common sense. Without any first hand knowledge of Alaska or any profound expertise in economics or politics, I looked at some facts, studied the records, put two and two together and now I'd like to encourage you to weigh in with your own insights and opinions.

Here are all the links to the sources used in the research involved in preparing this post, listed and clearly identified for ease of reference. Links to older posts on Palingates, other blogs and Palin's Facebook note are dotted around the text.

Demographic and Economic Profile - Alaska

Revenue Sources Book - Alaska Department of Revenue - Tax Division

State Government Employment Data - Alaska - 2009

Alaska Ethnic Groups

Population, Income, Education, Employment, and Federal Funds

Alaska Oil & Gas Association - State Revenue

ADN article - Oil Industry Employment

The News Tribune article - Alaska Unemployment Rate

Tribute to Martin Luther King -- Can The USA Still Apply His Teachings?

By Kathleen

Palingates reader Linda1961 left a comment yesterday which included the following quotes from Martin Luther King which seem even more relevant now than ever. America is at a crossroads. The tick tick ticking of the clock grows louder and it seems as if some people literally want to break the backs of others for their own purposes. How do reasonable people deal with the ugly voices? How can they be stood up against without losing our own moral compass? Without becoming the very same? It is easy to push back with the same tactics but the reality is that the situation will grow more intense as the voices on both sides grow louder in response to each other and bitterness sets in. Martin Luther King had his own ideas about how to solve the issues which beset society. He realised that society at the time was heading towards a dark future and that such a future could be deflected by a society in which altruistic values are more considered than selfish ones:

"Every man must decide whether he will walk in the light of creative
altruism or in the darkness of destructive selfishness."

and that

"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate

cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."

Wise words that need to be reflected on. King believed that we can change a bad situation around by reflecting light on it, by expressing love for people even if they are against us. I know that this is not an easy thing to do. We are conditioned to defend ourselves and in doing so we forget the fact that our defensive actions can hurt, confuse and create vast distances between ourselves and other people, even if they are not intentional. Often we think that we can resolve an issue by explaining ourselves when we should in fact be paying some attention to the other point of view. We need to set aside our hurt and find common ground if we truly wish to move forward. Both parties in any dispute need to take that approach if they sincerely wish reconciliation.

This does not mean that we have to accept "evil" deeds which are performed for their own sake.

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who
helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against
it is really cooperating with it."

"Evil" should be exposed to the light of day. Note that King mentions evil here -- I believe that he is referring to the lynching and bombing incidents which were used to terrorise black people on a regular basis during the 50's and 60's. He wanted to make it clear that wrongdoers have to be held accountable by society and good people should speak out against the "evil" that the wrongdoers have performed. Good people need to stand up and be counted. Their voices need to be heard above the sounds of people who only offer hate as a solution.

Permission to use this cartoon was kindly granted by V Harville

Can we apply the calls from some to take up arms against liberals and the government as "evil"? The people who make such demands believe that they have a right to do so. They regard it as a right like equality and don't understand that many feel threatened that such calls could result in the same kind of violence that ruined countries such as Northern Ireland for thirty years. Once the violence starts it is not easy to resolve. Northern Ireland still faces issues despite the peace process of the 90's.

If both sides really want to avoid such a situation then they will both get together and the political debate will ensue. It is probably not enough to say that people should be talking in a more respectful way. More than likely a proper forum needs to be held during which both sides listen to each other without pointing the finger and high rhetoric.

I'm not sure if such an event will happen but in honour of Martin Luther King and his beliefs I wish it could.

+++++++++++

Malia Litman, the blogger at http://malialitman.wordpress.com/, contacted me today to tell me about an upcoming book signing of her recent humorous rebuttal of Sarah Palin that will take place in Anchorage next Saturday. Malia is an excellent writer and we are happy to help her in whatsoever small way we can in order to get the word out.

Making a Difference in Anchorage

Alaskans are the people who seem to know Sarah Palin best, and object to her most. Democrats, Independents, and Republicans are each susceptible to PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome). Hope is coming to Alaska. Malia Litman, blogger at malialitman.wordpress.com and author of The Ignorance Virtues of Sarah Palin: A Humorous Refudiation of the Half-Term Ex-Governor will be at Borders at 1100 E. Dimond Blvd, Anchorage on Sat. Jan. 22^nd at 2:00. Malia will give a presentation and sign books, guaranteed to provide much needed relief for PDS. If you are one of the unfortunate Americans afflicted with this disability condition, come to Borders on Saturday. Together we can find comfort and therapeutic relief for our ailment. Please join Malia.

Malia Litman

dlitt@aol.com

malialitman.wordpress.com

www.justsaynotobs.com

.

Death in Sarah Palin's Alaska

The ADN published a list of homeless people who died in the past few months in Anchorage.

Twelve people who were homeless or familiar with life on the streets have died outdoors in Anchorage this spring and summer, most of them in woods and parks. Only one death has been classified as a homicide. (Click here for the full list)

Another article asks: What's killing the homeless in Anchorage?

The city's homeless alcoholics are struggling with a complicated disease and can't see the consequences of their actions, said Melinda Freemon, director of the Homeward Bound residential program that helps them get off the streets. Many are in emotional tatters. They can't think beyond getting the next bottle of booze, the next meal, a place to camp.

Freemon says they are dying because of the "long-term health effects of chronic alcoholism ... the cumulative effect of years of living in unsafe conditions."

Anchorage, she said, is sorely lacking in help. People must wait months for a treatment bed. The number of detox spots in the area has dropped from 35 to 10.

This is the story in Anchorage. I would like to know about the rest of Alaska.

Another thing I would like to know is if the deaths of homeless people in Alaska, who clearly have mental health problems, are in any way related to the $650,000 "lost" and recently found in Sarah Palin's last budget.

Housing programs for the homeless received a $650,000 boost after it was discovered the money had been incorrectly deleted from then-Gov. Sarah Palin's budget proposal.

The board of directors for the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority approved the money and it was included in a budget forwarded to Palin's office.

There, the money was apparently compressed into a smaller sum with another pool.

David Teal of the Legislative Finance Division says the lapse escaped everyone's attention until after the session.

Most of the deaths in Anchorage ocurred before the quitter governor resigned.

A lot of deadly stuff goes on in Alaska. The figures for suicides and alcoholism are staggering.

The tally of deaths during Sarah Palin's short time in office is mounting. Some deaths (254) were the result of mismanagement of Medicaid and Medicare state programs (funded by bad, bad federal money). Now it seems that money destined for the homeless with mental health problems has been lost then found again. In the meantime, 12 people died in Anchorage alone.

How many more examples of mismanagement and inefficiency have yet to surface? How many more people have paid with their lives for Sarah Palin's inability to govern? She's no longer the governor, but the effects of her 31 months in office continue to be felt by the most vulnerable among Alaskans.

These things make any speculation about her teeth, facelifts, hair extensions and all the rest of it seem very trite indeed. But such speculation serves to highlight Sarah Palin's priorities in and out of office. How could such a shallow person cause so much damage in such a short time?

I will have to continue to write about her frivolous side together with the more serious issues or my head would explode.
.

Sarah Palin's deadly healthcare

$arah Palin appears to have abandoned Twitter in favour of Facebook, where she can publish ghostwritten pieces in whole sentences and paragraphs with puctuation and proper syntax. One thing hasn't changed: her complete lack of respect for the president.

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” ..."

From ADN on July 14:

State programs intended to help disabled and elderly Alaskans with daily life -- taking a bath, eating dinner, getting to the bathroom -- are so poorly managed, the state cannot assure the health and well-being of the people they are supposed to serve, a new federal review found.

A particularly alarming finding concerns deaths of adults in the programs. In one 2 1/2 year stretch, 227 adults already getting services died while waiting for a nurse to reassess their needs. Another 27 died waiting for their initial assessment, to see if they qualified for help.

The families of the 254 elderly and disabled people who stood in front of Sarah Palin's death panel and didn't stand a chance would have something to say about her statement on healthcare reform. The 2 1/2 year stretch coincide with the length of time she "served" as governor.

Considering that Sarah Palin stated to Katie Couric that healthcare reform was necessary to shore up the economy, her understanding of this subject is non-existent.

When Sarah Palin speaks in her own words she's funny. When she publishes other people's words as her own, she's sinister.

Funny or sinister, she's dangerous. The death toll stands at 254.

Read a good post on this subject from AKPetMom.
.

Make up your mind, Sarah Palin.

$arah Palin's quitspeech in Fairbanks on July 26:

It is because I love Alaska this much, sir (at heckler) that I feel it is my duty to avoid the unproductive, typical, politics as usual, lame duck session in one’s last year in office. How does that benefit you? No, with this decision now, I will be able to fight even harder for you, for what is right, for truth. And I have never felt like you need a title to do that.

Meg Stapleton, Facebook on August 1:

Less than one week ago, Governor Palin asked the media to “quit making things up.” We appreciate that the more professional journalists decided to question this story before repeating it.

Thomas Van Flein, August 1:


Does she need a title or not?

Come on, $arah, either you fight for the truth as plain $arah Palin, no titles, or you should have thought twice before giving up the title of governor. You quit. No more governor, ok?

On the other hand, the person you keep referring to by his surname alone does have a title and a proper job. He's the President.
.

$arah Palin, brazen and gutteral

The twit tweets:

Great day w/bear management wildlife biologists; much to see in wild territory incl amazing creatures w/mama bears' gutteral raw instinct to protect & provide for her young; She sees danger? She brazenly rises up on strong hind legs, growls Don't Touch My Cubs & the species survives & mama bear doesn't look 2 anyone else 2 hand her anything; biologists say she works harder than males, is provider/protector for the future.

First misused word:

Adjective
gutteral

1. Common misspelling of guttural.

Adjective
guttural

1. Of or relating to the throat.
2. Having a harsh grating quality, as certain sounds produced in the back of the mouth.

Gutteral raw instinct???

Guttural is an adjective used to qualify sounds, I can't see how it applies to instincts. It comes from the Latin word "guttur", meaning throat.

$arah Palin probably thought it had something to do with one of the slang meanings of guts?

Noun
Gut

1.
a. The alimentary canal or a portion thereof, especially the intestine or stomach.
b. The embryonic digestive tube, consisting of the foregut, the midgut, and the hindgut.
2. guts The bowels; entrails; viscera.
3. Slang
a. Innermost emotional or visceral response: She felt in her gut that he was guilty.
b. guts The essential components or inner working parts: "The best part of a good car . . . is its guts" (Leigh Allison Wilson).
4. guts Slang
a. Courage; fortitude.
b. Nerve; audacity.

From Middle English guttes, entrails, from Old English guttas.

Next word:

Adjective
brazen

1. shameless or impudent: brazen presumption.
2. made of brass.
3. like brass, as in sound, color, or strength.

$arah Palin's use of the English language in her tweets is always very interesting...

When is she going to tweet about the Medicaid/Medicare crisis affecting so many vulnerable Alaskans?

Oh, but she did, over a month ago:

"Here’s a link re: older AKns & Medicare http://tinyurl.com/ljott2, & a great read by former LG of NY http://tinyurl.com/c44ah5"
10:41 PM Jun 8th from TwitterBerry

"True reform should benefit, not neglect, older Americans, the very bedrock of society! In AK, 80,000 AKns age 60+, to be affected by reform."
10:40 PM Jun 8th from TwitterBerry

From the ADN:

State programs intended to help disabled and elderly Alaskans with daily life -- taking a bath, eating dinner, getting to the bathroom -- are so poorly managed, the state cannot assure the health and well-being of the people they are supposed to serve, a new federal review found.

A particularly alarming finding concerns deaths of adults in the programs. In one 2 1/2 year stretch, 227 adults already getting services died while waiting for a nurse to reassess their needs. Another 27 died waiting for their initial assessment, to see if they qualified for help.

$arah Palin has been the governor of Alaska for the past 31 months. It appears she has brazenly ignored the disabled and the elderly in the Alaska she loves so much. Where were her "gutteral" raw instincts to protect her constituents? How has she provided for/protected anybody's future? 254 vulnerable Alaskans no longer have a future. This happened in her watch.

Come on, $arah, tweet us the answer!
.

When will Sarah Palin shut up?

Sarah Palin never misses an opportunity to criticize President Obama and her rhetoric is inflammatory, as usual.

Regarding the stimulus package, she says things such as "That's a very scary place for America to be, for our economy and for our national security." and "That - that's not a safe place to be." On defense cuts, she says the President shows signs of weakness.

We have already seen some of the extreme right wing lunatics in action, from teabagging parties to more serious incidents. Sarah Palin may not advocate extreme actions directly, but her words resonate with some deranged people.

Sarah Palin doesn't understand the basic principles of economics, doesn't understand what happens in times of recession or how it could lead to a full blown depression if the right steps are not taken quickly. She doesn't understand the concept of diplomacy or how fragile world peace is at the moment.

The governor promotes and celebrates the likes of Michael Reagan, for whom hate speech is a way of life.

For the third time in one week, I beg her to shut up. Her own statements are peppered with meaningless soundbites and she employs words that are red flags to ignorant people (who happen to own guns, protected by her pet 2nd Amendment).



On a lighter note, her reference to Bristol looking after her young family starts @5:15. In normal speech people don't normally refer to one child as a family...
.

Sarah Palin and the Nobel prize winner

Sarah Palin has kindly provided a link to a very interesting article, albeit in a snarky tone:

In the meantime, read this: Energy Secretary Chu wants to REGULATE roof, road color to slow global warming... http://tinyurl.com/q5ad59 (twit)

We all know that Sarah Palin is the foremost energy expert in the country, while Professor Chu is a mere Nobel prize recipient, so the governor's rejection of Prof Chu's ideas could generate a very exciting debate... the second runner-up in the Miss Alaska pageant takes on the Nobel laureate!

Times online reports:

Steven Chu, the Nobel prize-winning physicist appointed by President Obama as Energy Secretary, wants to paint the world white. A global initiative to change the colour of roofs, roads and pavements so that they reflect more sunlight and heat could play a big part in containing global warming, he said yesterday.

Professor Chu said that this approach could have a vast impact. By lightening paved surfaces and roofs to the colour of cement, it would be possible to cut carbon emissions by as much as taking all the world’s cars off the roads for 11 years, he said.

Pale surfaces reflect up to 80 per cent of the sunlight that falls on them, compared with about 20 per cent for dark ones, which is why roofs and walls in hot countries are often whitewashed. An increase in pale surfaces would help to contain climate change both by reflecting more solar radiation into space and by reducing the amount of energy needed to keep buildings cool by air-conditioning.

Professor Chu said that his thinking had been influenced by Art Rosenfeld, a member of the California Energy Commission, who drove through tough new building rules in the state.

Dr Rosenfeld is also a physicist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, of which Professor Chu was director. Last year Dr Rosenfeld and two colleagues from the laboratory, Hashem Akbari and Surabi Menon, calculated that changing surface colours in 100 of the world’s largest cities could save the equivalent of 44 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide — about as much as global carbon emissions are expected to rise by over the next decade.

Sarah Palin doesn't believe global warming is caused by man, so she won't go with the idea that man can do anything to improve matters, specially if it involves REGULATION.

Sarah Palin only approves of more regulation when it concerns what women can and cannot do with their own bodies.

Full article: Times online
.

Sarah Palin philosophy

Here are a few things Sarah Palin said during her campaign for governor, from the official campaign website:

PHILOSOPHY IN GOVERNING - I look forward to building a team that will put Alaskans first! I believe in fairness and inclusion and will call on the public to work together for Alaska's common good. I refuse to use divisive tactics that polarize us for political gain. As Mayor of Wasilla, the fastest growing area of Alaska; as President of the Alaska Conference of Mayor; as Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission; and as a business owner and mom, I approached issues with a fair, balanced, common sense approach. I love the challenge of hiring and appointing the best people to serve with me and I will bring this positive approach to Alaska as Governor. In building a public service team, my commitment to my home state is to always put Alaskans first and never allow special interests to take advantage of us. I know that government has its place, and it should be limited. My focus is on education, public safety, infrastructure and access to our resources. As manager of our vast public resources, the Governor must act as an effective CEO on behalf of all Alaskans in negotiating the best deals for the state, and I am prepared to tackle that challenge.

Let's look at some of the statements:

I refuse to use divisive tactics that polarize us for political gain.

Troopergate? Appointing a Republican to the Juneau Senate seat? W.A.R.? No, Sarah Palin is not divisive at all...

I love the challenge of hiring and appointing the best people to serve with me and I will bring this positive approach to Alaska as Governor.

We've noticed how much she loves to appoint her cronies to "serve" with her, but wouldn't go as far as saying they're the best people.

My focus is on education...

Why did Sarah Palin try to refuse the stimulus money for education? When cornered into accepting it, she wanted to replace the state education dollars with the federal money, what kind of focus is that?

From the page "About Sarah", one of her quotes:

“Alaskans deserve transparency and accountability from their leaders. It’s a philosophy I will promote as Governor." ~ Sarah Palin

It seems Alaskans didn't look very closely at her years as mayor of Wasilla before voting Sarah Palin into office as governor.

"Transparency" and "accountability" were hallmarks of her style back then.

The building of her house in Lake Lucille was shrouded in transparency: Sarah Palin blocked an effort to require the filing of building permits, so to this day we don't know who built it.

When challenged about spending more than $50,000 in city funds to redecorate her office without the council's authorization, Sarah Palin replied: "I'm the mayor, I can do whatever I want until the courts tell me I can't."

Documents show that Sarah Palin used city computers in her mayor's office to manage her campaign for lieutenant governor and billed taxpayers for mailings, phone calls and literature.

Sarah Palin hasn't changed at all. She's still as ethically challenged now as she was then. The same goes for being polarizing. She uses whatever soundbites seem appropriate for the occasion.

Since being catapulted into the national scene in the vice presidential campaign, Sarah Palin's every step is being monitored more carefully and all her contradictory statements quickly brought to the attention of the voting public.

Sarah Palin's soundbites are becoming less and less effective as she "progresses" her political agenda. They echo the emptiness of her philosophy in governing...

Maybe the book deal will take her away from Alaska and she'll decide not to run for a second term in 2010. We can only hope Sarah Palin will be very successful as an "author" and dedicate the rest of her life to writing, leaving politics in the hands of better qualified, ethical people.

Sarah Palin for Governor website
.

Sarah Palin, back in 2006

When I googled Wayne Anthony Ross for an earlier post, I came across a background article about Sarah Palin from the time of her campaign for governor in 2006.

It makes very interesting reading. I condensed it and want to share the juiciest bits with you, with my own comments in bold type.

Palin ran for lieutenant governor in 2002 at the age of 39. She was just finishing her second term as Wasilla mayor. In the last two weeks of the general election campaign, she did her Republican duty, stumping the state and appearing on television for Frank Murkowski. She was still, as she herself put it later, "the golden child."

LOL!

Murkowski offered her several jobs in his administration, she said, including commissioner of commerce or head of the state parks division. Palin turned the governor down until he offered to put her on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.

Oil seems to be a strong magnet...

Palin, who admitted to having little background in the field, was named chairwoman, with the $125,000-a-year seat designated for a "public" member. She said she took the job to learn more about the oil industry, vital for the state. It wasn't an obvious stepping stone, she insists.

In the same way Alaska is not a stepping stone to her ambitions in the national scene...

The other Murkowski appointee to the commission was Republican Party chairman Randy Ruedrich. He had a professional background as an petroleum engineer. But protests were heard immediately about having a fundraising partisan regulating the oil industry. There were staff complaints about Ruedrich doing party business on state time, a leaked document to a gas-drilling company, perceived favoritism toward companies the commission was supposed to be regulating.

Palin, acting as chairwoman and ethics supervisor, passed complaints up the ladder to the attorney general and the governor's office. By November, as the complaints compounded, Ruedrich resigned from the commission.

Ethics supervisor???

Palin, who was asked to gather evidence from Ruedrich's computer, was bound by state ethics laws from saying anything publicly.
It was especially tough for Palin because one of the main issues Ruedrich had been promoting, shallow-gas drilling in the Mat-Su area, affected her friends and neighbors.

She finally quit in frustration in January, months before specific allegations would become public. She had been on the job only 11 months.

"A good friend told me that in politics either you eat well or you sleep well," Palin said of those times. "I wasn't sleeping well."

Poor thing...

Concerned that the matter might be dropped, she continued to talk to the state through a lawyer, Wayne Anthony Ross, the National Rifle Association board member who had made a right-wing primary challenge to Murkowski in 2002.

W.A.R. rears his head.

"It was a crisis of conscience for her," Ross said. "Her personal integrity is very important to her, and here it appears she's behind a cover-up."

Two months after the Senate election, Palin was invited by Democrat Eric Croft to join him in filing an ethics complaint against attorney general Gregg Renkes, Frank Murkowski's longtime aide and campaign manager. The complaint charged he had a conflict of interest in an international coal deal that had been uncovered by the press. The case against Renkes mounted, even after Murkowski issued a reprimand and declared it closed. In February 2005, Renkes resigned and Palin was one of the heroes again.

Sarah Palin filed another ethics complaint?

Palin found other, small ways to stay in circulation. She appeared on statewide television in an ad for Spenard Builders Supply.

The same Spenard that provided materials for Wasilla Sports Complex at the same time her nice, warm home was being built nearby bearing some striking similarities to the complex.

None of these maverick positions were taken with the goal of setting up a run for governor, she says. When she appeared in the all-Alaska ads, she said, she still didn't know whether she might run for lieutenant governor in 2006 or make a run for governor as an Independent.

Ah, the maverick!

Instead she decided to enter the Republican primary last October, with Frank Murkowski still on the fence about whether to run himself. She said publicly that powers inside her own party wanted her "crucified." Her independence and her high profile on ethics issues captured an insurgent public mood, and by summer she was leading in the polls.

Ethics again...

Those qualities also left her vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy. Public-record requests of the City of Wasilla revealed Palin campaigning for lieutenant governor in 2002 on city time. The records -- obtained originally by the Voice of the Times' Paul Jenkins and distributed by Murkowski's campaign -- showed Palin arranging campaign travel from the mayor's office and using her administrative assistant to write thank-yous to campaign donors.

Hypocrisy? Sarah Palin?

Palin responded by calling the accusations exaggerated and not at all comparable to Ruedrich's transgressions on the oil and gas commission. She said she apologized for any mistakes. Mostly, she dismissed the charges as last-minute smears by desperate opponents.

Sarah Palin's own transgressions are all pink and smell of roses. The tone was the same then as it is now when dismissing complaints against herself.

Her supporters remain avid, and Palin's bright red signs -- the school color of the Wasilla Warriors -- line the roads of Southcentral Alaska. But the campaign has wobbled at times.

Palin missed a few scheduled events and, at others, came off as unprepared or over her head. After an education forum last week, she was mocked by her opponents for submitting a folksy three-year-old essay about her schoolteacher father instead of a plan for improving schools.

Education? What's that?

Then last week she told a hometown crowd in Wasilla she would favor them as governor. "Certainly, people will assume I'm biased toward the valley in the decisions I make. So be it, because I will be.

We've noticed a certain bias, yes.

Another disconnect is with the state's Native corporations. Palin backed away from a scheduled meeting with Native executives several weeks ago, her campaign conceding she wasn't ready to talk about tribal recognition and other Native concerns raised by the group. Subsistence was prominent on the executives' list.

Palin's ties are strong to the Alaska Outdoor Council, whose calls for "equality" and hunting access sound different in rural Alaska than they do in the Mat-Su. It's unclear where the candidate would turn for advice on Native political matters.

Sarah Palin still doesn't know much about Native Alaskans. If in 2006 she was just ignorant, now she has graduated into being absolutely insulting about this issue.

Since her 1996 run for mayor, when signs saying "Positively Palin" adorned Wasilla, the candidate has said she hates negative politics.

Yeah, right!


That was fun. If you'd like to read the whole very long article, click here.
I have realised that there is a part one of this article. If you have the patience to read it, it's here.
.