Just a quick note. I've been a little preoccupied with life as of late, (never sign up for Facebook if you have time issues... it is a time bandit for me.) I had intended to hold the first group meeting this month and Peter and I were aiming for October 26th. I do not at this time believe that I can pull this feat off.
We have decided to take a friend's advice and I contacted David Shimek about about meeting at Metro Books and Music. He was; I found, a wonderful and considerate person who agreed that we could meet at his store as a group. It appears that Saturdays are our best bet for regular meetings. I will proceed with Metro Books and Music as our meeting place once I get myself in order.
If you have a chance, please drop by his business and thank him for his generosity. As for me; a bronx cheer might be in order due to the delays I have now caused. Be aware that a Bronx cheer is something you'll want to do in person. To do that of course you'll have to come to the meeting when I and Peter finally set a date.
As to the format and topic for the first meeting I propose what I originally proposed: America: Free Country or Christian Nation? Format can be a bit more tricky. I intend to moderate all meetings, so if you ever attended one of the "Socrates Cafe" meetings a few years back you'll no doubt recall that thoughtful discourse and debate can be done in a respectful manner. These meetings will NOT be an opportunity to call people names or shout and curse at those who don't share your views.
That being said, please await with or without baited breath the pending announcement for the first meeting.
-Bradley C. Roberson
ASk Co-Founder
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Palin: Wrong for Alaska, Wrong for America, 5
In my analyses so far I have tried to assess Palin’s judgment or, as I see it, her lack of good judgment. For example, I believe that she raised taxes on petroleum production to such a high level (the marginal rate under ACES has reached 90% before crude oil prices recently declined) that it threatens jobs and future production, and I also believe her polices regarding a gas pipeline will ultimately prove to be counterproductive. But these are complex issues and others will certainly have different views. Also, because of my ties to “Big Oil” I could be perceived as being biased.
To counter this and provide what I think is one of the clearest examples of Palin’s lack of judgment, I ask you to consider the following:
Imagine that you know a woman who is about eight months pregnant and engages in the following behavior:
A month before her due date she boards an airplane to attend a conference in a major city 3,000 miles away. While at the conference her water breaks and she begins having contractions that feel unusual. Shortly afterwards she calls her hometown doctor to report her condition. Despite the fact that the city where the conference is being held has some of the best medical facilities in the world, she elects to attend the conference rather than seek an on site medical evaluation. Also, knowing that she has tickets to fly home later that day, she doesn’t ask if it would be medically acceptable to fly during the call to her doctor.
After attending the conference she boards a plane for a six-hour flight bound for a mid-size city which is en-route to her home, but he elects not to alert the airline of her pregnancy nor the fact that her water had broken.
Her plane arrives in the mid-side city nearly a full day after her water broke. The city where she lands has three major hospitals that can be reached in about 15 minutes. But, instead of going to any of these, she and her husband drive nearly an hour in the darkness of a northern winter night, along a road with unlighted stretches that regularly ice over and the woman and her husband drive directly to a hospital in her small hometown, where she gives birth several hours later.
Regardless of the outcome, rational people understand that from the moment this woman boarded the flight to attend the conference she put her unborn child at risk. Moreover, her reckless judgment continued to put her unborn child at unnecessary risk with every subsequent decision she made.
These mirror the facts during the 30 hours before Sarah Palin delivered her youngest son. This story was reported in the Anchorage Daily News on April 22, 2008 and you can read the original report at http://www.adn.com/626/story/382864.html.
Like many other events in Palin’s life, this was spun into a virtuous story. Alaskans, many of whom despise Texas, praised Palin for making sure her son wasn’t born in that state. And Alaskans applauded the fact that Palin returned to work just days later – what a tough lady. But they conveniently neglected to scrutinize the risks to which she subjected her special needs child.
Where was her judgment? Where was her motherly instinct? It’s no wonder that Palin can exploit her 7-year-old daughter Piper just to lessen the negative reaction she knew would come and expose Piper to the “boos” of the crowd at a hockey game where Gov. Palin recently dropped the puck for the face-off. This shouldn’t be surprising when you consider Palin is the same mother who put her Downs-Syndrome child’s life at risk with her decisions just before his birth.
Sound judgment under challenging circumstances is one of the most critical qualities America needs in its national leaders. Given McCain’s age and known health issues, we cannot afford to take chances on Palin’s poor judgment.
David A. Chacon
To counter this and provide what I think is one of the clearest examples of Palin’s lack of judgment, I ask you to consider the following:
Imagine that you know a woman who is about eight months pregnant and engages in the following behavior:
A month before her due date she boards an airplane to attend a conference in a major city 3,000 miles away. While at the conference her water breaks and she begins having contractions that feel unusual. Shortly afterwards she calls her hometown doctor to report her condition. Despite the fact that the city where the conference is being held has some of the best medical facilities in the world, she elects to attend the conference rather than seek an on site medical evaluation. Also, knowing that she has tickets to fly home later that day, she doesn’t ask if it would be medically acceptable to fly during the call to her doctor.
After attending the conference she boards a plane for a six-hour flight bound for a mid-size city which is en-route to her home, but he elects not to alert the airline of her pregnancy nor the fact that her water had broken.
Her plane arrives in the mid-side city nearly a full day after her water broke. The city where she lands has three major hospitals that can be reached in about 15 minutes. But, instead of going to any of these, she and her husband drive nearly an hour in the darkness of a northern winter night, along a road with unlighted stretches that regularly ice over and the woman and her husband drive directly to a hospital in her small hometown, where she gives birth several hours later.
Regardless of the outcome, rational people understand that from the moment this woman boarded the flight to attend the conference she put her unborn child at risk. Moreover, her reckless judgment continued to put her unborn child at unnecessary risk with every subsequent decision she made.
These mirror the facts during the 30 hours before Sarah Palin delivered her youngest son. This story was reported in the Anchorage Daily News on April 22, 2008 and you can read the original report at http://www.adn.com/626/story/382864.html.
Like many other events in Palin’s life, this was spun into a virtuous story. Alaskans, many of whom despise Texas, praised Palin for making sure her son wasn’t born in that state. And Alaskans applauded the fact that Palin returned to work just days later – what a tough lady. But they conveniently neglected to scrutinize the risks to which she subjected her special needs child.
Where was her judgment? Where was her motherly instinct? It’s no wonder that Palin can exploit her 7-year-old daughter Piper just to lessen the negative reaction she knew would come and expose Piper to the “boos” of the crowd at a hockey game where Gov. Palin recently dropped the puck for the face-off. This shouldn’t be surprising when you consider Palin is the same mother who put her Downs-Syndrome child’s life at risk with her decisions just before his birth.
Sound judgment under challenging circumstances is one of the most critical qualities America needs in its national leaders. Given McCain’s age and known health issues, we cannot afford to take chances on Palin’s poor judgment.
David A. Chacon
Palin: Wrong for Alaska, Wrong for America, 4
Palin as Reformer
Sarah Palin likes to paint herself as a reformer. But, if a reformer is defined as someone who improves upon the situation they came into by actively causing others to change their behavior so that prior abuses end, does Palin qualify?
Palin’s reputation as a “reformer” began after she resigned from an appointed post she held as one of three commissioners on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC). Palin was appointed to this post by then-governor Frank Murkowski as a consolation prize because she was not appointed to an open US Senate seat (that position went to Murkowski’s daughter Lisa). While at the AOGCC Palin found out that one of the other commissioners, Randy Ruedrich, had used the state’s e-mail for political purposes and appeared to have close ties to some of the oil companies he was regulating. Palin notified Gov. Murkowski, who did nothing – probably not an unexpected result given both Murkowski’s political allegiances and the relatively benign (compared to other Alaska politicians) nature of the infractions.
Ruedrich eventually resigned, and reporters began asking Palin questions about his resignation; but, at Murkowski’s request, she did not respond. Palin resigned her post at AOGCC a short time later, after rumors surfaced that she may have been connected to a cover-up of the Ruedrich situation. Some individuals who are well acquainted with Palin believe that another reason for her resignation was that she simply disliked the complex and detailed work associated with the job. In any case, Palin’s resignation was not needed to advance the investigation and subsequent punishment of Ruedrich.
Between the time Palin left the AOGCC and the time she became governor, a number of Alaska’s politicians were indicted on corruption charges. During this time, the Department of Justice and the FBI did the heavy lifting in the effort to fight political corruption in Alaska. While Palin had no active part in this effort, she is quick to insinuate that she had a major role in “reforming” Alaskan politics.
In the face of a perception of widespread corruption of politics in Alaska, after being elected governor, Palin did call for new ethics legislation. However, she left the legwork for writing ethics legislation to the Alaska legislature.
So, given that Alaska has passed the Omnibus Ethics Legislation (HB109), the question is: Has anything fundamentally changed that allows Palin to claim the mantle of “reformer?”
Alaska’s senior senator, Ted Stevens is currently on trial for failure to disclose “gifts” (a major remodel of his home) he received from Bill Allen’s VECO (the same individual who bribed a number of other Alaskan politicians who are currently serving prison sentences) and Stevens will likely win the general election, unless he is sent to prison.
Palin’s own Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell (who she supported in the primarily) was defeated by Don Young, Alaska’s long-time congressman, in spite of an ongoing federal investigation into Young. Even our new junior senator, Lisa Murkowski, was recently caught up in a scandal to purchase choice riverfront property at below market prices.
Moreover, there is growing dissatisfaction among Alaskans with Palin’s refusal to cooperate with the Troopergate investigation (Palin is alleged to have abused her power by pressuring Walt Monegan to fire her ex-brother-in-law, a trooper in his department). After Palin’s selection as the Republican VP candidate, Alaskan’s ire has been compounded by interference in the investigation from McCain’s camp.
One story that hasn’t received much attention is Palin’s choice to replace Monegan with Chuck Kopp. Within days of firing Monegan, Palin appointed Kopp as his replacement. However, Kopp ran into trouble almost immediately when it was revealed that he had sexual harassment reprimands in his personnel file for his previous position. But, it is believed Palin chose Kopp for his strong ties the fundamentalist Christian right rather than for his credentials in public safety. Kopp is a well-known figure in Alaska’s fundamental Christian movement. This was Palin’s attempt to placate the fundamentalist right in case she did get the VP nod because she had not previously advanced the fundamentalist agenda with her official policies.
Since becoming governor, Palin has used her line item veto power to punish politicians who did not support her agenda – in one case vetoing over 90% of the capital projects for one such legislator’s district. Palin later claimed her budget cuts represented “fiscal conservatism discipline” but the truth is that she provided no guidance whatsoever as to what should be submitted into the initial budget request – so naturally, many members loaded up the budget with pork that should have never gotten into the budget in the first place.
Since becoming McCain’s VP pick we have learned much more about Palin, including: she accepted money from tainted politicians (which she did not return until after her VP nomination), used her position as mayor of Wasilla to get a zoning variance for a fire hazard violation to sell her personal residence, and she used non-government e-mail addresses in an attempt to prevent the public from having access to certain correspondence (even though Palin campaigned on the slogan of “open and transparent”).
In summary, Palin has grossly exaggerated her role as a reformer. She has adopted many of the very tactics she previously criticized the “Good Old Boy” network for using. Alaska is not yet “reformed” and the FBI, the Justice Department and the Alaska legislature have done the real work thus far.
David A. Chacon
Sarah Palin likes to paint herself as a reformer. But, if a reformer is defined as someone who improves upon the situation they came into by actively causing others to change their behavior so that prior abuses end, does Palin qualify?
Palin’s reputation as a “reformer” began after she resigned from an appointed post she held as one of three commissioners on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (AOGCC). Palin was appointed to this post by then-governor Frank Murkowski as a consolation prize because she was not appointed to an open US Senate seat (that position went to Murkowski’s daughter Lisa). While at the AOGCC Palin found out that one of the other commissioners, Randy Ruedrich, had used the state’s e-mail for political purposes and appeared to have close ties to some of the oil companies he was regulating. Palin notified Gov. Murkowski, who did nothing – probably not an unexpected result given both Murkowski’s political allegiances and the relatively benign (compared to other Alaska politicians) nature of the infractions.
Ruedrich eventually resigned, and reporters began asking Palin questions about his resignation; but, at Murkowski’s request, she did not respond. Palin resigned her post at AOGCC a short time later, after rumors surfaced that she may have been connected to a cover-up of the Ruedrich situation. Some individuals who are well acquainted with Palin believe that another reason for her resignation was that she simply disliked the complex and detailed work associated with the job. In any case, Palin’s resignation was not needed to advance the investigation and subsequent punishment of Ruedrich.
Between the time Palin left the AOGCC and the time she became governor, a number of Alaska’s politicians were indicted on corruption charges. During this time, the Department of Justice and the FBI did the heavy lifting in the effort to fight political corruption in Alaska. While Palin had no active part in this effort, she is quick to insinuate that she had a major role in “reforming” Alaskan politics.
In the face of a perception of widespread corruption of politics in Alaska, after being elected governor, Palin did call for new ethics legislation. However, she left the legwork for writing ethics legislation to the Alaska legislature.
So, given that Alaska has passed the Omnibus Ethics Legislation (HB109), the question is: Has anything fundamentally changed that allows Palin to claim the mantle of “reformer?”
Alaska’s senior senator, Ted Stevens is currently on trial for failure to disclose “gifts” (a major remodel of his home) he received from Bill Allen’s VECO (the same individual who bribed a number of other Alaskan politicians who are currently serving prison sentences) and Stevens will likely win the general election, unless he is sent to prison.
Palin’s own Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell (who she supported in the primarily) was defeated by Don Young, Alaska’s long-time congressman, in spite of an ongoing federal investigation into Young. Even our new junior senator, Lisa Murkowski, was recently caught up in a scandal to purchase choice riverfront property at below market prices.
Moreover, there is growing dissatisfaction among Alaskans with Palin’s refusal to cooperate with the Troopergate investigation (Palin is alleged to have abused her power by pressuring Walt Monegan to fire her ex-brother-in-law, a trooper in his department). After Palin’s selection as the Republican VP candidate, Alaskan’s ire has been compounded by interference in the investigation from McCain’s camp.
One story that hasn’t received much attention is Palin’s choice to replace Monegan with Chuck Kopp. Within days of firing Monegan, Palin appointed Kopp as his replacement. However, Kopp ran into trouble almost immediately when it was revealed that he had sexual harassment reprimands in his personnel file for his previous position. But, it is believed Palin chose Kopp for his strong ties the fundamentalist Christian right rather than for his credentials in public safety. Kopp is a well-known figure in Alaska’s fundamental Christian movement. This was Palin’s attempt to placate the fundamentalist right in case she did get the VP nod because she had not previously advanced the fundamentalist agenda with her official policies.
Since becoming governor, Palin has used her line item veto power to punish politicians who did not support her agenda – in one case vetoing over 90% of the capital projects for one such legislator’s district. Palin later claimed her budget cuts represented “fiscal conservatism discipline” but the truth is that she provided no guidance whatsoever as to what should be submitted into the initial budget request – so naturally, many members loaded up the budget with pork that should have never gotten into the budget in the first place.
Since becoming McCain’s VP pick we have learned much more about Palin, including: she accepted money from tainted politicians (which she did not return until after her VP nomination), used her position as mayor of Wasilla to get a zoning variance for a fire hazard violation to sell her personal residence, and she used non-government e-mail addresses in an attempt to prevent the public from having access to certain correspondence (even though Palin campaigned on the slogan of “open and transparent”).
In summary, Palin has grossly exaggerated her role as a reformer. She has adopted many of the very tactics she previously criticized the “Good Old Boy” network for using. Alaska is not yet “reformed” and the FBI, the Justice Department and the Alaska legislature have done the real work thus far.
David A. Chacon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
