"BP president disputes governor's claims on oil tax"

That was yesterday's (Saturday) headline in the Alaska Dispatch.

I want to note it here, because under Sean Parnell, the oil companies never had to dispute anything with the governor.

I don't know yet that it means anything substantive, but it's refreshing.

There's been a lot of talk about Public Private Partnerships.  So much so that some people just say P3.

Governments have always bought goods and services from private companies.  Partnerships tend to go further and tend to mix governmental and private sector roles.  Theoretically, this can work out well.  Often though, this can be a ploy for the private sector to acquire government assets at low prices, chanting the mantra of the private sector being more efficient than the public sector, and then raising prices and profiteering from the arrangement.  The privatization of parking meters in Chicago seems to be a good example.

Government has a role to perform those functions that the private sector can't or won't perform.

When two people, two businesses, or a government and a business, decide to go into partnership, both sides need to vigorously guard their interests.  The term 'trust, but verify' has been used in diplomacy a lot lately, but it's also a good term for business relationships.

Unfortunately, corporations have a record of gaining leverage in their government partnerships through their support of candidates in elections.  Throughout the world, including the US, large corporations buy key decision makers who then give away government assets and interests.  I have no doubt that banker Frank Murkowski, as governor, was a willing partner with the oil companies and not a strong, cautious, demanding partner.  For whatever reasons, Sarah Palin was much more adversarial with the oil companies.  But her running mate Pat Parnell had been a Conoco -Philips attorney.  Instead of bargaining for the best deal for the state and people of Alaska, Parnell gave the oil companies what they wanted.  Whether he knew he was doing this or whether he has lived in the oil world so long he believed the narrative, I don't know.

But I do know that when businesses work with each other, it's like playing poker.  Each side wants to get the best deal it can from the other.  There's bluffing, there's careful calculation, there's distraction, and eventually there's an agreement, or not.  The positive spin of the word partnership may be the ideal, but competent government representatives know that the other side is out to get the best deal and if they can do it at the expense of the government they will.  Often, government partnerships happen when the private sector companies aren't willing to take the risk themselves and want the government to cover their losses.  The State of Alaska has a history of funding such risky operations - from dairy deals to barley to fish processing, just to name a few.  It was hard for legislators to say no when money was flooding into Juneau.

So this headline brings a little hope that our new governor is willing to stand up to the private sector.  It's only an early sign.  We have to see what the follow up is.  There will be a lot of pressure by the private sector to play the anti-government card.

Does this mean those people were right about Palin too?

The Alaska Dispatch is reporting that the Director of the Alaska Division of Wildlife Conservation  was arrested on 12 counts of illegal hunting today. 

A former predator control officer for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rossi is a longtime friend of Chuck and Sally Heath, Palin's parents. After Palin took office in 2007, Sally lobbied her daughter to have Rossi named commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. The commissioner oversees all wildlife and fisheries management in the state. Sally Heath, in an email to Palin, noted that almost everyone would object to Rossi as unqualified, but added those "are the very same people who said the same thing about you."

So, does this mean those same people were right about Palin too?

Rossi did not get the commissioner's job, but a special job -- assistant commissioner for abundance management -- was created for him within state government. .  .

. . . His qualifications have repeatedly been called into question. He lacks a college degree and his prime professional association with wildlife has involved killing rats and foxes in the Aleutian Islands.

 You can read the whole article at the Dispatch.  

Alaska Governor Should Borrow Bradley Manning to Help Release Palin Emails

The ADN reported Wednesday that Governor Sean Parnell's office was given more time  to release the rest of the Sarah Palin emails that have been sought in various freedom of information requests. 

An extension, until at least Feb. 20, was requested by Randy Ruaro, deputy chief of staff to Gov. Sean Parnell, in October. Ruaro maintained that without an extension, responding to requests for the emails would "substantially impair" the other functions of the governor's office, as well as the ability to properly and thoroughly review the messages.

It's taking quite a while.  Palin left office in July 2009 and it's already 2012 now.  Meanwhile Bradly Manning is sitting in prison for releasing a large number of government documents to Wikileaks.  He knows how to do this and I'm sure he's got some spare time. 

Perhaps the Governor's office could show some initiative and a little uncharacteristic cooperation with the Feds by working out a deal to let Manning help his office get the Palin emails out.  
  

Read more here: http://www.adn.com/2012/01/04/2245579/state-gets-more-time-to-release.html#storylink=cpy

Palin's Internet Provider?

Is it true this clothing store is in the internet business too?

Palin's Wake - Personnel Board & Duty Station Bills - Plus Juneau Gets Replaced

I've watched two bills debated in the last two days that are before the legislature because of Sarah Palin.  Yesterday, the House voted to expand the Personnel Board (HB 348) and change how its members are appointed because of the questions raised when the numerous complaints against then Gov. Palin's  were heard by the three member board she appointed.  For fifty years of statehood, this had never become a problem.  That's not to say that there hadn't been a governor with problems - Gov. Sheffield was almost impeached - but there had never been an issue with the Personnel Board and a governor.

Then today, the House State Affairs Committee heard SB 244 to officially designate Juneau the governor's duty station.  After lots of questioning by the committee members it seems that this bill would change very little other than to make it law what has been custom.  It does clarify that the governor's base is Juneau.  The only thing I understood this to really clarify is this:

For calculating travel allowances (including lodging and meals), Juneau will be considered the governor's residence. 

What does this change?  Not much.  If a future governor decides not to move his/her family to the mansion in Juneau, the governor cannot be reimbursed for living in his/her own residence somewhere else.  But that was the case before.  This bill simply clarifies this.

The governor gets a cook in the mansion who buys and prepares all food at no cost to the governor.  But when traveling, the governor can claim a $60 a day food allowance.  Even if living in his/her own residence elsewhere.  This hasn't changed, the committee was told by Administration representative Kevin Brooks and Sen. Stedman staffer Darwin Peterson.  Palin did claim per diem and the state determined it was taxable according to a Feb. 2009 ADN article by Lisa Demer. But the article says the payments were for "meals and incidentals," not for lodging. 

What about if the governor drives from his residence to the Anchorage governor's office?  No change.  The state gives the governor a car and fills the tank. 

Gov. Palin painted herself as a maverick who doesn't do things like everyone else does.  She wasn't going to live in Juneau as her main residence so her kids could stay in their own schools.  Except Track did his last year in Michigan and Bristol went to school in Anchorage.  

People have asked before whether being mavericky has some larger state purpose or it's just doing things that make her own life easier.  They've pointed out that living in Juneau is part of the job of being governor of Alaska.  One could argue that given the travel a governor should do, it might come out cheaper if one is based in Anchorage.  I can't tell.  But I do know that the legislature is working this year to clean up things that became issues for the first time in our state's history, because of how Gov. Palin did things.

One more thing that Sen. Egan probably did not anticipate when he signed on as a co-sponsor to the bill.  Rep. Gatto asked why the bill made "Juneau," instead of "the State Capitol" the official duty station.  Rep. Johnson proposed a successful amendment to change "Juneau" to "the State Capitol" in the title and text of the bill.


Note on Photo:  We can do anything these days with Photoshop and you are right to always be suspicious, but this is an undoctored picture I got earlier in the session of the governor's mansion with a moving van in front.  

"...located on a busy street in the heart of downtown."

Which of the following would you call a 'busy street?'

A.   

B.

  





Or  C (from Google Maps Street Level)?

Why do I ask?  Well, there's a lot discussion about the flood of Sarah Palin books.  I followed links today which got me to this quote from Scott Conroy and Shushannah Walshe’s new book, “Sarah from Alaska: The Sudden Rise and Brutal Education of a New Conservative Superstar,” on the HastingReport:

One afternoon, while conducting interviews in Juneau, we decided to take a short walk to catch a glimpse of the governor’s mansion, which is located on a busy street in the heart of downtown. On our way back, we crossed paths with Piper Palin and two of her friends, who were evidently returning from school. We had known Piper as a frequent guest in the back of the plane during campaign flights between the cities. Her energy and humor made her a favorite among the ever-exhausted members of the traveling press corps, and she seemed excited to chat briefly with us about her return to Alaska…[emphasis added]

The hedge in pictures C above belongs to the Governor's Mansion in Juneau.

For people who have never been to Juneau, the picture on the left is the northeast section of downtown Juneau.(The red section on the map below.)





The street in the picture below runs along the Baranof Hotel in the business district of Juneau.

While the Governor's Mansion (yellow circle) is technically in downtown Juneau. There are business sections and residential sections and the mansion is on a tiny residential street.  (Actually, there are several tiny streets that surround it.)  Is it just me, biased because I live in the metropolis of Anchorage, who doesn't think of any streets in downtown Juneau as particularly busy?   You can walk from the lower right of the map to the high school in 15 or 20 minutes.  And sure, thirty cars all leaving the Capitol at once could cause a bit of a jam, but this is much more accurately described as a tiny, quaint,  and picturesque town.

The picture below is of a house across the street from the Governor's mansion.  My subjects are standing in the "busy street" described in the book.

I raise this issue because it makes me wonder if they were even at the Governor's mansion if they describe the street it's on as "busy." The only way it might have been busy is if there was a tour bus or two on the street at the time they saw it. Or maybe there were a hundred out-of-state journalists driving around the house at the time.

But for most Americans who have never been to Juneau, hearing 'busy street' certainly has to conjure up an image closer to pictures A and B than C above.

So, what's my point?  This may be a poor description, but it hardly is important in terms of what they are writing.  Well, if they call this street busy, what else in the book is misleading, distorted, or just plain wrong? I don't know.  Maybe nothing.  I'll just put this out here for the record. Maybe this is the only error.  It certainly struck me when I read the passage.  Perhaps other readers will find other errors. Certainly the rush to publish around the same date that Palin's book is coming out may have caused there to be a number of such problems. Maybe not.

A Sign of the Difference Between Palin and Parnell

Arriving in Anchorage September 8, 2008.

Arriving in Anchorage October 26, 2009.

Palin in Hong Kong

I tried to find some Hong Kong bloggers reporting on Palin there. Mostly it's foreign press blogs. Maybe that's because Hong Kong doesn't care about Palin. Or because the press was shut out of the speech. But here's one local blogger, Hong Kong Life, describing the CSLA - the forum where she spoke:

WSJ noted that Palin has never been to East Asia and isn't exactly famous for her mastery of public speaking or her expertise in finance and international affairs. But CLSA spokeswoman Simone Wheeler said it isn't necessary to have financial background to be speaking in the prestigious event.

There are basically two groups that compose these noted speakers. First are the conventional, ultra-savvy financial / political leaders like Alan Greenspan, Michael Robert Milken. The other group are composed of celebrities either for entertainment or taking diverse views. This includes Bob Geldof, Boomtown Rats lead singer turned anti-poverty activist, and singers Sir Elton John, Macy Gray, and Tom Jones.

We don't know if Sarah Palin would be grouped with entertainers (she is entertaining enough during the election campaigns by the way) because her topic isn't disclosed and the event was off-limits to media. Not until she opens her mouth and starts talking.

Hong Kong's South China Morning Post's story began this way:

Palin's handlers take the conservative approach

A triumph of low expectations? Quite possibly, but as always with Sarah Palin, that depends on who you talk to....

The main event instead was a tightly choreographed speech and question-and-answer session behind closed doors. Talking to attendees, it was clear Palin was determined to brush aside criticism of her ignorance of world affairs and burnish her international credentials while painting herself as a "small c" conservative. The "drill, baby, drill" rhetoric of her stump speeches, geared to firing up American conservatives, was replaced with an international edge and a touch more humour and nuance. She spoke for more than 90 minutes, part of a paid engagement that her aides have admitted will help pay legal bills. . .

"She seemed to relish the chance to show us really who she is and what she thinks ... I thought she gave a good account of herself," one Republican banker said. "She mentioned Reagan and Thatcher and small government and fiscal discipline ... that was all good stuff for this crowd. She didn't mention either of the Bushes or Obama [by name] once."

Not everyone was as generous. Some described people nodding off, walking out or even reading a newspaper at one point. Others dismissed her foreign policy ideas as the stuff of a high school project. She skated over global finance, and many noted that it did not appear as if she had written the speech herself.

A Frenchwoman who attended said she felt Palin was campaigning. "It was a goodwill speech without referring to what is happening. Maybe as governor of Alaska she did well, but she's not for the presidency. You get the impression she doesn't know the world is changing and that the US is not the power it used to be."

The Hong Kong Standard used a piece from and AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, REUTERS:

Palin's Asia debut speech divides investors

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Former US vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin divided an international Hong Kong audience of financial big-hitters at her first speech outside North America yesterday with some leaving in disgust.

The wide-ranging speech by the former governor of Alaska at the CLSA Investors' Forum covered international terrorism, US economic policy and trade with China, but was closed to the media.

Some listeners praised her forthright views on government social and economic intervention but others walked out early.

"She was brilliant," said one European delegate. "She said America was spending a lot of money and it was a temporary solution. Normal people are having to pay more and more but things don't get better."

In a speech lasting about 75 minutes, Palin slammed the current US government on spending and health care and praised the economic policies of former US president Ronald Reagan, delegates said. "We got into this mess because of government interference in the first place," Palin said.

A US delegate leaving early said: "It was awful, we couldn't stand it any longer."

And this is from the (London) Timesonline:

Sarah Palin’s first ever visit to East Asia began with a monologue that invoked the spirit of Margaret Thatcher, sounded “unmistakably” like a pitch for the 2012 presidency and was described by several members of the audience as “long, humorless and George W Bush-like”. . .

“I’m going to call it like I see it and I will share with you candidly a view right from Main Street, Main Street USA,” the former vice-Presidential candidate declared, before launching into prepared remarks on the Alaskan fishing industry.

Several audience members reportedly walked out of Ms Palin’s speech 30 minutes before the end, citing “more important things to do” or describing the talk as “too partisan and too much like a speech at the Republican convention”.

One senior fund manager told The Times that the 80-minute lecture, and the lack of an opportunity to fire any questions at Ms Palin, was a disappointment. “You would think that with her team of speechwriters and a supposedly media-free environment Palin could have afforded to be either funny or thought-provoking, but she was neither,” she said.

Interesting, the Times piece says "lack of an opportunity to fire any questions" but the South China Morning Post piece mentions "a tightly choreographed speech and question-and-answer session". The Times piece is quoting an attendee, the SCMP mentions it as part of their own reporting.

Does Idaho Exist? Why Everyone Should Study Philosophy

This blog is called "What Do I know?" because I think this is one of the fundamental questions that people should be constantly asking themselves. And occasionally I address the topic head on. This is one of those times.

I'm not a trained philosopher, but I found that I had to teach philosophy to my graduate students because the vast majority had never seriously considered the basic questions that still keep philosophers busy:

• What is real?
  
• What is true?
  
• What is good?

(As you'll quickly see in the examples below, the three questions are often intertwined.)

If we look at what the citizens of the United States are debating, we see that all the really contentious fights are related to these questions. Let's look at three examples:

What is real? Debate over marriage.

Opponents of gay marriage say things like (this is from biblestudies.suite101) :

God declared them to be "one flesh" (Genesis 2) and established the pattern of marriage to be a man leaving his father and mother and being joined to his wife (Genesis 2).
From this model, it can be inferred that:

• Marriage was instituted by God;
• Marriage involved one man and one woman;
• The marital union is intended to bring children into the world, and;
• Children are raised to enter into their own marriage unions -- and repeat the cycle.

One of the key questions in the field of ontology (What is real?) is whether social reality exists external to humans or whether it is socially constructed. Don't give up here. Force yourself to keep reading. This is understandable. And critical.

Let's assume here, for this discussion, that the so called 'natural' world of rocks and trees and water does exist independently of human beings. If we fall head first into a rock from a ways up, there will be damage. We can't legislate or will that away. What we're talking about here is NOT that physical world, but the social world - the world of human meaning. (There are philosophers who will take on the physical world too, but that's for another day.)

So, a mountain exists independent of whether humans are there or not. The socially constructed part is its name. Should it be called Mt. McKinley after an Ohio born US President or should it be called by the traditional Athabaskan name, Denali? That's where the social construction comes in. Is a hill an obstacle to be bulldozed for more rational roads or is it a sacred mountain? Is the Mona Lisa just a piece of canvas with paint on it or a great work of art?

Is marriage then a 'natural phenomenon' that exists independent of human construction or is it something that humans have created? We certainly have evidence that it is socially constructed (from the Washington Post):

Vermont Legislature Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage
By Keith B. Richburg Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 7, 2009; 2:23 PM

NEW YORK, April 7 -- Vermont on Tuesday became the fourth state to recognize gay marriage, and the D.C. Council voted to recognize same-sex unions performed in other states. The two actions give same-sex marriage proponents new momentum, following a similar victory last week in Iowa's Supreme Court.

This is a clear example of social construction. The body of people designated by law to represent the people of Vermont has decided that two men or two women can, in the State of Vermont, be legally married.

The opponents of gay marriage might say, "Exactly, this is socially constructed, it isn't 'natural' law." Clearly, no matter how creative they are, two men cannot have a child together. I would accept, in terms of 'what is real' that to have a child, you need a man and a woman. (I'm excluding all sorts of fertility interventions here.)

But I doubt that the people who claim that marriage is between a man and a woman only, would accept then, that any man and woman living together and having sex, even a child, are "married."

This is because marriage is more than simply a man and woman living together. It is a recognition, by the community in which they live, that they are married. It is, in fact, a socially constructed situation. In some cultures, simply living together and having a child might be recognized as a marriage. In others, a marriage may include one man and more than one woman. It is all socially constructed.

What is true? Where was Obama born and death panels.

Garry Trudeau's Doonesbury yesterday illustrates the problem of determining what is true.

(Double click to enlarge)

Is there any way that people who claim that Obama wasn't born in the US could be convinced that he was? What sort of proof would they have to have? If the birth certificate were sent to all 50 states in a glass case, they would just claim it was a fake.

Epistemology is the area of philosophy that examines how we determine what is true.

• Western natural science demands an exacting set of experiments that can be repeated by independent scientists. (Social scientists have different requirements.)
  
• Our legal system requires that a jury listen to the opposing sides and come to a determination whether the defendant violated the law.
  
• Some Christians use the bible as their source of truth, though different Christians interpret the bible differently which causes even more problems.

If everyone studied epistemology - what is true? (a very simplified characterization to be sure) - in school, at least we would all be able to recognize that underlying the 'debate' over Obama's birthplace, is a disagreement over how we prove what is true.

We see the same issue in this current silliness covered by Yahoo on the facts over death panels:

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill. Palin stands by 'death panel' claim on health bill
AP
By MATTHEW DALY, Associated Press Writer Matthew Daly, Associated Press Writer – Thu Aug 13, 5:56 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin refused to retreat from her debunked claim that a proposed health care overhaul would create "death panels," as the growing furor over end-of-life consultations forced a key group of senators to abandon the idea in their bill. . .

In a Facebook posting titled "Concerning Death Panels," Palin argued Wednesday night that the elderly and ailing would be coerced into accepting minimal end-of-life care to reduce health care costs based on the Democratic bill in the House.

But there will be no "death panels" under the legislation being considered. In fact, the provision in the bill would allow Medicare to pay doctors for voluntary counseling sessions that address end-of-life issues. The conversations between doctor and patient would include living wills, making a close relative or a trusted friend your health care proxy, learning about hospice as an option for the terminally ill, and information about pain medications for people suffering chronic discomfort.

This article is all about 'what is true?' The writer tells us what Palin said, then tells us his version of what is true.

Does Matthew Daly think that Sarah Palin disciples will be convinced by " her debunked claim" or "But there will be no "death panels" under the legislation being considered. In fact,. . ." and "there will be no "death panels" under the legislation..."?
I doubt it.

I'll leave the discussion of 'What is Good?" for another day. These two concepts are more than enough for one post. And this is barely an appetizer for these topics.

Personally, I believe that some people do truly believe that Obama was born in Africa and there is nothing anyone could do to change their minds. Some people also believe that Elvis is still alive. But I suspect that some of the birthers and many who claim that Elvis is alive know the truth, but they just prefer to believe their versions.

But this issue is NOT trivial. In a democracy, if enough people are hoodwinked by purveyors of falsehoods, we are all in trouble.

I realize that some people argue against referencing the Holocaust because it turns people off. But it is a major reference point in my life. I never met any of my grandparents because of the Holocaust. Nazi Germany holds many lessons we shouldn't forget. Making comparisons to a particular aspect of the Holocaust does NOT mean that I am saying that someone is a Nazi who wants to murder everyone.

But if there are useful comparisons, we should use them. The German people after WW I went through a period of great hardship. (Again, this is a something I know from my parents telling me about their childhoods.) The Treaty of Versailles

required Germany to accept sole responsibility for causing the war and, under the terms of articles 231-248 (later known as the War Guilt clauses), to disarm, make substantial territorial concessions and pay reparations to certain countries that had formed the Entente powers.

This was seen as humiliation by many Germans and contributed to their being ripe to the exhortations of a leader who promised to restore Germany's former greatness for 1000 years. I think that the current economic conditions in the US, plus social change that challenges many people's views of the world, cause many Americans to feel, if not humiliated, certainly less than they were individually and less than we were as a nation.

This makes us ripe for demagogues who have no regard for truth. Thus, it is particularly important that we spend time learning about the nature of 'truth' and how to test it. And how to challenge blatant untruths.

An example of one attempt to fight untruths - the claims of Holocaust deniers - resulted in (among many other things) a tract that questions the existence of the the State of Idaho.

People at the Simon Wiesenthal Museum [UPDATE 8/9/13 Alan Lustiger (see comments 8/8/13] developed this fact sheet which 'proved' that the State of Idaho does not exist. They did this to demonstrate the ridiculous logic that Holocaust deniers use. Here's how that discussion starts. (From KUOI)

The "State" Of Idaho: The Case For Open Debate

If you would ask any schoolchild how many states there are in the United States, you will get the same answer: 50. Fifty states in the Union. It is simply an accepted "fact." If you would disagree with this supposed "fact," you would be branded insane or worse.

However, mounting evidence shows that there are in fact only 49 states in the US, and the "state" of Idaho is a baseless myth.

We have been trying to distribute and publish this information for over *two years*, but our scholarship has not been given any respect. We have been censored, vilified, ridiculed and spat upon by the "traditional" geographers and historians, but WE WILL NOT BE SILENCED!

All we ask is that the existence of the state of Idaho be debated, as every other historical and geographic "fact" can be debated. Time after time, our opponents have refused to debate us on the FACTS. This alone should tell you something about the people who support the "existence" of this "43rd state."

Please read the following evidence VERY CAREFULLY, and you will be astonished at the veracity of our cause.

The Population Myth

Do you know anybody from Idaho? Do you know anybody who knows anybody from Idaho? According to the 1990 "census," there are over one million (1,000,000, or 1 x 10^6) people living in Idaho. But if there are so many Idahoers, where are they?

Some people have come forward and claimed that they were born and raised in "Idaho." But every single person who made this claim have been shown to be frauds and charlatans. These "Idahoan wannabes" are invariably inconsistent with each other about the size (in square miles or square kilometers) of "Idaho," about various town and village names, and even about the names of "Idaho's mighty rivers."

The Size Farce

According to traditional geographic sources (created entirely by people who believe in the existence of Idaho, and probably the Tooth Fairy, also) the "State" of Idaho is more than twice the size of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Massachusetts combined. Isn't it strange that a state with such vast land resources has so few people? And even of [sic] you look at a map (created by the Idaho-centric cartographers) the "State" of "Idaho" is dwarfed by its much larger neighbor, Montana.

Satellite Evidence

Recently declassified weather satellite information, showing the entire continental United States, shows absolutely *no evidence* that there is any state where "Idaho" is supposedly located. Noted experts in the field of interpreting these pictures unanimously agree that, from outer space, it is impossible to determine the borders of this elusive "state." Yet meteorologists and cartographers routinely overlay these satellite pictures with the outline of states that would seem to indicate Idaho's existence. . .

You can get the rest of this from KUOI. [Update July 30, 2010: It appears the Idaho story is no longer on KUOI's website.  For the time being you can find it here at Fantasymaps.] I couldn't find anything that linked the arguments with Wiesenthal, but I know (do I know anything for sure?) about that, because I was given copies of this by one of the people who developed it many years ago. The intent was to show how ridiculous the logic of Holocaust deniers was.

Perhaps one option for confronting the truth denying fantasizers is to use their words and logic, as in this example, to demonstrate things they believe simply do not in fact exist.

But in the long run, we need to get philosophers to stop spending as much time as they do on needle heads, and get into high schools and show the teachers there and the students the practical uses of philosophy.

[Disclaimer: Although my daughter is studying philosophy, this is not simply an attempt to increase the number of positions for philosophers so she can get a job when she graduates.]

Guest Post on Palin's Last Day

Nagging Questions....

I’ve decided I need to write, to see if it can help resolve some of the bad taste in my mouth that won’t seem to go away. Actually it feels more like an achy headache, if we’re going to use body parts analogies. So to write, to see if this can help provide catharsis for this person in my head. 

Sarah Palin is quitting today.  Resigning is too nice a word. It’s quitting. As for “reasons”?  If she’d been doing her job, there wouldn’t be any reasons. And if you believe she “has no plans”... Pa...Leeze.... 

This actually brings me to the crux of my problem. How many times can a person lie without it coming back to haunt them? In particular, how many times can a person of faith do that?

It galls me that she calls herself a Christian, a follower of Christ, and tells so many untruths so blatantly. I don’t want to put words in anyone else’s mouth, but isn’t this something integral to being a decent human being, much less a person of faith, that one doesn’t lie?

Didn’t she take an oath when she became Governor? Didn’t she put her hand on a Bible and swear? Is this her best? What was underpinning the faith that the people of Alaska had in her when they elected her? 

A friend of ours suggested having compassion for her. 

I thought, “ok, that sounds reasonable, I’ll give it a try...”  And I did squeak some up, for a small part of a day, sometime after she quit. I thought, “Gee, she must feel a little disappointed with herself” ... but then the compassion fizzled when I read, not much more than a day after she threw in the towel, an article she wrote which was published in the Washington Post, criticizing the President. Yeow, this woman has gall. 

How is it that the country is still talking about this woman, this person of lies and gall? And how is it even legal that she is collecting money from all over the country to pay her bills? Bills that wouldn’t be an issue, again, if she were doing her job. So people are paying her because she wasn’t doing her job? Ha, YEP, ye ssiree, that’s sure what it looks like. 

Last night on Shannyn Moore’s talk radio Shannyn expressed a feeling welling up, a feeling that soon we (the collective we) would be able to talk about the things that really mattered, like the environment, like moose hunting or berry-picking, like health care. And this morning I think, “This is it” - this is how to be healed from SP, from the media surrounding her - to start letting her go. I need to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear, to her, to the media, to the lies, to her spokespeople. How can anyone take what she says seriously? We can’t. She’s in it for herself, not for anyone else. Certainly not for this great State, where leaders typically knuckle down when the times get rough. Certainly not at this crucial time. She’s quitting, pure and simple. There is just no other way to slice this cake. 

Instead I will focus on what I usually focus on this time of year... putting up food for the winter, gathering my berry buckets and heading out to pick, thinking of catching a few more fish, watching the birds migrating to their winter homes, and hoping the first killing frost is still many weeks away. 

Catherine Senungetuk

Alaska Governor's Picnic Anchorage

The Governor's picnic in Anchorage today was well attended. These annual events have generally been non-partisan events in the past and I didn't quiz people about their affiliations or reasons for being there. And we didn't get there until the governor had already left. Not intentionally. We had friends of the kids over for brunch, so we got started late.


There were several government agencies prominently present, including the FBI, which had equipment available to test and a crime lab demonstration.




Some people clearly supported our governor.



Including the owner of the 55 Chevy in the old car display.




A LOT of people were there to eat. There were looong lines of people waiting for food/ You had to be a real Palin fan or very hungry or very patient to wait this long for a free hot dog or hamburger. But I didn't hear anyone grumbling about the lines.










































And there was plenty for the kids to do. With the blogging discussions we've had about pictures of kids, I decided to try just blurring any faces that might be clearly identifiable.

Alaska Political Bloggers Credited

Phil at Progressive Alaska just alerted me about this post at Media Matters by Erik Boehlert Saradise Lost: How Alaska bloggers dethroned Sarah Palin (another case where the title goes well beyond what the article actually says.)

I'm not suggesting that homegrown bloggers alone were responsible for Palin's "no más" moment, but there's no question that the online activists played a key role. That with their shit-kicking brand of frontier citizen journalism, they drove Palin to distraction and changed the way voters nationwide thought about the governor. So if conservative bloggers get credit for driving Dan Rather out of the anchor chair in 2004 following their Memogate campaign-season tale, then the band of scrappy liberal bloggers in Alaska ought to be allowed to bask in a bit of glory, because they made their own history when Palin announced her exit.

Now, Palin has already credited bloggers in her resignation speech. But I guess we saw that as being made scapegoats. Boehlert's comments feel different.

Even What Do I Know? is listed in the story (thanks to Phil's den mother-like devotion to his digital-campers.) While it's true I have written way more Palin posts than I think is good for my mental health, the real bulldogs in this story are (stand up and take a bow as your name is called):

Alaska Progressive
Mudflats
Celtic Diva's Blue Oasis
Just a Girl From Homer
Immoral Minority

along with

AndrewHalcro.com

who's written some critical posts - such as the stuff on Troopergate which began before the VP nomination. (There are lots of other Alaska bloggers who regularly touch on matters political, but the listed blogs were almost all-Palin, all-the-time.)


I take some pride in being, I'm sure, the first website to link to Progressive Alaska, even before it actually went public, having met Phil at the Kohring (or maybe it was the Kott) trial. From the beginning he had ideas of finding a way organize bloggers into a force to post the important stories that the local newspapers were missing. But, as others have mentioned, the pivotal event for Alaska political bloggers was McCain's announcement of his VP running mate.

While some of this pack of self-taught journalists have been more shrill and less polite than is my preference, I have no doubt that those qualities were critical to their success. We get the vacuous news the MSM gives us because that's what most people want. I used to dispute that, but I can see how many hits I get for different posts, and Palin sells, big!

And this isn't good. Other difficult stories aren't being adequately covered - like what's happening in the fishing wars of the North Pacific. We should be unraveling of the complex legal and financial web, including Uncle Ted's role, of what some say is the North Pacific's version of the destruction of the North Atlantic fisheries.

Alaskan bloggers, though, have had a special duty to cover Palin, not simply as a local politician, but because of her national aspirations.

But I would like to debunk some of the conspiracy theories that had Alaskan bloggers as agents with direct links to the White House. While there is a loose email connection among the larger group, and individual bloggers see each other more or less frequently, this is a pretty rag-tag group, united in their dedication to be Alaska's crap detectors.

To give you a sense of how 'loose' this group is, I remember first meeting Linda of Celtic Diva at the Alaska Democratic Convention last May. Then again at a hastily arranged dinner last September out at Phil's place to meet with journalists from Outside who were here to find out about Palin. . That's when I also briefly met Mudflats and Gryphen (from Immoral Minority). And there was a barbecue at Phil's place too. And that's the last time I think I've seen most of them. I'd met Shannyn Moore already at one of the political trials. I've bumped into some of them at events we were all covering - like the Alaska women against Palin demonstration - but other than that, I've had no contact. When I was taking the computer art class last fall, I sometimes ran into Phil while I was locking my bike and he'd come out from his office (music is in the same building as art) for a cigarette break. (He's quit since then.) And the odd email now and then. I realize some of the others have gotten together more often, but this is not a highly polished get-Sarah machine. It is individuals with computers at home who get too little sleep and drink too much coffee, so they can share what they find out about what is behind the facade.

And there were others who offered us encouragement and inspiration along the way, like Matt Browner Hamlin who was in Alaska working on the Begich campaign and had done political blogging in the East (Massachusetts if I recall right[It's Connecticut.]) He raised our sights about what bloggers could do.

Eric Boehlert has already tipped his hat to this group of bloggers in a chapter in his recent book The Bloggers on the Bus.


So what has this group done?

Followed up on every rumor they heard. They didn't always post what they heard, but they looked through the evidence and

• after getting it from several sources, but without confirmation, reported it as a rumor
• got more information and confirmed or rejected it
• analyzed the data available and offered possible explanations and their reasoning
• sometimes taken too much glee in Palin missteps
• kept a constant vigil on everything Palin said, giving her no lattitude when she stretched the truth, and she kept them very busy
  

They've (I'm not sure what it means that I'm using 'they' instead of 'we' but I'll not worry about it and go on that way) posted lots of videos and pictures, of varying levels of good taste, that related to Palin, and had links to local and national stories on Palin.

They've also been sources of information for Outside journalists. Overall, while some of the group have been louder than necessary and sometimes a little fast with declarative sentences, most of the bloggers have qualified their claims based on how much they actually knew or how solid the evidence was.

One critical contribution was the group's early awareness of what Don Mitchell said last week, that Palin is a celebrity, not a serious politician. But unlike Paris Hilton, Sarah Palin held an elected political office, so she was accountable in a way that celebrities aren't. Now that she's almost out of office, she can take advantage of that celebrity without getting flak for not doing a competent job as governor. However, if she plans to continue trying to influence public policy and democratic elections, there will continue to be an open season on Sarah Palin.

[Update July 20, 2009: As I've had time to think more about this, I believe the biggest contribution the so-called progressive blogs was to give Alaska liberals a media presence, a sense of identity and of political efficacy. I've posted an addition to this post today explaining why.]

Don Mitchell Revises the 'Palin-as-Public-Ethics-Champ' Story

With years as a politically active Alaskan and a week's worth of perspective on Palin's decision to resign, Don Mitchell offers a very plausible explanation the Governor's decision over at Alaska Dispatch.

There's a lot of interesting new story and interpretation here. Did you know that Palin was "reportedly livid" when Gov. Murkowski didn't appoint her to fill his vacant US Semate seat?

In December 2002 when Frank was sworn into office, Alaska's election law allowed Governor Murkowski to appoint Senator Murkowski's replacement. Sarah had enough juice to get on the long list of Republicans Frank interviewed. During her interview she came off as vapid and uninformed. But that's not how Sarah saw it. Several weeks later Frank astounded Alaskans by giving his Senate seat to his daughter, Lisa, who had never been publicly mentioned as a candidate for the seat and who had not been interviewed. Sarah, a 38-year-old former small town mayor who had never won a statewide election, reportedly was livid and reportedly never fully forgave Frank, because in her self-absorption she was certain that she should have been the obvious choice.

But most interesting to me was his rewriting of the story of Sarah Palin, ethicist for the people.

Mitchell talks about how she was appointed as the public member of the Oil and Gas Commission, even though she had no experience at all in oil and gas. He also points out how the position didn't require such expertise at the time, though that has since been changed.

Within weeks of her arrival at the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Sarah knew she was drowning. That she had no understanding of, and no interest in, the Commission's highly technical work. And not only that, but, like every state employee, she was expected to be at work five mornings a week. To get to the Commission's office in Anchorage required an hour commute from Wasilla that during the winter she had to make by driving in the pitch dark down an icy, moose-strewn highway. [Moose-strewn? A little color for the Outside readers?]

So according to people who knew her at the time, soon after she arrived at the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Sarah began searching for a face-saving excuse to quit a job she never should have been given.

She picked up on an issue raised by Ethan Burkowitz during the confirmation hearing of another Oil and Gas Commission member - Republican Party Chair Rudy Ruedrich. Berkowitz had asked how a party chair could ethically regulate people he would, as party chair, be asking money from?

For several months thereafter Oil and Gas Conservation Commissioner Palin, who also served as the Commission's ethics officer, had no ethical problem with Randy Ruedrich serving as a Commissioner. But then she suddenly had a huge, and very public, problem when the news leaked that during his workday Ruedrich had been using his office computer to conduct Alaska Republican Party business.

The year previous when she had been a candidate in the Republican primary election for the party's nomination for Lieutenant Governor, Sarah not only had used her computer in the Wasilla mayor's office for campaign purposes, she had used it to communicate about the progress of her campaign with Randy Ruedrich. But now she not only expressed outrage about Ruedrich's ethical lapse, she had the brazen temerity to file an ethics complaint against him. And then in a public fit of professed pique, in January 2004 she quit the Commission because, since the Attorney General's investigation of Ruedrich's violation of the Alaska Ethics Act was ongoing, she was precluded from publicly discussing what she knew about it. As Sarah went out of her way to tell the Anchorage Daily News, the state's largest newspaper: "I'm forced to withhold information from Alaskans, and that goes against what I believe in as a public servant."

There's a lot more in Mitchell's post. I can neither confirm nor dispute Mitchell's factual characterizations. But I think they add a lot more information to the public discussion of who Sarah Palin is. Eventually, with enough accounts, we will be able to sort through them, find which facts seem to stick and which seem to lack substance. Eventually we'll get a clearer picture of the phenomenon of Sarah Palin.

Mitchell's track record as, among other things, the most comprehensive chronicler of the history of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (and volume 2) gives him more credibility than most.

Breaking Up is Hard to Do

This post is better if you have the music from the video on in the background.



We just lost our girlfriend governor. You know, the "hottest Governor in the country" that we've had this rocky relationship with. It started out pretty good. She stood up against Frank and said ethics was the most important thing in life. And we'd never had ethics before and we loved it.

But then John caught her eye, dangling before her much more than we had to give. She was flirting with states all over the country, humiliating us. But when they dumped her, we took her back. It was hard to see her with all those others, but damn it she was "hot!" and she was our governor, no one else's, even if she was so high maintenance.

But now she's made it official. She broke up with us on Friday. She doesn't like ethics with us any more. It seems it didn't just get boring, she's started to hate it. When she was in charge, she loved it. But now that we decided that we wanted to call the ethics shots, she's no longer into it.

And while she told us it was over and she was going to her secret hiding place, she must have her cell phone, because all these other guys are suddenly over at her place and they're as love struck as we once were. She's teasing them. Yesterday they each got to make out with her for ten minutes on the beach, and then she went on to the next guy.


Sorry, different metaphors keep trying out for the role of explaining Sarah Palin. Today, I've been taken over by the high school metaphor. Let's try a variation on this theme.

OK, I graduated high school before Palin was born and I'm sure things are different now. But when I was in high school, there were different cliques.

The soshes (from social) were the 'in' crowd. The beautiful people of high school, they defined what was cool and not. (Has 'cool' been in all this time, or did it go away for a while and come back?) Even among the soshes there were rival cliques. They had minor differences, but they all wore the right clothes, drove the right cars, hung out at the right places, and dated the right people. The cheerleaders (Title IX wasn't even an idea then) and the football players were the inner circle.

Then there were various others castes. The nerdy people were smart, but hopelessly dressed, socially inept, and a bunch of loners. Some soshes used the smarts from time to time for help with homework and exams (and helping them gave the nerds the illusion of temporary coolness), but the in crowd laughed at them behind their backs and sometimes, if necessary, would humiliate them in public.

And then there were others who simply didn't count at all. They weren't well dressed, they weren't cool, and they weren't even smart.

I can't help seeing Palin as one of the soshes. Popularity is the most important thing. The image has to be maintained - cool clothes, being with the right people, doing the cool things. Basically looking good. Going to class is a social event and homework is so boring. She'd been a sosh in Wasilla, but when she moved to Juneau, it was like changing schools and she had to work her way in.

She used some of the nerds to come up with AGIA. They realized she wasn't too smart, but she was beautiful. They loved it when she walked around with them, holding their hands, leaning up against them, as they walked past their usually untouchable rivals the oil team. The team had been busted for gambling with the legislature and were temporarily on probation.

But when John, that college guy, caught Palin's eye, all bets were off. She quickly tried to act college. But she was out of her league. But when they wanted her to be a pit bull - hell that was easy, it was her natural behavior and hiding behind a facade of nice was so tiring. Well, that relationship didn't work out, but a lot of other college guys started panting after this hot high school chick.

But for a while, she came back to finish high school. But it wasn't any fun any more. She even stopped going to class at the end of this last semester to hang out with some college guys. And those nerdy chicks with the blogs started getting brazen and telling people that she wasn't pretty without all that make up, and who was buying her clothes, and they put up posters all over school every time she dallied with another guy. Who are these bitches?! But no matter what she said, they wouldn't leave her alone.

And so now she's announced that in her sophomore year, she's dropping out. I don't need you guys, I'm bored with you. I don't need to do my homework, the college guys like me just the way I am.

Deciding Which Public Information to Release

If you want to see the maturity of Alaskan bloggers, go look at Henkimaa's post "The 2 Million Dollar Meme." Mel writes a term paper on the Palin claim that $2 million has been spent on dealing with 'frivolous' ethics complaints. Mel pulls together ADN stories as well as posts from various blogs (yes, full disclosure, even this blog) which have covered the Personnel Review Board's report that only $300,000 has been spent on these, 2/3 of which was for Troopergate which Palin filed against herself. Mel posts a variety of charts.

Palin's counterclaim is that she's counting the cost of all the time others besides the Personnel Review Board spent. One line from a new ADN article from Sean Cockerham Mel quoted caught my eye:

It is a per-hour calculation that the Palin administration put together, involving time spent by state lawyers deciding which public information to release as a result of all public records requests, time spent by governor's office staffers responding to media inquiries about ethics complaints, and time technicians spend on retrieving requested e-mail, among other things.

This isn't in quotes in the article, so I'm not sure Palin actually said this or Sean has worded it this way, but as I understand it, no one should be deciding which public information to release. ALL public information should be released.

Palin is also quoted as saying she didn't take the filings personally, she's just concerned with all the money it's costing. Yeah right! This just doesn't square with how often and how emotionally she's mentioned it. Why was this mentioned, say, in her resignation speech? On the other hand, I have said that some of the complaints are pushing the line of what we consider acceptable. For instance, all politicians use their offices as stepping stones to higher office and campaign while in office. And for an Alaskan, physically so far away from DC, more time is required. But, ethics review offices, such as the Municipal Board of Ethics, have a pre-screening process with which they screen out 'frivolous' filings. It doesn't take that much time. I think she's taking her cue from the hate-radio guys - never back down from anything you say. She said two million and she's going to go with that no matter the contrary evidence.

Anyway, check out Henkimaa for one of the most indepth Alaskan blogger reports. As I say, this is a professionally prepared report on the topic. (OK, I said term paper above, but my grad students' term papers were often as good or better than reports the government pays for.)

McNamara and Palin - Wrong Stories

Robert McNamara died today at age 93. Lots of others are covering this story. I want to pull out a quote played today on NPR from the movie Fog of War.

"We saw Vietnam as an element of the Cold War, not what they saw it as - a civil war. We were wrong."

McNamara was usually characterized as a 'technocrat.' Over 30 years ago, management scholars Blake and Mouton developed their managerial grid where they identified two characteristics of managers - people orientation and task (production) orientation. McNamara came to the Department of Defense in the Kennedy administration from the Ford Motor Company, clearly a task oriented person. He had a Harvard education and had through his task orientation and mastery of details, done great things for Ford.

I would argue that Palin tends to be more of a people oriented person and mastery of the technical details of getting the job done are not her strength.

I think though that there is another issue that caused failure for both - they both used their skills to push the wrong story.

McNamara told us that his story going into the Vietnam war was "The Cold War" but it should have been "Civil War."

In the Cuban Missile Crisis, at the end, I think we did put ourselves in the skin of the Soviets. In the case of Vietnam, we didn't know them well enough to empathize. And there was total misunderstanding as a result. They believed that we had simply replaced the French as a colonial power, and we were seeking to subject South and North Vietnam to our colonial interests, which was absolutely absurd. And we, we saw Vietnam as an element of the Cold War. Not what they saw it as: a civil war. [also from NPR]

I think that Palin's problems too, are based on a story that is at odds with most people in the US. It's a story, apparently, based on a strong belief in a fundamentalist interpretation of Christianity. It's based on relatively sheltered life with a small set of family and friends and experiences which never seriously challenged her story. Combine this then with her people orientation - which values loyalty (taking care of your own and expecting them to stand with you) - and a weakness with details and analysis of complex issues.

So, it is understandable when Palin is startled by the animosity towards her and it might explain her vitriol in attacking those who challenge her. But I think that while many of the issues that have been raised against Palin are petty, the real issue is the antipathy to Palin's story. Perhaps one day, an enlightened Palin, like a more enlightened McNamara, will say something like:

"I saw good and evil as established by Fundamentalist Christianity, not as they saw it as defined by the Constitution of the United States. I was wrong."

Palin's Loyalty to Alaska Forces Resignation - Tea Leaf Time

[Cut to the chase: looking at this press release, sentence by sentence, I get one message: " Something bad is going down and I'm quitting so it doesn't hurt Alaska."]

A friend called me to ask what I knew.

S: About what?
KS: About Palin's resignation.
S: You're kidding.
KS: No, I thought you might know something you can't print.
S: I know much less than some people think.

OK, it's tea leaf time. All I have is the press release to sift through. If you want to skip down to the press release which is below the tea reading, click here.

Warning: I'm just looking at the words in the press release here and what they suggest and don't suggest. I'm not second guessing whether it was written in good faith or with a clear understanding of what it implies and doesn't imply.


Quote 1

“People who know me know that besides faith and family, nothing's more important to me than our beloved Alaska,” said Governor Palin. “Serving her people is the greatest honor I could imagine.”

". . . serving [Alaska's] people is the greatest honor I could imagine" implies

• So, I'm not resigning because I want to.
• Being President of the US would not be as great an honor.

Early Palin fan, and someone I never expected to quote, Jonah Goldberg, suggests in a letter to Palin published in the National Review and reprinted in today's ADN that Palin's got great charisma but needs to get up to speed on the issues.

So here’s my advice. Stay home and do your job and your homework. You’ll still be a national figure come the primaries. But if you can’t surprise your detractors with your grasp of policy when you re-emerge on the national stage, you won’t win the nomination. More important, you won’t deserve to.

By resigning, she's not taking his advice to do her job. If she were planning to take his advice about doing her homework so she can be a national figure in 2012, then why would she make serving Alaska the highest honor imaginable? And why not some word that would just hint at doing some homework?

Quote 2

“I am determined to take the right path for Alaska even though it is not the easiest path,” said Governor Palin after the announcement.

The right path for Alaska, she seems to be saying, is without her as governor. Why would that be? Has she been watching Sanford do damage control as he tries to hang on as governor of South Carolina? (No I'm not suggesting he's Trig's daddy.)


Quote 3

“Once I decided not to run for re-election, I also felt that to embrace the conventional ‘Lame Duck’ status in this particular climate would just be another dose of ‘politics as usual,’ something I campaigned against and will always oppose.

Ok, deciding not to run for reelection (without the context of the earlier quotes) could be for many reasons. She could then be free of state obligations as she prepared for 2012.

She does play her maverick theme (isn't 'politics as usual' more or less the opposite of maverick?) which could be seen as a hint that she's going to be in the national race again.

Except, what does "in this climate" mean? It doesn't sound like she's talking about a good climate. The press release has an Anchorage byline and here the sun is shining brightly and it's about 70˚ out. So she isn't talking about weather. What exactly is she referring to?

The ragtag pack of local bloggers shouldn't amount to more than a cloud briefly hiding the sun for a serious presidential candidate. Does she mean the Vanity Fair article, and the public debate among Republicans that's going on about whether she's fit to run for President, is raining on her parade? But that storm is in the Lower 48 and shouldn't disturb her being Governor of Alaska.

Not only isn't she going to run for reelection, she's not going to be a lame duck. She uses her disgust with 'politics as usual' to explain her stand on lame ducks. Let's play that logic out. Once you are reelected to your last allowable term, you are a lame duck. So, you should just quit after you are elected if it gets cloudy? Maybe everyone should be limited to one term. But then everyone would be a lame duck... You can see where that logic leads.

Or is this just a cover for why she's going to be the first Alaska governor to quit before her term is up? I think Nixon was the first (and only) US president to quit before his term was up. People generally don't quit when things are going well, even when they are rocky. Just when they are disastrous. [Correction: Wally Hickel quit as governor of Alaska to accept an appointment from President Nixon to be Secretary of the Interior, a position that greatly impacts Alaska.]


Quote 4

It is my duty to always protect our great state. With that in mind, my family and I determined that it is best to make a difference this summer, and I am willing to change things, so that this administration, with its positive agenda, its accomplishments, and its successful road to an incredible future, can continue without interruption and with great administrative and legislative success.

Duty? As governor she has an official duty, but if she resigns, then she won't have that official duty. But I can accept that she feels a personal duty to protect Alaska. But we're still talking about Alaska, not the US.

so that this administration, with its positive agenda, its accomplishments, and its successful road to an incredible future, can continue without interruption

What's the interruption? She's pulling out, as I read this, because something is going to happen that would interrupt Alaska's journey to the future if she were Governor. So it isn't something about the state, it's about her. Something that would interfere with her running the state. Maybe there's another way to read this, but that's what it says to me.

I can't make hide nor hair of "best to make a difference this summer and I am willing to change things." It comes out of the blue in this sentence. The only thing preceding that suggests change is needed is hidden between the lines.


Quote 5

I look forward to helping others – to fight for our state and our country, and campaign for those who believe in smaller government, free enterprise, strong national security, support for our troops, and energy independence.”

This sentence leaves some hope for Palin supporters. She'll be around to help, not just at the state level, but national as well. But this, in the context of the whole press release, is what she'll do with her new spare time, it isn't the reason she's leaving Juneau.


Quote 6

The list of her accomplishments is too long to quote. Just go down and look at it.

This list could be interpreted, as writing the first draft of her legacy as Governor. Optimistic Palin supporters could see it as part of her resume in her application for the US Presidency. If the body of the press release had even had a hint of moving to bigger and better things, they might take heart. But it doesn't. I won't even touch the questions about the legitimacy of the list or what is missing.

Using logical analysis to parse what Sarah Palin says is sort of like using a tape measure to see how good a concert was. But by looking at what's written in the press release (as well as what's not), I don't see hint at better offers - I doubt Obama has asked her to be ambassador to Russia. Maybe she's started to realize how much work writing a book is and doesn't want to risk the $11 million. But the press release itself is all about her love of Alaska and not wanting to interrupt the State's progress. The basic message I read from this: "Something bad is going down soon, and I'm going to resign from office so that my problems don't interfere with the State's well being."

But now that we know there's a cat in the bag, can she keep it in there for three more weeks?

.................................................................................


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE No. 09-167

GOVERNOR PALIN ANNOUNCES NO SECOND TERM

NO LAME DUCK SESSION EITHER

July 3, 2009, Anchorage, Alaska – Governor Sarah Palin announced today that she will not seek a second term as Governor of the State of Alaska and will relegate the
power of governor to Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell in order to serve Alaska’s best interests. Lieutenant General Craig Campbell will move into Parnell’s current role.

“People who know me know that besides faith and family, nothing's more important to me than our beloved Alaska,” said Governor Palin. “Serving her people is the greatest honor I could imagine.”

Standing outside her home in Wasilla, Alaska, Governor Palin reflected upon some of the administration’s accomplishments for Alaska as she approaches her final year in office.

“I am determined to take the right path for Alaska even though it is not the easiest path,” said Governor Palin after the announcement. “Once I decided not to run for re-election, I also felt that to embrace the conventional ‘Lame Duck’ status in this particular climate would just be another dose of ‘politics as usual,’ something I campaigned against and will always oppose. It is my duty to always protect our great state. With that in mind, my family and I determined that it is best to make a difference this summer, and I am willing to change things, so that this administration, with its positive agenda, its accomplishments, and its successful road to an incredible future, can continue without interruption and with great administrative and legislative success. I look forward to helping others – to fight for our state and our country, and campaign for those who believe in smaller government, free enterprise, strong national security, support for our troops, and energy independence.”

The transfer of power will occur following the Governor’s picnic in Fairbanks on July 26. At that point in time, Lieutenant Governor Sean Parnell will be sworn in and Lieutenant General Craig Campbell will assume his role as Lieutenant Governor.

Governor Palin will spend July 4th in Juneau.

###

Selected Accomplishments of the Palin Administration

General
· Transferred more control of public issues to the local level Natural Resources
· Created the Petroleum Systems Integrity Office to oversee responsible development
· Held the line for Alaskans on Point Thomson that encouraged drilling
· Restructured the state’s oil taxes to create a clear and equitable valuation formula for our oil and gas
· Initiated and implemented the largest energy project in the world through the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act
· Removed government from the dairy business and put it back into private-sector hands
Ethics
· Ushered in ethics reform
· Cleaned up previously accepted unethical actions affecting development Fiscal Notes
· Slowed the rate of government growth
· Worked with the Legislature to place billions of dollars in savings
· Vetoed hundreds of millions of dollars in capital budget line items
· Reduced Alaska’s dependence on federal earmarks by nearly 85%
· Eliminated state-funded personal luxuries like the jet, the chef, and junkets
· Refused a pay raise, along with the Lieutenant Governor Education
· Provided unprecedented support for education initiatives Public Safety
· Filled long-vacant public safety positions over the last year Corrections
· Broke ground on the new state prison Fish and Game
· Maintained biologically-sound wildlife management for abundance Environment
· Established first sub-Cabinet on climate change
Legal
· State’s rights protected in two recent victories handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court





For those who must know, the tea is a Chinese jasmine. Labrador tea would have been more appropriate, but I'd have to go pick some first.