"Graham Promises Investigation Of ‘The Effort To Destroy This Good Man’" - Give Me A Break

I've been thinking how many bizarre, even unimaginable (not long ago) headlines we've been seeing.  Some of this, of course, is hyped by the media (online probably worse than print) to get more hits and sell more ads.  The title quote comes from TPM.

But really, Sen. Graham, I'm so glad you've come to the aid of all men who might be falsely accused of sexual abuse.  From a Stanford (sure, biased source since Dr. Ford teaches there) Men's anti sexual assault group (group of traitors to their gender, right Sen. Graham?):

Only about 2% of all rape and related sex charges are determined to be false, the same percentage as for other felonies (FBI). So while they do happen, and they are very problematic when they do, people claim that allegations are false far more frequently than they are and far more frequently than for other crimes.  Put another way, we are much more likely to disbelieve a woman if she says she was raped than if she says she was robbed, but for no good reason.
On a related note, only about 40% of rapes are ever reported to the police, and this is partly because victims know that if their claim becomes public, their every behavior will be scrutinized, they will be shamed for their sexual history, and they will be labeled as lunatic, psychotic, paranoid, and manipulative.  Just because someone does not report their crime does not mean it did not happen.  Furthermore, only one in two claims lead to prosecution, so if the DA decides not to prosecute, that says nothing about whether or not it happened.  http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/reporting-rates)

2% are false claims, and 40% of such crimes are never reported, so that would bump down the 2% figure.

And Sen. Graham is worried about men who are falsely accused, the 2%, rather than all the women  (and men) who are sexually abused and assaulted with impunity.  OK, I know this is one specific man.  But unless you are ideologically blinded, or so corrupted by campaign funders, or worried that accusations like this might affect you and lots of other male abusers you hang out with, it's hard not to find Ford's testimony totally credible and Kavanaugh's evasive at best and sprinkled with lies - big and small - at worst.

What we learned, incontrovertibly, at the hearings was:

1.  In a time of personal crisis, Kavanaugh fell apart.  He did not remain calm and rational.  He blew up.  If Dr. Ford had acted like Kavanaugh, she would have been pilloried in the committee.  Anger is an emotion, one that shows great loss of control.  I don't care if this was a personal crisis. This man is being considered for the Supreme Court.  Only nine people get that privilege.  I'm sure there are plenty of qualified candidates who are able to control their anger and act more like Dr. Ford than Judge Kavanaugh.

2.  He lied about the meaning of words he wrote in his high school year book.  He lied about getting into Yale totally on his own merits, that he had no connections.  (He was a legacy student because his grandfather went to Yale.)  [UPDATE 3pm 9/30/18 - Nathan J. Robinson wrote the detailed, lie-by-lie analysis "How we know Brett Kavanaugh is lying" I didn't have the time or energy to do.  And he does a much better job than I would have had I had the time and energy.  So thanks Nathan.  Here's his summary of what he's doing in this piece:

"In this case, when we examine the testimony of Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford honestly, impartially, and carefully, it is impossible to escape the following conclusions:
Brett Kavanaugh is lying.
There is no good reason to believe that Christine Blasey Ford is lying. This does not mean that she is definitely telling the truth, but that there is nothing in what Kavanaugh said that in any way discredits her account.
I want to show you, clearly and definitively, how Brett Kavanaugh has lied to you and lied to the Senate. I cannot prove that he committed sexual assault when he was 17, and I hesitate to draw conclusions about what happened for a few minutes in a house in Maryland in the summer of 1982. But I can prove quite easily that Kavanaugh’s teary-eyed “good, innocent man indignant at being wrongfully accused” schtick was a facade. What may have looked like a strong defense was in fact a very, very weak and implausible one."

It's long, but he needs time to spell it all out,]

I recognize that these are the kind of lies Kavanaugh worked to attack when they were coming from Bill Clinton.  There the kind of lies one tells to avoid bigger consequences - like not being confirmed by the Senate.

3.  He openly showed his political bias.  "Since my nomination in July, there’s been a frenzy on the left to come up with something, anything to block my confirmation.”

He showed himself to be a bitter, self-centered, jerk.

This was not a profile in courage.  He did not pull himself up and and calmly and rationally defend his actions.  I suspect that would have been hard to do.

Graham's accusation of "the effort to destroy this good man,"  which echoes Kavanaugh's words, should be seen in the context of Kavanaugh's own work for Ken Starr on the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

A 1998 memo written by Kavanaugh that was released in full Monday by the National Archives underscores his distaste for Bill Clinton’s Oval Office affair in apparently purposefully graphic terms. As the team prepared to interview Clinton, Kavanaugh advises it to put the president through the wringer “piece by painful piece” when questioning him.

This is what Kavanaugh wanted to do to Clinton - to destroy him.  So naturally he believes the Democrats would do the same thing.  Is the K in Kavanaugh for Karma?

There may be people out to destroy Kavanaugh.  The more I learn about him, the more I realize he's been a political hitman disguised as hard-working former alter-boy, who joined the Federalist Society judicial cult of originalism that favors the powerful over other citizens, and served that cause to the cusp of a still possible Supreme Court position.

I think most people who oppose him fear his ideological commitment to originalism would do great damage to the United States.

His performance the other day, in my mind, disqualifies him for this position for the reasons listed above, regardless of whether he did the deeds Dr. Ford alleges he did.  This hearing is NOT about whether Kavanaugh sexually abused Dr. Ford - though the Republicans are making it that, and short of eyewitness reports, or better yet, video, nothing can prove it to their satisfaction.

It's really - as Graham said earlier - not about truth, but about power.

Alaskans, your calls to Sen. Murkowski carry more weight than those of people outside of Alaska. Call her.  Email her.  Even if you've already done so ten times.  And send copies to Sen. Sullivan.  He's not going to vote against Kavanaugh, but it's important to let him know you're watching and you aren't happy.

Murkowski, Lisa - (R - AK)

522 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510

(202) 224-6665

Contact: www.murkowski.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact

Sullivan, Dan - (R - AK)

702 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510

(202) 224-3004

Contact: www.sullivan.senate.gov/contact/email

I did an hour bike ride this morning, had a hot malasada, and now I'm going to play in the water.

















And a reminder about Senate courage from the JFK Presidential Library:




And here are some study/discussion questions for students that the Senate Judiciary Committee might want to work on as a group.

And some poetry on courage from a rich, white, male, imperialist poet (Rudyard Kipling) that is sure to appeal more to Sen. Graham.  It begins:

"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;"

Happy Birthday Dad From Maui

It's been, this is somewhat shocking to me, 30 years since my Dad died.  But today is his birthday and I celebrated by going for a swim this morning before it got too hot.  What would we talk about if he were here?   Definitely the Kavanaugh hearings.  Our kids were teenagers when he died, but he spent much of his last month with us in Anchorage.  He loved being a grandfather too.  So we would talk about them and their children.

We'd talk about how long it's been since we've been to Hawaii, how much it's been built up since the last time we were here.  But also how wonderful the water is, and the local fresh food.

Yesterday, Dad, we went beach scouting.  We decided that Kamaole I would be a good place to try out the snorkeling.  It was hot and windy when we parked ourselves on the sand.

There were two sets of fins and two facemarks and snorkels in the condo we're staying at.  I fiddled with the straps so it would be tight on my face and went into the warm (but a little cooler than the air) water.  I don't remember, Dad, Hawaiian water being so warm, but I've always ever been here between December and March.  The water was very clear and I swam around looking for something other than just a smooth sandy bottom.  A small school of small but colorful fish swam nearby.  The water felt great, floating there felt great.  After a while I decided to head back to J on the beach.  But I'd drifted a ways and decided to swim back rather than walk on the beach.  

That's when I saw the sea turtle up ahead of me.  The water wasn't deep.  I could have stood up.  It was coming straight toward me.  Maybe three or four feet long.  It kept coming my way.  I've snorkeled where there were sea turtles before, but only in places further out from the shore and where I'd been told they were likely to be.  But here it was, still swimming straight at me, a foot or so below me.  I tried to move to the side and it went right by.  

Wow!  I wish I could show you a picture I took, but I don't have an underwater camera.  And without the camera I was totally there with the turtle, not worrying about getting a good picture.  Same kind of thrill as a close encounter with a moose like I had last week.  

Later an old friend of J's - who lives on Maui -  came by.  We snacked on two kinds of poke (in the bowl lower left) we'd just bought as well as star fruit.   And the star fruit was, I realize now, a prelude for what were going to see.*  

.  

As the sun set we shifted to the lanai to catch up on all that's happening in each others' lives.

If you look closely, you can see the windmills on the hill on the right.  

And then the stars came out.  Well, I'm pretty sure they're the planets.  

Time and Date lists the planets we can see tonight  in Maui (and I'm assuming last night wasn't too different) but I'm not sure which planet is which in the picture below.

The camera picked up three.  Venus is supposed to be "Fairly good visibility" and sets at 7:40 (tonight).  This picture was taken last night at at about 7:55pm (last night.) (My camera seems to be on PST and about 20 minutes fast.)  So maybe Venus is the one on the horizon.  Mars is supposed to be "Perfect visibility" and set (tomorrow) at 1:51am, so it could be the one on top.  And I'm guessing the middle one is Jupiter which is "Fairly good visibility" and is supposed to set (tonight) at 8:47pm.  If it's clear enough tonight, I'll track them more carefully.  There is sun but also a lot of clouds now.  

[UPDATE 7:49 pm:  The light on the horizon is probably a boat based on what I see tonight.]

Then we went for a good Thai dinner and lots of conversation.

Dad, you didn't follow the stars that closely, but your grandson does and maybe he'll see this and let us know.  And as long as I'm talking to my Dad here, I can also fantasize that he might be up there with the planets and the stars.  

*Ok, planets aren't stars.  But then stars don't look like slices of star fruit either.  

Kavanaugh Hearings Thoughts - No One Is Entitled To A Supreme Court Seat And This Was NOT A Trial

[UPDATE:  Just moments after I posted this, I see that Sen Flake has called for a week's delay to let the FBI investigate the sexual assault charge.]

1.  Ostensibly, this hearing was about  who is telling the truth.  Dr  Ford or Judge Kavanaugh?
Republicans seemed to have conceded  that  Ford was telling the truth, EXCEPT that she got her assaulter wrong and Kavanaugh was telling the truth when he said he never assaulted her or anyone else.   That takes some tricky brain compartmentalization, but since the Trump presidency, Republicans have gotten lots of practice with that.

Democrats felt Ford was telling the truth including her identification of her assaulter.

My perception, and apparently most people's, was that Ford was very credible  Even the Republicans spoke of her with respectful tones.  The only problem with her testimony, in their eyes, was that she was mistaken about her attacker.

Kavanaugh, on the other hand, provided evidence of what some had alleged was a violent temper when he gets drunk.  Except, I presume, he wasn't drunk.  He certainly seemed to be highly emotional - yelling in obvious fury about the accusations and also crying at times.

I couldn't help but think about the warning:  You don't know how you'll react in a crisis until you are in one.  Kavanaugh was in a crisis yesterday and instead of staying calm and reasoned, Kavanaugh lost it completely.  He was  focused on himself - how unfairly he was being treated.  Although people argue that it is difficult to pinpoint the meaning of 'judicial temperament," what Kavanaugh demonstrated yesterday, surely wasn't it.

And Kavanaugh refused to concede the two things that could have cleared his name.

1. Unlike Ford, he's taken no polygraph.  
2. He wouldn't agree to ask an FBI investigation into the assault charge.  Despite telling Senators he would agree to anything to clear his name,  when they offered him such a way - that he ask Trump to order an FBI investigation, he hemmed and hawed and said everything but wouldn't give a clear yes or no.  
1. He echoed Republican senators that there could have been an FBI investigation if the Democrats hadn't concealed the Ford letter.  (Feinstein said she had done so because of a promise she'd made not to reveal Ford's name.)   
2. He quoted Joe Biden saying that you could prove anything you wanted with an FBI report, that they didn't make any conclusions, only presented facts.  Yet he also said he had been cleared by FBI investigations any number of times when he was up for previous positions.  
3. Kavanaugh also claimed that there was no need for an FBI investigation because the Senate Judiciary Committee was investigating.  Yet each Senator gets only 5 minutes, and a skilled candidate like Kavanaugh who has coached nominees in the past, knows he can eat those minutes up by talking without answering the questions.  FBI investigators can ask for as long as they need.
4. He also said there was no need to have people like Mark Judge testify because he'd already submitted a note saying that Kavanaugh was not involved in the Ford assault.  Yet writing a note - actually it came from his attorney - is clearly not the same as appearing in person and having people ask probing questions and being able to judge how the person responds.  

Overall, the only evidence that Ford was wrong about her attacker was Kavanaugh's denial.  And his claims of inconsistencies in her story, that trauma experts say are normal memory lapses for trauma victims.   That was enough for Republicans.  Even though he, and they, could probably get much closer to the truth with an FBI investigation and him taking a polygraph.

2.  For Republicans, the hearing was about trying to convince people watching, that the Democrats have poisoned the advise and consent process by, 

• hiding the Ford letter until the last minute
• by opposing Kavanaugh from the beginning

Someone even said that from now on Supreme Court nominations will simply be bitter partisan fights, not about the candidates' real qualifications, but about winning and losing.

But, of course, that needs to be put into the context of all the federal judges that the Republicans held up when Obama was president, including never even holding hearings for Merrick Garland.
And the fact that Trump had relatively little trouble getting Neil Gorsuch approved.
The problems are also exacerbated by the elimination of the 2/3 majority requirement for approval of Supreme Court judges.  With that rule, presidents knew they had to nominate a judge moderate enough that some members of the minority could vote for.  With the simple majority rule we have now, a president can appoint a much more extreme judge if he can get all of the majority to vote yes.


3.  Kavanaugh's testimony made this all about Kavanaugh.  He was obsessed with how this process was ruining his reputation, his life, and his family.  All the things that happen to rape and sexual assault victims, he claimed for himself.  Yet as much as he was feeling sorry for himself, many decisions he's made as a judge don't seem to show much empathy for other people who have far more difficult problems in life.  See this overview of some of his decisions.

But this process wasn't about Kavanaugh really.

Yes, he is the nominee, but this was a hearing to confirm a presidential nominee to the Supreme Court.  No one is owed a Supreme Court position.  And no one is 'the only possible good candidate.' The president should nominate the best person he can find that the Senate will approve.  In the Senate's vetting process, some problems have arisen.  Problems, which if true, should disqualify Kavanaugh.

A candidate who had the best interests of the country in his heart, rather than ranting about his victimhood,  might realize that the debate over his nomination was not only hurting the country now, but would hurt the credibility of the Supreme Court if he were to serve.

4.  No one is entitled to a Supreme Court seat.  He acted as if he were owed this Supreme Court position.  It was his and he sees the Democrats trying to snatch it away.  I understand that being accused of sexual assault does have a great impact on one's life.  But far worse things happen to people every day - innocent people get shot by police, others die because they can't afford medical treatment, or they lose their home so they can pay for medical treatment.  Their kids die of violence in schools.  And my sense is that Kavanaugh, as a judge, has little sympathy for their plight.  But, I give him credit that, like all the Republican senators there, he made sure not to insult Ford or to question her integrity.  But one can't help thinking that's because in the #metoo era, they knew it would make them look bad in front of millions.

But Kavanaugh made it clear - this wasn't about the good of the country, it was about him and his entitlement.  He yelled in anger.  He cried in (not sure, frustration?)  And he told us how his life had been ruined.

Most of us have survived not being appointed to the US Supreme Court.  And most of us have been turned down for something we felt was important - whether a job, a marriage proposal, a job.  And we've all been upset for a while and then gotten on with our lives.  Most of us have not had temper tantrums during the job interview.   The temporary fuss over Kavanaugh's confirmation will blow over.   His children will still love him and he will find lucrative opportunities.  In fact, his fallback position, should he not be confirmed, is his current life time appointment as a judge.

5.  This isn't a trial.  Neither Kavanaugh nor Ford were on trial yesterday - though the Republicans hired a woman prosecutor to question Ford for them as if she were on trial.. There will be no verdict of guilty or innocent.  No one will face jail time or other penalties as a result of these hearings.  And because this is not a courtroom, their resolution of which person is telling the truth, need not be "beyond a reasonable doubt."


6.  Kavanaugh was too clever for his own good.

Kavanaugh knows this Senate process well.  He's coached other court nominees when he worked in the Bush administration.  But all rules of strategy are meant to be broken when conditions change.  One rule most judicial candidates have adopted is to be as evasive in answers as possible. Don't let the Senators pin you down.  Kavanaugh has become an expert in not saying yes or no.  As mentioned above, he skirted the issue every time Democratic Senators urged him to ask for an FBI investigation to clear his name.

But in another question - Did he wish that Dr. Ford had never come forward? - he again weaseled.  This really seemed like a softball question.  There was no one watching (I'm sure) who didn't believe that Kavanaugh would have preferred to have his hearings over with without Dr. Ford's accusations.  Yet he wouldn't say yes.  I assume that his training in evasion wouldn't let him acknowledge what everyone knew to be true.   In my opinion, he would have sounded uncharacteristically candid had he just said, "I would love not to have to be here today, so yes."  He couldn't.  All he could do was continue playing dodgeball as Democratic senators kept throwing questions at him.


There was so much to think about during yesterday's hearings.  These are just a few observations I had.

And I can't help but imagine what people who did NOT see the testimony and are relying on news reports might think.  Even reports I heard on NPR seemed to be bending over backwards to not suggest any bias - thus depriving the listener of how different the testimony of the two was.

Just Spent My First Daylight Hours In Maui Watching Senate Hearings, But Reminded That Universe Will Continue Unaffected

We got in late last night.  I didn't set an alarm for this morning, but I woke up early enough to only miss the first half hour - much of which was repeated during breaks.

But as important as the Kavanaugh hearings may be to many of us, really, the universe isn't paying any attention.  My evidence?

We finally took off about 7pm last night from Seattle as the sun was starting to set.  We were headed southwest to Maui so we had a sunset backdrop for a long way.  The picture above - well it really looked like that from my window seat.  The sun and the rest of the universe are oblivious to what we do here on earth.

There’s still a fiery glow along the horizon at 9pm Seattle time (7pm Hawaii time).

These are just a few examples of the changing sunset over the first two or more hours of our flight, though the first picture is by far my favorite.


And as I look out over the cloud covered ocean, the sky and the water seem unaffected by the Senate Hearings as well.

Though here on earth, the activities of humans are affecting the oceans and the wind patterns and how the clouds move and how long they hang over places while they drop their load of water back to earth.  Who gets on the Supreme Court and the decisions they make about climate change, about regulations on carbon, and about various things - like campaign financing and gerrymandering - that affect who gets elected to Congress will make a difference on our planet.

Long Delays at Seatac

We landed with a thump and soon we were stopped.  In line, waiting for other arriving planes to  get gates, for planes to take off, and finally for a gate.  It was about 45 minutes sitting on the tarmac when we arrive this morning.  We had a long wait til our connecting flight to Maui, so it was sort of ok.  Except the long layover was so we could catch the train in to Seattle to see our daughter and granddaughter.  But we still had four hours of bliss.  But this post is about the delays at Seatac.

When we got back to the airport and onto the plane, we left the gate on time.  But it was another 45 minutes before we took off.  But we made it to Maui on our scheduled time.  

Here’s a plane that just arrived crossing the take-off runway.  

And here’s part of the line-up of planes behind us once we got to the head of the line.  There are four in the picture and there were four more behind the Alaska plane on the left.  

The pilot said there’s a runway being repaired which is most of the delay.

I'm not complaining, just noting.  We still had a wonderful time with the little one and now we're sweating in warm and humid Maui.

Alaskans In LA Times Stories

Saturday's  LA Times' page 2 had just one story,  by Alaska's Zachariah Hughes , about a transplanted North Carolinian in Kotzebue.  In part:

“I like the fall up here,” said Jay Denton, an educator raised in North Carolina who’s spent the last decade in the small towns and villages of the region. Now he lives in Kotzebue, the town of some 3,200 residents about 20 river miles from Hugo’s bald dome. 

Denton stared down at the broad cursive of the Noatak River as it trickled from the western edge of the Brooks Range toward the Chukchi Sea, flanked by taxi-yellow willows and spiky green spruce and miles of rolling tundra.

Fall in the Arctic is something to behold. It begins with a rush of chilled air that prompts the vegetation to change, a shift in the light, and a flurry of movement, both human and animal. It is a season of paradoxes as the flora and fauna come alive on the cusp of winter. But there’s also the inevitable feeling of decay, of an ephemeral landscape slipping away.

Lillian Lennon photo in LA Times

Today, a long story on the ups and downs for transgender folks nationally, includes a picture of Anchorage's Lillian Lennon, who worked to defeat the referendum that would have repealed transgender rights in Anchorage.

"In April, transgender people got some support from voters in Anchorage. By a 6-percentage-point margin, they defeated a ballot measure that would have repealed a trans-inclusive civil rights ordinance and required transgender people to use public bathrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender at birth.
For activists, that result was heartening in light of events in Houston in 2015 after its City Council adopted an ordinance that included protections for transgender people using restrooms based on gender identity. Opponents of the ordinance gathered enough signatures for a repeal referendum, then campaigned using the slogan “No Men in Women’s Bathrooms.” By 61% to 39%, the anti-bias ordinance was repealed."

I included the Houston part, just so Alaskans don't get complacent.  The article also mentions a similar referendum is on the ballot in Massachusetts.  

Autumn Equinox Is Gone

We hiked the Wolverine Peak Trail today as the colors are changing.

Bark on an old birch trunk.

Meanwhile at home, the birch leaves have begun to fall as well.

I could laugh at this, except that a Supreme Court seat is at stake

When I read about Kavanaugh confirmation strategist Ed Whelan concocting bizarre stories to explain Kavanaugh out of trouble over Dr. Ford's charges of sexual assault, I couldn't help but think of 10 year olds thinking they could outsmart their grandmother with some crazy story about how the window got broken but not by them..  (For those who have been marooned on a desert island, the story Whelan came up with, is that Ford misidentified the person who sexually assaulted her.  It was really some other guy.)

The excuse is so full of holes, I just had to look online to find the worst ever alibis.  

Whelan's efforts seem about as simple-minded as the ideas listed in a post at Cracked  entitled, "The 7 Stupidest Alibis in the History of Crime"

First, there are the stories that, like Whelan's, try to blame someone else:

#7  "My cat downloaded all that child pornography."

and

#1  "It was my evil twin!"

Whelan's story falls right into this pattern. The evil twin seems to be the best fit -  the other guy supposedly looks a lot like Kavanaugh.   But Whelan's efforts have fallen apart, badly. 

Just in case he's working on more cockamamy excuses, we can look at the other five stupidest alibis.  

Here are two I'll call the  "I'm immune" alibis:

#5  "I am a Texas Republican sovereignty."  

I guess Kavanaugh was counting on a version of this one before Ford showed up, only Kavanaugh's variation is "I'm a member of the Federalist Society."  I guess he's still using that and Grassley is still accepting that as a valid excuse for anything.  Though Whelan (the head of the "Ethics and Public Policy Center, mind you, and a fervent Federalist) is helping, along with Kavanaugh to strip off the veneer of purity and respectability the Federalist Society has long dazzled Republicans with.

The other example of "I'm immune":

#2  "I worship the Norse gods!"

Kavanaugh's offers, "I worship the constitution” which up til now has made him immune to most everything.

What should I call this next one?  The plagiarist alibi?

#4  "Did you see Law and Order last night? It was exactly like that."  

Actually, Democrats are using  this one:"Did you see the Anita Hill hearings?  It was exactly like that."

Then there are these two that blame "things" for their behavior.   

#3 "I shot someone six times because I was on a diet."  

This worked for Dan White, and perhaps Kavanaugh would argue the alcohol made him do it, but that would acknowledge he did it.  But given what Whelan's done already, who knows? (Actually Snopes explains that White didn't actually claim the Twinkies made him do.   I'm letting you know so I'm not spreading false rumors.)

And

# 6 "The alignment in my car is bad."  (You really have to go to Cracked to appreciate the absurdity of how this and the other alibis were used.)

This would be a variation of the diet alibi, like "the bed in that room knocked me on top of her."

As the title says, I could laugh at this, except that a Supreme Court seat is at stake.

 [The #s are the rankings that Cracked gave these alibis.]

Reading Press Releases Between The Lines - Anchorage Airport

Here's a press release I got by email from the Anchorage Airport today.  My comments are below.

Cargo Ranking: Up one spot to #5 in the world, remains #2 in the US
(ANCHORAGE, AK) — Airport Council International (ACI) released its Annual World Airport Traffic Report yesterday with 2017 numbers. Last year, more than 2.7 million tonnes of cargo transited through the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport.
Airport Manager, Jim Szczesniak said, “The airport remains a substantial part of the world air cargo system, that’s good for Anchorage and good for the State. We continue to promote our strategic location, and the synergies that Anchorage can provide in air cargo transfer, e-commerce distribution centers, major and minor aircraft maintenance and repair, and aircraft parts warehousing. This all translates to good paying jobs for Alaskans.”
Anchorage Airport is located on transpolar flight routes between Asia, North America and Latin America.
Total cargo volumes handled by airports experienced a record increase of 7.7 percent from the previous year.
Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport is less than 9.5 hours from 90 percent of the industrialized world and serves more than 5 million passengers annually. The airport accounts for 1 in 10 jobs in Anchorage, accounting for more than 15,000 jobs in Anchorage and a $1 billion in earnings.
The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities oversees 239 airports, 10 ferries serving 35 communities, more than 5,600 miles of highway and 731 public facilities throughout the state of Alaska. The mission of the department is to “Keep Alaska Moving through service and infrastructure.” [emphasis added.]

Let's look at the wording.

We are told in the headline and first paragraph that ANC went up one spot in the world rankings in 2017 and that we increased by more than 2.7 million tonnes of cargo.  

The every next paragraph begins by mentioning Airport Manager Jim Szczesniak.  I would suggest that the placing of his name like that would imply that he should take credit for this increase.  But I'd note that Szczesniak's appointment as the Anchorage Airport manager came in January 2018.  So he had nothing to do with the 2017 increase.  It might have been nice to give former airport manager John Parrott credit.  But then Parrott was asked to leave by the governor last October for undisclosed reasons.

But I'd also note things that the article doesn't mention:

If you click on it you'll be able to read it better.  Or go to the original here.

The press release tells us that world-wide air cargo increased by 7.7%.  It doesn't tell us (but the chart does)  that Anchorage increased only by 6.7%. In fact, of the top 10 airports internationally, Anchorage's increase was the 7th highest, or fourth from the bottom.  Of course, to be fair, the less you have to start in actual quantity, the easier it is to get a higher percentage increase.  But then again airports #1 (Hong Kong) and #3 (Shanghai) increased by 9.4% and 11.2% respectively.

The Airports Council International's press release, on which the Anchorage Airport press release is based, also tells us that the biggest growth in passengers and cargo comes from Asia.  So, in some ways Anchorage's growth is due to our lucky global location equidistant between Asia, Europe, and Eastern US.  (The press release doesn't mention Europe, but does mention Latin America which didn't used to be in the airport's publicity.)

International passenger service via Anchorage is way down (since 1990) due to planes that fly longer distances and passengers who want to get wherever they are going faster. (It was great for Anchorage residents who could fly directly to Europe and Asia.)  But freight fleets would rather carry more paying cargo weight than fuel weight, so a stop in Anchorage lets them carry more cargo and less fuel and then pick up more fuel in Anchorage. And credit must be given to the airport for being ready to take on more traffic.

I understand that the purpose of the press release is to make their organization look as good as possible.  But it's also the role of journalists to point out what they don't say.  On that count, I'd like to also note how the press release talks about all the jobs the airport provides.  It doesn't talk about all the noise Anchorage residents had to endure this summer and the even more noise they will have to endure next summer.  It also doesn't talk about all the pollution that is added to Anchorage's air and water.  (I found lots of interesting information and you can easily find studies that downplay the amount of air pollution  But check the dates of the studies.  And who did them.)

Why I Live Here - Meeting Friends On The Bike Trail

I was biking home.  Just got under the first bridge under Seward Highway (going east), along Campbell Creek, when I see this moose coming in my direction.  I pull out my pocket camera and shoot a bit of video.  Then back up.  Then back up more - this time to the bike trail bridge over the Creek.  It's still coming.  But then it veers off into the bushes below the bridge.

This is why people can't move away from Anchorage.  These encounters are just too cool.  The greenbelt cuts through town.  About 10 minute bike ride from my house.