Alaskana

URBAN ALASKA :-)

Seems as though I ought to make "Alaska" be the "Home" button! I was, after all, born and raised here ... and for a white guy on the gray side of 50 there aren't all that many of us! Included here are a miscellany of Alaskana articles that I have written from time to time. Beyond that, there is no particular theme to tie them together. Alaska is strange and wonderous enough, however, that it is a theme unto itself.

1)

.

Rolling Heads

November 27, 2008
Rolling Heads

Having spent so much time yammering generically about the fact that Sarah Palin took on the Big Boys and won, it seems particularly appropriate to use Thanksgiving to give you all a more specific rundown on exactly who the turkeys are whose heads have, or are soon likely, to roll.

It has been awhile since I did my "Sarah Palin cleaned up Alaska" shtick on this blog. But when I'm writing in an online news or (some other) blog comment section regarding an article on Palin I find that I do some version of it fairly regularly. Generally this is when either the initial article or existing comments do the "Sarah Palin is ethically challenged, and dumb besides; even the people of Alaska can't stand her any longer" regurgitation. (It is not difficult finding such allegations; an enormous number of people still believe the media's caricature despite having at least the opportunity to learn a lot more about her now that the election is over. This is not a woman who shies from the media! :-) She has almost certainly given substantively more interviews post-election than she was allowed to do during the campaign!

My standard rap often includes the assertion that Palin "cleaned house" [and Senate :-)] up here and took on the Big Boys and won; that people had been campaigning on reform tickets for years but once elected, either joined the gravy train or were effectively silenced. When it came time to stand up and fight, they backed down and the Big Oil folks just pocketed them.

But, I claim that Palin was utterly fearless. And in her we finally found someone who would stand up to the rampant corruption and not blink. When she was serving as Chair of the Oil and Gas Commission she discovered documented, provable, rampant corruption but she couldn't get anyone to pay attention to her. So she quit and ran for her boss's job [Governor] and whupped him in the primary! A sitting Governor who had served the state for decades as a U.S. Senator and she demolished him in the primary and then tromped a two-term, very popular, prior Governor in the main race.

Then she (and the FBI whom she called in to work on the case) started cleaning up and that because of her probes some "(self) important people", including some who could have bought the entire Alaskan prison system without major financial difficulty are going to spend their retirement looking out from its bars. She showed that many of our legislators were for sale on the open market. (She found them on eBay ... no! Just kidding! :-) I claim that even Senator Stevens wouldn't have been busted if it hadn't been for the probes she started.

I further claim that once the Big Boys found that she couldn't be bought, bribed, blustered or bullied they didn't leave the state in a huff (as had been predicted by many); but just sort of shrugged and said "ok" and that she has been able to develop a good working relationship with them.

But I thought I should put some meat on those sort of amorphous claims and take a closer look at exactly who got caught either purchasing legislators or being a purchased legislator, and dispel, or respond to, however you want to phrase it, the "yeah, who?" challenge.

So, let's see. Who all has Palin "taken out"?

I should begin this by saying that the probes are continuing and that there will undoubtedly be future additions to it. [For example, our recently "reelected in a squeaker" U.S. Representative, Don Young, hasn't been charged or indicted of anything. But, by last April, he had still spent well over a million dollars (!) on attorney fees! I don't know what the tab must be by now!]

We have different "categories" of corrupt players. For starters, we have the Big Boys who a couple years ago were highly respected business leaders and well thought of "involved in the community" type folks and are now convicted felons. In addition to which they are either at or approaching retirement age and are so desperate to not spend any more of it in the Big House than necessary that they turned on their prior "partners in crime" and ratted them out to the FBI or U.S. Attorney's office in exchange for "hoped for" leniency.

The "Biggest Gun" in this group is Bill Allen who is the ex-CEO of the "used to be high flying" oil services company VECO (which is largely an Alaskan company but it also operates in Asia, the Middle Ease, the Caribbean and other parts of the U.S.). He was very involved in community affairs and a highly respected and very well known "friendly face of your friendly neighborhood oil company"! In May of 2007 he pled guilty to extortion, bribery and conspiracy to impede the IRS. Joining him in so pleading was VECO's Vice [yes :-)] President for Community and Government Affairs, Rick Smith. The specific issue that was behind the activities he pled to involved bribing legislators to pass an oil tax law that VECO was pushing. His sentencing awaits, but is anticipated to be between nine and eleven+ years in jail plus a substantial fine. This is not the sort of person who envisioned the type of "retirement community" he will be joining! Where the sentence ultimately is within that range is presumably contingent to some degree on how well he does the job of bringing down everyone else. But he cut his deal to rat on his partners in crime (allegedly) not primarily for a better sentence for himself, but to keep his son and other family members from being charged (which means we'll probably never know what all his son Mark did).

But Allen is an excellent example of how far the mighty have fallen since Sarah put the trip wires out around the candy jar. The Allen family is a family of money. It is a family that has even more money now that they "had" to sell VECO. Even Allen is living the good life at the moment. But he is going to either have a heart attack and die before he gets there (strangely it seems a lot of folks who can't psychologically or emotionally deal with spending significant time in prison die before they get there), or he is going to be spending a huge portion of the remainder of his life in jail. It will be a dramatic change for the man!

Those two, Allen and Smith, are the highest ranking Oil Boys to bite the big one. But it isn't only the oil industry that is involved. Our legislators were so clearly for sale that even a bunch of high muckety mucks in the fisheries industries are being investigated for legislator purchases! Oh, and on the "payer" side of the ledger we also convicted lobbyist William Bobrick who was sentenced to five months in prison.

The list of the "payees" (the folks on the take) that are convicted, indicted, or "allegedly anticipated to be indicted" has some even more powerful names. The biggest, of course, is "Senator for Life" ... not; Ted Stevens. As virtually everyone knows he was convicted ... excuse me, I erred on what the definition of is is! :-) Ted Stevens was found guilty by a jury [he is right ... technically he hasn't been convicted yet - that will be done by the judge at sentencing] of not reporting gifts from Allen and others. Even at that he came within a whisker of being re-elected anyway. [There was some logic to that ... even if he was kicked out of the Senate a week after being elected to the seat, the seat would be filled by a Republican. Instead we have democrat Mark Begich.]

So, Senator Stevens has been found guilty of seven felonies and lost his Senate seat ... and I have a hunch the worst is yet to come. His trial was strange enough, between prosecutorial and juror misconduct. The capper being a juror telling the judge -- after Stevens lost the election due, presumably to his "conviction", that he lied at the prosecution's behest. It makes one wonder how many layers of corruption there are. The Democrats wanted that seat badly ... they are desperate to have 60 seats so they can be "filibuster-proof". Whether or not it was intentional skulduggery (and we may well never know), there was enough bizarre stuff that Stevens may win a new trial on appeal. The process could take years before such a new trial ever came to be and no one has a clue what might happen to Bill Allen or other witness by then. Likely, Stevens is going to get convicted and sentenced ... but the man is 80 years old and stubborn as a mule ... I personally don't expect him to spend any time behind bars. But that doesn't really matter. His life is in tatters. His reputation destroyed. His life's work (and he truly did some excellent stuff) ... will be completely overshadowed by his reputation as "the crooked Senator" now. Probably even worse than all that, his pride and joy, son Ben, who was the president of the Alaska State Senate ... looks to be even deeper into the scandals than Ted. I think Ben probably will serve substantive time in prison. He is accused of taking bribes from the fisheries industry, VECO and others. Bill Allen says he bribed him. I know that is not what Ted's hopes for his handsome, dynamic, powerhouse of a son were.

What other big names? Well ... we have another parent and child combination under severe scrutiny. Ex-Senator; ex-Governor Frank Murkowski (the sitting Governor that Sarah tromped in the primary) looks like he is going under. They haven't indicted him yet, but the Feds can pretty well demonstrate that he got over $20,000 worth of unreported "value" from VECO (a large part of that was apparently polling services) ... and the word is that there will be lots more on the plate when the indictment is actually presented. He had served the state for decades as its "other Senator", but resigned to "come home and take over the Governor's job". Then ... although the law has been changed to try to keep something so embarrassing from happening again, as Governor he had the right to fill vacant U.S. Senate seats; even those that he just vacated! So he appointed his daughter Lisa!!! No nepotism in Alaska! It looks like he may not have done her any favors though as she has allegedly been caught with her hand in the cookie jar as well; for, among other things, diverting taxpayer funds to a road to her home!

So the curtain is apparently falling on two of the biggest political family acts in Alaska: the Ted and Ben show and the Frank and Lisa show.

Let's see ... in the "sure, I'll have some" department I've discussed our U.S. Representative, Don Young (the list of his alleged scandals is lengthy, but also includes VECO bribes), our current U.S. Senators, Stevens and Lisa Murkowski, our prior Governor/Senator Frank Murkowski, the ex-president of the State Senate and son of our Senator for Life, Ben Stevens. Those are the biggest names on the "take" list ... they are also the biggest names in state politics! Or were before the name "Palin" surfaced :-)

Others that have been hammered include Frank Murkowski's Chief of Staff Jim Clark (who also cut a deal with the Feds to narc out more folks). The former Speaker of the (State) House, Pete Kott was sentenced to six years in prison. Former State Representative Victor Kohing got a three and a half year sentence. Former State Representative Tom Anderson got five years.

There are several people who have either been indicted or very publicly named as on the take. That includes former State Representative John Cowdery who has been indicted for taking bribes. Former State Representative Bruce Weyrauch will be going to trial soon - Bill Allen says VECO bribed him as well. Oh, Trevor McCabe; he was hooked up with Senator Ted and was apparently the recipient of "scam" money procured by Ted.

There are ... several others who are almost certainly going to be charged. There are rumors swirling about a few more. And almost certainly there are some that are guilty that simply aren't going to get caught.

So that's the situation to date. One of the main planks on which Sarah Palin ran for Governor was to bring these people to justice [these folks were, bottom line, engaged in a conspiracy to steal Alaska's resource wealth] and one of the reasons she had a 90%+ favorability rate is because ... unlike every other politician who had made that promise ... she did it.

Rock Star Embarrassment?

November 25, 2008
Rock Star Embarrassment?

Thank you Kelly for sharing that sentiment :-) That is a reference to the note she added to the "Time to Take Campaign Posters Down" article in which she opines that "Sarah Palin is an idiot and an embarrassment to the state of Alaska." Actually, I mean that. I appreciate all opinions here. It would be nice to flesh it out a bit; for instance it might make a lot of difference to some folks to know whether Kelly is an Alaskan or just someone "out there" feeling sorry for us :-) But it certainly represents a fairly widespread opinion and one that begs for a response. So, Kelly, I hope you don't mind, but I'll use your comment as representative of that "mindset". I've been wandering blogs and online news outlets. Clearly there are a lot of folks saying essentially the same thing.

The mainstream online media outlets and the "linked-in sold-out" blogs talk about how Palin's approval ratings in Alaska have "plummeted" giving the implication that now that Alaskans have learned more about her they see her more clearly. This is the equivalent, I believe, of Kelly's comment about how Palin is an embarrassment.

So, I have researched the issue at some length to determine its validity. We are somewhat hamstrung in Alaska because we only have one statewide newspaper, the Anchorage Daily News. ADN is part of the McClatchy chain which means (given the number of times I've known a lot about something that McClatchy reports on, I can safely say) that the paper is inherently untrustworthy and at times it seems that it must be intentionally lying because the only other possibility would be stupidity at a level where they couldn't possibly compose understandable sentences. But, as long as one understands that and can work around it, it is still possible to find the truth in the nooks and crannies of small local papers with an online presence, independent bloggers, going to the cited sources of the ADN articles and finding out what was really said or done, and lots of other ways including just talking to people. So it is with some confidence that I can report that the idea that the people in Alaska are embarrassed by our Governor and that her popularity has "plummeted" due to the enlightenment of the citizenry such that they truly understand her better is total and utter balderdash.

It is true that Palin's approval rating in Alaska did drop. It hovered around 89% to 93% in 2007 (an insanely unsustainable number potentially unmatched by any Governor anywhere ever!) As late as mid-September, 2008, (after the Couric interviews!) it was still the highest of any Governor in the nation at around 85%. By late September, it was down to 68%. This is the "plummet" that folks keep mentioning. It is true that knocked her off top rank. She was, at that point, only the 4th most popular Governor in the U.S. (not quite what I'd call an embarrassment). In fact ... virtually any politician would sell their soul for ratings that high. (Palin is one of those rare politicians whose soul really isn't for sale. The Big Oil boys found that out to their chagrin.) But it does keep the evangelical right (of which I am not a member) happy, and gives her that "God is on my side" power that I personally find distasteful but has a substantive demonstrably positive effect.

But back to her "plummeted rating". I seldom do this, but I'm going to give some significant space here to the folks over at FemiSex.com. They are pro-female but definitely not generically Republican or right-wing. Indeed, most were Hillary supporters (which should give them at least a little more credibility with the Kelly's of the world than I have :-). I won't quote it all here, although it is tempting to do so. If you'd like to, it just takes a click on this link! The article is discussing a posting by a "Palin-hater" about her plummeted rating:

"It is ... wonderful as an exemplar of how the press inflicts fatal blows to female candidates. … Proof Positive that the Media inflicts violence upon women candidates by a sustained pile-on of besmirchment ...

Up until the media told us all over.. and over.. and over.. and over.. again what a dolt, sinner, adulterous, contriving, ambitious, book-burning, vicious Bitch Palin is ... Palin had an 80 % approval rating in Alaska by her constitutes.

LET ME REPEAT THIS: UNTIL THE MEDIA SAVAGED PALIN, SMEARING HER DAILY, SHE HAD A SOLID 80% APPROVAL RATING ...

Then came a poll—a poll taken a mere three weeks after the Lefty Press gang-smeared Palin in a manner befitting their conduct towards Hillary Clinton.

Guess WHAT?????????? Palin’s approval rating fell 12 points. Now does any intelligent person think the manner in which she governed Alaska changed in three weeks? For crying out loud, the woman has been campaigning the entire time!! There is zero chance Palin committed anything policy-wise to make Alaska’s citizens turn against her by 12 percentage points.

And there is ZERO chance that her past efforts and successes and failures changed. (There is a 100% chance the media perpetuated lies about Palin, such as the continued fabrication that the woman tortured rape victims, and afterward put on witch-clothing and burnt books toasty at the public library, while having adulterous sex with an unknown entity, faked a pregnancy, and toasted male testicles on the remnants of her book fire.)

When a woman is in the mix, the press spins things into such ludicrous negativity, invents stories, and ABOVE all fails to outline the many positives ... Hats off MSM, u’ve done it again. First with Clinton, now with Palin. NO woman running for Top Doggie or 2nd Doggie is safe. We hear u loud and clear ...

-Now just try to tell me that Media did not Kill off Hillary. Tell me about how Joe Biden lied about being shot at in Afghanistan. Wait, you haven’t heard about that if you're in middle American and listen to the six o’clock news.

-Now tell me about Hillary’s sniper fire lies. Sure, that u can quote verbatim. Round the clock negative coverage kills female candidates. If I had a nickel for the # of women who’ve said to me: “I really liked Hillary, until I didn’t.” When they didn't occurred during the media hate frenzy towards Clinton.

There is almost no way anyone could hold up against such sustained smearing..."

I honestly don't know that the media is that anti-female. It certainly is possible. But it is quite clear that the press intentionally attempted to destroy her, whether it was because of her gender or, my theory: that the Obamamedia was scared to death when she showed up because her incredible charisma had crowds reacting like she was the world's greatest rock star and they thought that if they didn't destroy her she might be able to drag McCain across the finish line.

If they had treated Obama the same way they'd treated Palin ... McCain would have won in a landslide. I have never before witnessed such vicious lock-step attempts at utter character assassination.

But a funny thing happened on the way to her destruction. People paid [the ever so self-important punditocracy] less attention than they believed they should. Oh, it was enough to elect Obama. But Palin's star is continuing to rise like crazy. I also assume that she will be back up in the 80s statewide in her approval ratings soon if she is not already. (Even when she was "down" at 68% she still kept a 93% favorable rating with Alaska Republicans!) And her star is not just Alaskan any longer.

CNN reports: "Oprah wants her, and so do Letterman and Leno. Fresh from her political defeat, Sarah Palin is juggling offers to write books, appear in films and sit on dozens of interview couches at a rate that would be astonishing for most Hollywood stars, let alone a first-term governor. Sarah Palin continues to attract huge media interest despite her failed bid to become vice president.

[Governor Palin] crunched state budget numbers this week ... Meanwhile, her staff fielded television requests seeking the 44-year-old for late-night banter and Sunday morning Washington policy. Agents, including those from the William Morris Agency, have come knocking. There's even been an offer to host a TV show.

'Tomorrow, Gov. Palin could do an interview with any news media on the planet," said her spokesman, Bill McAllister. "Tomorrow, she could probably sign any one of a dozen book deals. She could start talking to people about a documentary or a movie on her life. That's the level we are at here.'

'Barbara Walters called me. George Stephanopoulos called me,' McAllister said. 'I've had multiple conversations with producers for Oprah, Letterman, Leno and 'The Daily Show.' Palin ...[has]... returned to Alaska with an expanded, if unofficial, title: international celebrity."

And! The lady has coattails! The Republicans are still scraping and scrounging to try to keep the Democrats from getting that 60 seat filibuster blocking majority they want so badly.

As McClatchy reports: There are still two undecided positions in run-off campaigns and those two will determine whether they get their 60 chairs or not. One of those elections is in Georgia. So, in an incredibly close and critical situation in which their degree of national power for at least the next two (potentially incredibly important) years hangs in precarious balance ... what do the Republicans do? They call Sarah!

It is a tight, tight election. So they reached about as far distance wise as one can go in this country to bring in who they call "the closer". Sarah Palin will be in Georgia on Monday campaigning (at least four big rallies are planned so far) for Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss.

So ... sorry, Kelly, but the idea that we are so embarrassed that we have a Governor who is so incredibly popular nationwide with the people (even if clearly not the lockstep media) that they beg her (and pay her way) to come clear to Georgia to win this thing for them just doesn't pass the smell test.

The Atlanta Journal Constitution entitled their article about it: "Ohmigoodness ... the goddess descends."

She is featured at the top of Chambliss's web site to help attract people to the rallies which are expected to be so packed you need to RSVP reservations!!! Chambliss spokeswoman Michelle Grasso said "She has a lot of support, a lot of fans down here. A lot of people are very excited that she's coming ... I think it's absolutely the way you want to end a runoff."

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile is campaigning for the other side [the big guns are out on both sides for this one]. Donna says "Saxby Chambliss is calling out the cavalry because he needs to motivate his base". So now even the top Democrats figure Sarah is the cavalry!

She's not skipping out on Alaska business ... she is going to be in the area anyway. She'll be meeting with Obama and other invited governors in Philadelphia in a big bipartisan attempt to figure out how to deal with the ailing economy.

And of course, she just returned a couple weeks ago from the Republican Governors Association meeting in Miami. Alaska governors often attend these functions, but it was a little different this time. Even McClatchy says: "She dominated media attention at the conference and did an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer. 'Poolside paparazzi' photos were even taken of her and circulated on the internet."

I have to agree with one of my commenters that I'm not 100% sure I'm thrilled to have a rock star governor. But are Alaskan's embarrassed by her? I don't think so.

Turkeys

November 21, 2008
Turkeys

I thought I had done enough about Sarah Palin for awhile. There are other important things to discuss! How the world, especially the Islamic world, is reacting to Obama's election. Another glance at the ridda (apostasy) issue. What Obama's proposed appointments tell about how he will actually govern. What his choice for Secretary of State will mean ...

Instead I'm doing yet another column on our famous/infamous Governor and the media. In fact, I'm afraid this isn't going to end the "theme" either. She is still top-level international news.

It is uncanny. Biden has been around and involved in critical national and international matters for over 36 years. Palin probably made the front page of a newspaper not published in Alaska for the first time less than four months ago. If you Google "Biden" you get 25,000,000 hits. Quite respectable! That's a lot of people talking about you! Google "Palin", however, and you get 95,000,000 hits! Let that number sink in. 95 MILLION hits! The latest estimate of the population of the United States according to the U.S. Census Bureau is 305,726,193. Of course this is comparing apples and oranges ... but there are nearly 1/3 as many "Google available and located" documents mentioning Palin as there are people in this country. For some reason that seems mind-boggling to me.

Nor is it because "Palin" is a more common name. Put the name in quotes and run "Sarah Palin" and you get 48,500,000 hits. "Joe Biden" only gets you 12,000,000. Even "Hillary Clinton" only gets 28,700,000 and she's "been around" in the public consciousness a bit longer than Sarah Palin has also.

Stories about her remain at the top of the national interest meter. Articles about her are cited at the top of nearly every "most popular story" list put out by the major news agencies.

Oh, the media still has a nasty streak that they can't seem to break when they get the opportunity to make fun of her. Like, for instance, the topic of this column: the nonsensical big "top news story" about Palin pardoning a turkey; a minor Thanksgiving ritual done by essentially all governors and presidents. Then she gave a short interview, apparently without realizing what else was in the camera viewfinder. During the video filming of the interview, workers in the background continued with the job at hand at a turkey farm shortly before Thanksgiving [duh]: butchering turkeys.

That is not a huge hook to build a story on ... and yet, it is currently (and has been for several days!) the number one story accessed through Huffington Post (and presumably near the top in interest of current news stories period!) At Huffington the story and video has 673,582 views and 5,416 comments. This blows all the "competition" out of the water. Not only the "real" and "serious" news stories ... but it even makes the silly "Obamas Expected to Have Sex In White House" story seem to be boring [91,912 views, 222 comments]! (The Obama article is actually hilarious ... especially the comments from people who don't understand that it is satire! But it is only 1/7th as popular as a boring interview of Palin at a turkey farm!)

I am beginning to understand that people (and cameras and media types) are addicted to all things Palin. But the video of a turkey pardon? Arianna [Huffington] even mentions it in her little front page editorial squib telling people to make sure not to miss it! And the comments are (largely) insanely obnoxious. Many of them call for Palin to please just go away and shut up. Ya know, if they wouldn't keep a' clicking on any news story about her and adding comments ... presumably she would! There were 49 other state Governors and a sitting U.S. President that (probably) all did the same traditional "turkey pardon". Yet not one, other than Sarah's, made the YouTube best-seller list. If people don't want to hear Sarah Palin then they should [get your crayons out so you can take notes] "stop listening"! Clearly, the turkeys weren't all behind Sarah.

"Help! Save me from myself! Stop showing news stories about Palin because I can't keep myself from watching them!" Even atrociously stupid ones like this.

Headline news: the turkey you eat for Thanksgiving was killed before you cooked it. I know this is a shock! [Well, unless it is a PETA tofu turkey :-) Are there such things? Actually, I'm sure there are given the rampant
idiocy that a rich free society engenders. Don't they have any sympathy for the poor tofus they keep killing? Heartless I tell you. We should start a "SAVE THE TOFU" campaign! We could run some video clips of masked ninja types sneaking up on baby tofus and smashing them with clubs until they die a slow and painful death!]

I just checked. It isn't just a bad joke (the tofu turkeys, not the baby tofu killers - that is a bad joke :-). But they really do make tofu "turkey". [Sigh.] It's called Tofurkey and PETA even has a website full of "oh so yummy" Thanksgiving recipes! Saints preserve us!

Doesn't anyone know that tofu is curdled, coagulated soy beans??? It is a perfectly reasonable thing to eat ... if you are starving and lost in the desert and there is nothing potentially edible for hundreds of miles ... and you've already eaten your belt. Under any other conditions it is pathetic. But I digress :-)

I think it is all ... Reagan's (?) fault. I can't remember if he was Governor of California when they decided to close down all the "establishments for the sanity deprived" [this is California we're talking about after all :-)] and send the crazy people out into the streets. This caused such things as sidewalk congestion on Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley and PETA.

Granted, Palin isn't as "ewwee" squeamish as this patriarchal society likes its women to be. [Grow up America!] Sorry, I, and probably most Alaskans, have difficulties with such elitist machismo - on the frontier a woman has value, she isn't just considered to be decoration.] Sarah kills and butchers moose and other animals. She commercially fishes and tromps around in boats full of dead and dying salmon.

[By strange coincidence one of the big positives for me about Hillary, (personally, not politically) was that she wasn't the squeamish type either. She worked a "slime line" in Alaska when she was younger ... which consists of butchering salmon, some of which aren't quite dead, as they come past you at the salmon cannery on a conveyor belt.] Hillary noted that, armed with a rain coat, hip boots and a knife, the slime line job "was the best preparation ever for working in Washington"! But that's only because she has never field dressed a moose! :-)

So, sure, maybe some more "girlie" governor would have been grossed out. I suppose Sarah could take pointers and learn. Given that she learned to tear down, clean and reassemble a rifle in only a few minutes I'm sure she could manage this. But if you've butchered a moose, the idea that seeing a turkey "prepared" for the Thanksgiving table is objectionable is just silly. As is the reaction by all those who are grossed out by it (but can't keep themselves from watching it while ranting about it!)

I realize that there are turkeys involved here all right. I just can't decide who all they are.

But ~675,000 views just through Huffington of a turkey pardon? I'd say we probably could find at least a half a million of them in that viewer group.

All that attention. And it was probably the least important thing Sarah did that day! Pu-leese people! Get a life!

Time to Take Campaign Posters Down

November 19, 2008
Time to Take the Campaign Posters Down

Well, the last state finally reported results. Missouri went to McCain. Just barely, but that’s all it takes. McCain came out 3,632 votes ahead of Obama – out of more than 2.9 million cast! Too little, too late to do McCain much good but it was the first time since 1956 that Missouri didn’t "pick" the winner of the presidential race. It has been a strange election from every perspective!

And ... "Uncle Ted", the U.S. Senator that has represented this State for so long he had gained the title "Senator for life" ... lost. He was ahead in the vote count after the regular ballots were counted even after being found guilty for not noting some oil company "gifts" on his federal disclosure forms the week before the election. But we had a huge number of absentee and "other" ballots that were finally counted over the past few days and a "kid" [a 46 year old kid :-)] by the name of Mark Begich prevailed and today Senator Stevens conceded. Uncle Ted was so well known and so appreciated for all the loot he had brought home from the federal treasury that no one ever believed he would lose an election. But he did ... on his 85th birthday. He was likely the most important politician in Alaska’s history and much of what he did as a Senator (besides bringing home all the pork) shaped the State in many ways. Granted, I disagreed with much of what he did, but that doesn’t lessen the importance of it :-)

[I will, btw, be doing a future column on why the feds actually owe us vastly more than we’ve ever gotten from them. They flatly stole most of our (oil) wealth that they agreed by contract in the Statehood Compact was ours. But that will be a future column.]

So ... the elections are over. And I hate it when I still see campaign signs in people’s yards long after the election has passed, so I’ve taken mine down as well.

Besides, as thrilling as it was to have our Governor as a candidate for such a high office ... and the fact that her mistreatment by the press infuriated me ... she and I do disagree on much ideologically. [Which, however, despite the furor caused by the "stop her at any costs" national media ... she didn’t govern (that is past tense but I really don’t expect it to change) as a member of the flat earth society.] Indeed, her actual governance was not nearly as conservative as the campaign painted her. Frankly, she is a lot more tough minded and practical than she ever got credit for.

Although there are plenty of folks who disagree with me, I do believe ideology is important even if one appears to "transcend" it for practicality when necessary. And Sarah and I have some very basic, very different ideologies. I have spent a lot of time in this blog defending her against the phony attacks and simple lies about her told by the pressography during the election. To the extent that such continues, so shall I. But in areas where we disagree ... you’ll be hearing a lot more about those from me now that the election is over also!

I have not yet heard that Sarah has repudiated the claims that her beliefs include such things as the fact that evolution was divinely guided. I’ve also heard it claimed that she believes the world to be only 6,000 years old but that hardly fits with evolution, guided or not. Besides. Her father was a science teacher. Surely she knows better!

I do think highly of her, however, and this campaign has increased that admiration. I don’t know how anyone can take what she was put through. And her star is still in ascension! She continues to receive non-stop requests from the media, agents, producers ... she delivered a well-received (and well-covered) speech at the Republican Governors Association. She is more in-demand and the national ... indeed international ... spotlight is on her more strongly than it ever was when she was a mere vice presidential candidate! She has become a legitimate "star" in her own right.

The William Morris agency has called multiple times (and they only call stars :-). Barbara Walters wanted to make Palin one of her "10 most fascinating people" (and apparently she is still in contention for Walters' #1 Most Fascinating Person)! Interestingly, they have already announced that Tina Fey made the
list ... but poor Tina! After all the great stuff she's done (she is my second favorite female comedienne), she is now known as "Sarah Palin impersonator Tina Fey"! :-) Also see (one of her) fan sites: "Currently, Tina Fey is best known for her portrayal of the Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin".

Sarah has had offers to host talk shows, write books, and do countless interviews. She is finally free to do so ... and so she has been. She has done a tremendous job of turning her reputation as an intellectual lightweight into a solidly respected intelligent and resourceful person.

She is, (in the words of the McClatchy press no less!):

"A national political figure and one of the world’s most famous people."

Despite the desperate hope of many Democrats that she would run back to Alaska with her tail between her legs and disappear into an ice cave ... she is doing no such thing. And the Democrats who hoped so (and the Republicans to whom she is a potential competitor for national office someday) just don’t know this woman (as they clearly demonstrated during the campaign). She doesn’t put her tail between her legs. She is fearless. She took the best (worst) punches the national punditocracy could throw ... and she emerged stronger and vastly more respected than ever before.

They won’t succeed at pigeon-holing her with their caricatures of her in her next national venture. People will know her too well by then. They only got away with the phony portrait they painted because no one knew anything else, so they accepted the pablum the media fed them.

And she still emerged a star! One with a very bright political future. Is she the next Ronald Reagan? It could be. The resemblances are remarkable. The press tried to paint Reagan as a mental midget his first couple runs for national office as well. But it didn’t stick. He was known as the Teflon President because the people simply decided to ignore all the nastiness from the media about him ... even when they were right. They had cried "wolf" too often. They no longer had any credibility.

The same thing appears to be happening with Sarah Palin. As people discover who this woman really is ... they are learning to ignore what the press says about her. In their desperate attempt to ensure Obama's election, the press pulled out all stops in screaming "wolf" ... or, in her case "wolf killer" :-) But ultimately it is (and soon will be even more so) the press that lost credibility, not Sarah Palin.

She and Ronald Reagan both shared that ephemeral unlearnable "something" that people call charisma but which simply excites people and makes folks want to like them and want to please them. Obama has it. And Sarah Palin has it. Presidents Reagan and Kennedy had it. [Unfortunately, probably so did Hitler ... it doesn't inherently translate to "good" ... but it does tend to translate to "powerful".]

But it is a rare and potent gift. [I remember being in a room when Ronald Reagan walked in ... before he was President. The room was instantly and remarkably electrified. It was an amazing sensation and an fascinating thing to watch.] Sarah Palin is something special. And I’m not going to be bashful about recognizing and acknowledging that.

So ... the election signs are down. But we will, among many other topics, continue to follow the exploits of our Governor. And when I disagree with her (and I will!:-) I won’t be bashful about that either!

A "Con"stitutional Question

November 16, 2008
A "Con" stitutional Question

Ok. We've had our election. The national media gave Obama his Rolls Royce ride to the white house. The people" (represented by a much larger percentage of street people bussed to the polls in the weeks before and during election day than had ever been seen in the past :-) have made him the "President-elect". (Republicans have little ability to counter this new form of electioneering except to work to stop all the early voting and make absentee voting much more difficult. It wouldn't stop the election day busing, but it would put an end to the huge numbers that get dragged to the polls in the weeks preceding an election. This is the Republicans only real solution since there are probably very few street people who would vote Republican unless for a specific quid pro quo and Republicans tend to get squeamish about outright vote buying.)

Being president-elect, however, is not a long term position. It is supposed to come to an end, according to the Constitution, on January 20 of the year following the election. But we have over two months left before the scheduled occasion.

So what happens if Obama is disqualified from holding the office before that date arrives? And, even more interestingly, what if the courts were to so determine after he is sworn in as President? I doubt that it will happen but this election has been so strange that nothing would surprise me. I think most people believe it is too late. All those lawsuits challenging his standing to be the U.S. President are generally thought to have gone "poof" with his election. But they didn't.

Interestingly the lawsuits have not been dismissed as frivolous either, which is the common response to the wing-nut lawsuits that pop up virtually unnoticed at other elections. In fact, despite the best attempts by the media to ignore them, the lawsuits have a pesky way of showing up and are not proving susceptible to being swept under the rug. I don't know if it is true or not since it is just an unverified comment, but at least someone apparently counted and says there are 17 cases in the Federal courts on this issue, two of which are currently before the Supreme Court. I assume there are "a bunch" in state courts as well seeking to stop certifications or whatever in the individual states.

Nor are these all nut-case lawsuits. Everyone has heard of the Phillip Berg lawsuit. It has been fairly well scoffed off the table by the mainstream media suggesting just that ... that it is just another nut-case action. Part of the problem with that argument is that Phillip Berg isn't your typical nut-case. Indeed he is the former Deputy Attorney General for Pennsylvania.

Although that is probably the most famous of the cases, perhaps the most fascinating and compelling case is the case brought in California by, among others, Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes. Dr. Keyes (a PhD from Harvard is not one to be brushed off easily. He also overcomes the big problem that Phillip Berg has with his case is that the court is questioning his "standing" to bring the action. I think the court is hopelessly wrong on that. Any citizen of the United States has standing to bring a lawsuit alleging that a presidential candidate (or president-elect) does not qualify for the office.

However that is ultimately decided, Dr. Keyes does not face that problem. Perhaps fortuitously, he was on the ballot in California as a candidate for President running as the nominee of the American Independent Party. It would be difficult to imagine who would have standing if a citizen of the country who was competing with Obama for the election as President, does not.

You would think that Obama would stop trying to win all these law suits on procedural grounds and just wipe them out on the merits ... if indeed he is right on the merits. All he has to do is wipe out the "vault birth certificate" (the real one ... the kind you probably have to show to get a driver's license! Not that phony certificate of live birth that the experts are split on but that appears there is a good chance it is a forgery).

I have a hunch that Obama may not even have known where he was born until questions came up about it! It isn't like he remembers it. And things were such a whirlwind he probably didn't even take it all seriously when it started. But the wheels of justice grind slowly ... but they do grind away. But even though it isn't the kind of thing one is likely to remember, ignorance absolutely is no excuse.

I can see it, though. His Mom (who was a bit of a wild card anyway) wanted him to have U.S. citizenship as a "born in the U.S.A. type, not as a "naturalized by moving here so young" type, so claimed he was born in Hawaii and told him that. His Grandmother said he was born in Kenya. She certainly had nothing to gain by saying that. Only the vaulted certificate knows for sure. And by now, probably Obama. Or he would have produced it. He was recently in Hawaii for his Grandmother's funeral [no, I'm not enough of a wing-nut to go there :-)]. But I bet he checked the certificate while there. And instead of producing it as he has been court ordered to do and which would make all the lawsuits go "poof" ... he fights them on procedural grounds and keeps the birth certificate in the vault.

But the "no standing" argument presumably won't work against Dr. Keyes. Nor will the screams of racism by his proxies. The fact that Dr. Keyes is a nationally syndicated columnist and a black man who stands about 6' 7" adds a bit to the drama. He has also held substantive governmental positions, particularly in the Reagan administration. And he was on the ballot for President in California.

The interesting question really is whether the issue gets decided before or after January 20. He can't very well pardon himself if he is not the real president (which he wouldn't be if he was not constitutionally qualified to hold the office). He would be, in the words of the Keyes' suit ... a usurper to the office. I don't know what the punishments are. Is it treason? Would the U.S. be after him just as all the Islamic world will be because he is an apostate?

He is forming an army to answer solely to him ... do you suppose he'll put up resistance if the courts order him to get the *%&#$)% out of the President's chair? :-)

But here's the thing. I don't know if Keyes or Berg has thought through. Clearly, if he is found to be ineligible before being sworn in, he gets booted. The Constitution is clear on that. But what if it doesn't happen until after he is seated? Would Pelosi become VP?! :-) Nah. Even the Forefathers would have thought far enough ahead to save us from that! Presumably it would be the same result.

However ... I'm still not certain that Keyes and Berg and the others have thought this through sufficiently! Obama could take his platform and run comfortably in the Socialist party of most countries of Europe. But behind the rhetoric he has shown some surprisingly conservative thoughts. And there is nothing like "real life" to make one more conservative!

He is an unknown. Usually that is bad. Except this time we know who his replacement would be: Joe "no longer Biden his time". And we do know his record. I'm not so sure but what I'd rather take my chances with the unknown!

Fates Having Fun

November 13, 2008
The Fates are Having too much Fun!

Barack Hussein Obama. President-elect of the United States of America; a country that is fighting two wars each of which was primarily designed to "take out" an individual. In Afghanistan it was Osama, whose name is a tiny typo away from being the same as that of the president-elect. In Iraq, it was Hussein.

Is there a Barack running an Islamic country anywhere? If so, I'd be real nervous were I him :-)

Could the Fates have played a stranger trick? Not only is the name tie-in to our two wars beyond coincidental comprehension ... but in both wars we are fighting (radical) Muslims ... and the Islamic and Christian nations and religions have not been so close to falling back into the Crusades mentality since ... the Crusades?

It has, in any event, been a long time. Most Americans never thought of Islam in a negative fashion before Osama sent the planes into the buildings. Most Americans never thought of Islam at all. Or if they did, it was along the lines of "Isn't that the religion that the Cat Stevens dude adopted?" [It is. On Muharram, in 1398 by the Islamic calendar. Indeed his name now is Yusuf Islam. What most folks don't know is that he never was "Cat Stevens"; that was just a stage name. He was born Steven Demetre Georgiou.]

In any event, we are at war for all practical purposes, in two different countries and in a third sort of generic "War on Terror", with the radical arm of Islam. And we elect, for the first time in the history of the nation, a presidential candidate who has an extensive Muslim background.

Indeed, his Muslim background is another of those "hazy" areas surrounding the man. He acknowledges being born to a Muslim father and that his stepfather was also Muslim. It appears likely that he was enrolled as a Muslim at a child in the Muslim school he attended in Indonesia. I wrote one column on apostasy and will soon do a follow-up to that now that he is president-elect. But in any event, his "Muslim background" is the greatest of any U.S. President to date ... and likely greater than any serious presidential candidate in the past. And we elect someone with that background ... now?

This is beyond mind-boggling. The Fates have got to be rolling in the aisles ... of wherever it is the Fates hang out.

And yet this man not only stridently proclaims that he is Christian ... but he stained his reputation badly by being a member of such a radical Christian church (and it would have been much worse had not the press been giving him, in Bill Clinton's words, that Rolls Royce ride to the White House as noted in my last post). If the press had tackled Obama the way it did Palin ... you'd know every sermon that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ever preached that could be taken negatively in any way.

But my point here is not to complain about the disparate press treatment. I've spent plenty of time in this blog doing that.

My point is that he joined the radical arm of his religion. He isn't just someone who grew up in a church and continued on in the religion he was raised in. He actively sought a place for his spiritual side and specifically selected this Church, which was more to him than just a "show up at Sunday, visit with the congregants, hear a bland sermon on doing good and believing, and maybe attend the annual potluck". This Church filled a deep hunger and he took it much more seriously spiritually than socially. "Obama was searching for an identity and a community, and he found both at Trinity. And he found a spiritual guide in Wright."

And Wright was radical! [He still is, but he has now retired.] Obama's continued association with (and pronounced affections for) him long after he reasonably should have rejected Wright and all that he stood for (assuming it was even defensible to have joined the Church in the first place) was faulted by even the most liberal of columnists. This man who Obama claimed was his "spiritual advisor" vehemently preached (to, ultimately, a huge audience) about how 9/11 was America's fault and how the U.S. was intentionally spreading the Aids virus. This man who married Obama and his wife said in one famous speech "God Damn America" at least three times. Yet Obama says it was this man's words that were the inspiration for his book "The Audacity of Hope"!

My point here is not to regurgitate that oft-repeated point that Obama's various "associations" have shown a remarkable lack of judgment. While that is clearly a true statement, my point was really to show that Obama, more than any prior president, is a member of the "radical fringe" of Christianity ... while we are fighting wars against the "radical fringe" of Islam.

It strains credulity that all these are coincidences. And yet, this is all acknowledged mainstream information. Those tending closer to the wing-nut position will tell you many more things too strange to be coincidence (including many apparently strange numerical synchronicities). I'll refrain from giving those print space here at the moment. But it all does make one wonder.

Is there something going on that none of us truly understand?

I am not a mystical nor religious person. But even I am tempted to research what the Bible says about the Anti-Christ! :-)

No. I very much doubt that Barack is the Anti-Christ. And I presume that the Fates are just having fun at our expense. But the more one ponders the impossibilities surrounding this election (imagine if, before you had heard of Barack Hussein Obama that such a person could be elected president at this time in our history). If you look at it in that context ... you will have to concede that the chances of it ever happening would be too silly to even consider.

It makes me more curious than anything. Is this truly God playing a joke on us? Could it be that these coincidences are just coincidences? Perhaps someday I'll manage to satisfy my curiosity about this most curious of elections. But somehow, I doubt it.

Sarah Palin - A Star is ... Created

November 9, 2008
Sarah Palin - A Star is ... Created

Well, she has legs! No, no ... I'm referring to the continuing stories about Sarah Palin, not the beauty queen herself!

It isn't enough that the press, in Bill Clinton's own words [bottom of 9th paragraph], acted as Obama's "personal chauffeur" on the election trail, but they now seem determined to utterly destroy Sarah Palin and any potential political future she might have on the national stage.

The attacks continue in the pressosphere unabated. I think today Obama finally got more national press coverage than Governor Palin did ... but not by a whole lot.

I have been "consciously aware" of presidential elections since the Goldwater debacle of 1964 [well, semi-conscious for the first couple ... and for some really boring ones since]. But I remember the election of '64 very clearly. Even though age-wise, I was only a short distance into double figures, I was flabbergasted that the media could destroy someone so completely. I knew things about Goldwater that the media didn't know (nor do most people even today!) ... indeed, I knew things about the John Birch Society (which was the primary limb from which the media hung him), that the media didn't know! How could that be?

Obviously now that I'm old and cynical I realize that the media knew everything I did all along and simply lied on the theory that most people really didn't know and even if they did, perhaps they could be made to question their own knowledge. Those were different times and the media and "the people" had a different relationship. There were very few sources of news. Essentially there were three television stations and "local" newspapers. Oh, there were a few national newspapers out, but few "regular people" read them and they tended to be specialized and their readership similarly specialized. For example, although it has been published since 1889, to the best of my recollection I had never seen anyone reading the Wall Street Journal.

The press had inordinate power. As mentioned, there were very few options for obtaining national news back then and, perhaps vastly more critical, "the people" as a whole had not yet realized that the newspapers regularly and intentionally lied to us. We were taught in school that the news in newspapers was just that: news. Boring facts unadulterated by the personal opinions of the reporters or the political positions of the owners. All opinions were on the Editorial Page and were clearly marked as such. Oh, there were small muckraking newspapers whose single editor/owner/typesetter often broke such rules and let his opinions run rampant. But those were not considered "real newspapers" by "real journalists". Indeed, newspapers were held to such a high standard that they hired proofreaders to make absolutely certain that no error or typo or misspelling made it into print. And, indeed, few did.

But after the press had done their job and destroyed Goldwater's reputation and successfully elected Lyndon Johnson by a landslide ... they talked about ... Lyndon Johnson. They didn't talk much about Goldwater and they certainly didn't talk much about [you don't have a clue do you? :-)] his VP candidate, William Miller. I remember Johnson won that election by using the "old" Cold War and the "new" television to scare the public in the first example of true dirty"negative" advertising on national TV (such as the "daisy ad"that convinced people that Goldwater was a militaristic loose cannon and if he were elected we would be annihilated by Atom Bombs)!

Johnson ran as the peace candidate (and of course, immediately upon winning the election cranked up the Vietnam "situation" where we had "peacekeepers" and "advisers" into a full-blown war).

I do remember one somewhat famous mention of Goldwater in regards to the election that included an early "shot" at the media sometime afterwards: "They told me that if I voted for Goldwater, we'd be in war in 6 months. Well, I did, and we are."

But I have never seen anything like the Palin phenomena. It suggests that either the left is remarkably scared of her and desperately want to destroy and bury her or that the right is fascinated and delighted and wants her to play on the national stage without being "held down" by a hopeless candidate (who, perhaps wisely, particularly after the national economic meltdown seemed to be working to lose the election). Or, most likely ... both factors are at work.

It is clear, however, despite the idiocies of the pundits in trying to "kill two birds with one stone", (and McCain's people trying to shift blame as effectively as possible) that McCain's loss was not due to Sarah Palin ... nor was his potentially psychologically throwing the election due to his remorse about putting someone "so unqualified" a heartbeat away from the presidency. (Although it certainly is possible that he didn't want to give any unhinged Palin backers ... and every candidate has them ... a reason to get rid of that heartbeat that was keeping her from the main office.) More plausible is that he realized that because of her, he might actually win! And that scared him more than being shot down by enemy aircraft!

Yet two things are happening that the "Hate(fear) Palin" crowd did not anticipate. First, the simple fact that they are continuing to berate and lampoon her keeps her in the national news and in the public's mind. They would be well served to remember the old saying: "I don't care what you say about me, just spell my name right." There is a sense that if the liberal elites are still this concerned about her ... perhaps there are reasons why they should be.

So there is that sort of "obvious" backlash. If there had been any working brain cells left, the punditocracy would have instantly and immediately ignored Palin as though she had never existed. With no national press coverage she would have quickly "sunk back" into that distant Alaska pond from where she emerged. The pressography did Palin a huge favor ... one that they would not have had they been paying attention in class in Journalism 101 or remedial Psychology.

Yet, there is something else going on as well. Palin has been so viciously castigated by out-and-out lockstep lies ... lies that are patently obvious to those of us who knew a lot about Sarah Palin before most of the nation had ever heard of her. The witch-hunt has been so unrelenting and so intense, that it has spawned an entirely different sort of backlash: the good kind. People are obviously still fascinated with her. Many would like to believe better of her than the media does. And so we now have people who are going to tell the world the truth!

It is much more likely that Obama was born in Kenya than it is that Palin is a pawn of Big Oil, for instance. Yet because the press pooh-poohed the stories about Obama and, indeed, ripped anyone (including Sarah) who suggested that there was anything amiss that perhaps the press should look into, such stories never got traction.

Yet "everyone" seems to "know" that Sarah is a pawn of Big Oil who sold out her own state. This is ludicrous of course for any who know the facts ... but we are few and far between. However, the public's fascination and the media's refusal to let go of a bone that, had it any sense it would have spit out on election night, have led to what I believe may only be the beginning of a Palin resurgence. Presidency in 2012? It is not as crazy an idea as the elitists would have you think. Especially if people start learning the truth (and therefore start learning how badly they've been lied to)!

I haven't read this book yet. But it looks as if this is an example ... a first salvo as it were ... in the beginnings of the public redemption of Sarah Palin ... which will doubtlessly be helped along by the realization of how badly the punditocracy lied about her.

If so ... and considering the issues he faces, the unbelievable lack of experience, and the most socialistic agenda of any candidate in the nation's history ... President Obama may find himself badly beaten by a woman with lipstick and a great wink in 2012.

Rumor Mongering

November 8, 2008
Rumor Mongering

While we are on the subject of how dishonorable it is to be a "bad winner" and kick someone while they are down, there appear to be more stories in the national media about Sarah Palin ... the losing Vice Presidential candidate, that there are about our President-elect, his running mate, Joe Biden-His-Time, or John McCain! It is virtually all incredibly negative and nasty, but she still elicits more coverage (which equals interest) than the rest of them! The nastiness is inexcuseable, however, and only understandable in the context of extreme fear by the liberal elites that Sarah is indeed the long-awaited return of the Messiah ... oops, sorry, that was Obama. Sarah is apparently feared to be the long-awaited return of a Ronald Reagan. It seems that anyone running for anything in the Republican party has tried to claim that title (including the outgoing President Shrub). Sarah hasn't tried. She hasn't had to. She has excited the Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) beyond anything anyone has seen on the Republican side since ... well ... since Ronald Reagan! Realize the media did its best to paint him as a mental pygmy his first couple of runs at the presidency as well. Now ... he is the most likely 5th face to be carved into Mt. Rushmore! No wonder the liberal elite is scared of her and is desperately trying to make her look stupid and vindictive even after she lost! They desperately need to bury her politically. But they won't.

Even this latest nonsense: an anonymous (way out-of-date) report allegedly by some disgruntled McCain staffer that Sarah didn't know whether Africa was a country or a continent is total bunk. As I understand it, what she really asked(according to unnamed anonymous sources :-) during the debate preparation for her one-on-one with Biden, was something like "Are we talking about the country of South Africa or the continent of Africa?" which, in the context of the conversation at the time was perfectly reasonable. I haven't discovered for sure yet whether a staffer misheard the comment and missed the "South" or if it was just an intentional hatchet job. But I'm working on it.

I am not alone in the realization that the media intentionally painted a caricature of Governor Palin and even nationally well-known Democrats who got to know her well flatly do not believe that Sarah could have been confused as to whether Africa was a country or continent. This story conveys the following (and more): a Democrat reporter, Greta Van Susteren, who interviewed Sarah Palin twice says that she was "enormously impressed at how smart she was". The Democrat who was the former communications director for Citizens for McCain, Elaine Lafferty, traveled with Sarah and got to know her well. She was also incredibly impressed at her intellect ... and that, far from being a diva, the staff absolutely loved her. Assuming that someone on the staff actually did tell Cameron about the alleged Africa confusion and other nastiness about Sarah, it would have to be, according to those who know, "sour grapes from one or two people".
I guess my latent [latent? :-)] cynicism finally emerged in full bloom after watching the press march so diligently to the beat of the exact same drummer; who was (is!) drumming a bizarre concoction of outright lies and half-truths. As noted above, for instance, even if someone associated with the campaign did mishear something that they turned into the utter nonsense that Sarah didn't know whether Africa is a country or continent, it was not a newsworthy event. Biden said dumber things daily. Obama is going to be President of all of the 57 states he had visited. But the media -- you know -- the folks that have been telling you about evey misstep that Sarah took whether it happened or not? The folks who mix the kool-aid? They would never make a mistake that could look dumb like that, could they? [Btw: I'm not a fan of political correctness (obviously :-), but the kool-aid comments started from Barack himself. See bottom line of third main paragraph.]

Let's take a quick glance at just a few of the articles from the pressography that attempt to make her look the fool on that specific issue of Africa's "continentalism":

Fox News started it all in an apparent attempt to boot-lick the winner of the election and to erase any suggestion that it had any conservative leanings, so let's start with them. Here is the headline and the opening sentence:

Fox: "Palin didn't know Africa is a continent"
06-11-08, 04:43 PM

"As Fox News's Carl Cameron reported Wednesday, that Palin thought Africa was a continent -- not a country –"

Now I realize that I am apparently too stupid, in the view of the press, to see how dumb this makes Palin look. Silly me! I thought it made Fox look dumb instead. Last time I checked ... Africa WAS a continent! Now obviously we can't blame the press for one little mistake that ... oops ... that's what they were attempting to skewer Palin for doing! Only they were probably wrong and only "name" some unnamed anonymous source for their allegations. Even though they probably have changed it by now, however, their "stupid mistake" was made in print and in plain view of millions of people. And not only in this country! As we can see from this exact quote (copied and pasted ... no editing by me at all) from the left-wing BN Village in the U.K.:

"So just how woefully unqualified was Sarah Palin? Now that the election's over, aides to John McCain's campaign are starting to dish on the former Republican vice presidential nominee. The Alaska governor who bragged about being able to see Russia from her home state was pretty uninformed on even the most basic details of the world, it appears. As Fox News's Carl Cameron reported Wednesday, Palin allegedly thought Africa was a continent -- not a country ..." [Bold emphasis was in the original, as cut and pasted.]

I obviously have erred in referring to the lock-step Palin bashers as the "national media". Clearly they were mixing kool-aid from the identical recipe "internationally"! Here's another from across the pond (although Newstin reports reports of news stories more than actually reporting news).


"Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, returned to the 49th state and denied reports that ... she thought Africa is a continent, not a country, as Fox News's Carl Cameron reported."
Closer to home, it was Newsweek that was one of the first to jump on the "kick Sarah under the bus" bandwagon:

"She was angry at [reports that she did not know that Africa].... is a continent, not a country, as Fox News's Carl Cameron reported."

I could go on at some length; there were many who used that exact quote. Apparently many "theoretically competent" news outlets and bloggers just ran with what they were given without even bothering to see if it made any sense, let alone to fact check it. And yet these are the people who think we should trust the truth and accuracy of what they tell us? Even Cameron's report was so wishy-washy it shouldn't have even been National Enquirer material. [Actually, perhaps I should apologize to the National Enquirer for that. There standards may be higher!] "Folks told us ..."? "We were told ..." all by unnamed sources weeks ago. This is trash journalism folks. And incompetent trash journalism to boot!