Sunday, March 15, 2009

Reasons to vote for Sarah for Pres . . . not

Sarah Palin made a big splash in the Presidential race as McCain's V.P. pick. The State of Alaska was also highlighted, because of our governor's sudden notoriety. Now, a group of folks in Connecticut are setting out to see that Palin runs for President. Their website is

Some of the reasons why these people feel Sarah Palin would make a good choice for President:

"The thing I like best about her is she has international experience and she
started at the very bottom and moved to the top," he said. When asked to
elaborate, Troyer replied: "Her state does not border any other state. It
borders Russia and Canada, and China isn’t too far away."--Jim Troyner of
Bridgeport (3/12/2009 New Haven Register)


I supported Sarah Palin for governor, I worked for her election. I believed her rhetoric. However, the individual who made that quote needs a geography lesson, quickly!
Yeah, Alaska borders Canada. Alaska does not border Russia, nor does Alaska have any direct dealings with Russia, other than cultural exchanges once in awhile, and an air shuttle that flew to Russian oil development centers when Mobil, Exxon, and others were pouring billions into the Russian oil sector. Alaska Airlines ran that shuttle periodically. I do not believe that it has run since Putin clamped down on foreign investment in Russia's oil fields.

As to China being not too far away? China is as near as the local Walmart. You are as close to China when you go to your local Walmart as Sarah Palin is when she goes to the Walmart in Wasilla.

Another reason to support Sarah Palin:

"She is a fine American. She’s just everything that we need in this country: An
honorable woman who can stand with men."--Veronica Kivela, North Haven
(3/12/2009 New Haven Register)

I would agree with the sentiment, up to the point of 'just everything we need'. I disagree with that assertion, as Sarah’s record as Governor is so-so. Sarah Palin is a RINO in terms of fiscal discipline. Other decisions at odds with campaign rhetoric have clouded the Palin image of an Alaskan Joan of Arc fighting the good fight for integrity and the betterment of the people of the State of Alaska. Too often the “fight” is about Sarah’s ego, and not Alaska’s needs.

Here's a typical male response to Sarah and certainly a “worthy” reason for her running for President:

"I think she’s a beautiful-looking woman."--Ted Pechinski of North
Bradford (3/12/2009 New Haven Register)

Ted . . . quit thinking with your . . . never mind. God help us if there are more like Ted. Kind of like the female support for Obama.

In both the national campaign and her Alaska gubernatorial campaign of 2006, Sarah came on like Reagan. She spoke directly, straight from the heart, or so it seemed. She said what we felt needed to be said and did so in a positive manner. In the national race, she was tied to a dead horse. Not the other way around. John McCain was hardly a ‘breath of fresh” air amongst Republicans. Especially to conservatives, whether Republican or not. Frank Murkowski was the perfect opponent for Sarah in the gubernatorial race: big, stuffy, old Republican establishment, and an easy target for criticism.

There is no doubt that Sarah Palin is now a national figure.

Palin has prepared well to keep her name in lights. There is Sarahpac to fund her national notoriety and national political ambitions. There are the Outside appearances for organizations who believe that Sarah shares the same outlook. And, recently, the announcement that Sarah will be appearing with candidates for Congress around the nation showing her support for their candidacy.

Is there a benefit to Alaska from all of this notoriety for Sarah Palin?

Yes. Americans now know Alaska has a babe for governor.

Do they know where Alaska is on the map? Debatable.

Has Sarah’s notoriety helped get ANWR in production or a gas line built? No.

How about the folks who were quoted above? They believe that Sarah Palin has ‘international’ experience—whatever that is. That she is ‘everything we need’, and that she’s ‘a beautiful looking woman’.

Great reasons to vote for Sarah for President, if you have the mentality of the typical Obama supporter!

If the ding-a-lings from Connecticut are any example of Palin’s national supporters, Sarah may want to rethink her Outside ambitions.

Maybe, just being Alaska’s governor is not so bad after all?

Friday, March 6, 2009

Sarah Palin is pro life, so why a judge that is not?

Sarah Palin appointed Anchorage Superior Court Judge Morgan Christen to the Alaska Supreme Court. Christen was the highest rated candidate submitted by the Alaska Judicial Counsel.

Alaska’s constitution requires that the governor fill vacancies to the Alaska Supreme Court by choosing a qualified candidate from a list of members of the Alaska Bar vetted by the Alaska Judicial Council. The names submitted to Palin were vetted by a questionnaire put to Bar members. The answers were tallied, and scored by an independent group. Christen and Palmer Superior Court Judge Erik Smith were the two individuals with the highest scores.

In choosing Judge Christen, Governor Sarah Palin appointed a judge who was a board member of the Planned Parenthood, a pro abortion organization. Further, her credentials are decidedly liberal, as well as obviously “pro choice”, read pro murder of the unborn.

Although, Sarah Palin had no choice of accepting a list with Judge Christen’s name, she had a choice in naming Christen to the Supreme Court of Alaska. The governor is not limited to the highest score by the Alaska Judicial Council, and can select any name, or demand additional candidates be named for selection.

When Sarah Palin was running for Governor, her stance was unabashedly pro life. She would not compromise on that position, no matter how hard the questioner tried. I know, I attended many of the candidate forums, and listened and watched those on radio and TV. I spoke with those closest to her and listened to Sarah too many times to have misunderstood her unabashed pro life stance.

Sarah Palin’s position on the court was for the judges to be constructionist, not interpretive when it came to constitutional questions. She favored overturning of Roe v. Wade.

The one issue that I thought Sarah Palin would never compromise on was her pro life position. With the appointment of Judge Morgan Christen, she has erased all doubts in my mind about the ability of this woman to put political expediency over her stated campaign positions.

What is Sarah Palin?

Just another politician?

Judge Christen is the second time that I am aware that she has allowed politics to eclipse her stance on the right to life. The first was with the association of the group Climate Change Strategies (CCS) with the Palin sub-Cabinet for Climate Change. CCS is funded largely by the most notorious anti-growth and population control—pro abortion—foundations in the U.S.

It is bad enough that CCS is also anti-growth and now affecting and influencing the Palin Administration. How that situation plays into Palin’s pro-development stance, is something that I cannot fathom.

I expressed my concerns to one of her aides very recently regarding the association of CCS with the Palin Administration. Now, comes the appointment of Judge Christen.

With Judge Christen on the bench, what might become of the parental consent bill just introduced in the Alaska Legislature? A bill allegedly supported by Governor Sarah Palin who just appointed a judge philosophically opposed to the premise behind the legislation: the preservation of life and the preservation and recognition of the authority of parents.

Does Sarah Palin honestly believe that Judge Christen will be a ‘constructionist’ when the parental consent bill now in the legislature comes before the court?

I doubt that Judge Christen will be supportive of that legislation, given the predecessor was declared unconstitutional by the Alaska Supreme Court in 2007.

Was her support of that bill some sort of Machiavellian ploy to appease the pro life, family rights crowd, knowing that she would have to support the appointment of a judge philosophically opposed to those viewpoints?

After all, Judge Morgan Christen is a woman. Sarah killed two political birds with one stone. She appointed the “most qualified” from the list given her, and she appointed a woman, the second to Alaska’s Supreme Court.

Thus far, Gov. Sarah Palin has pretty well wiped the slate of
fiscal conservatism,
political propriety in keeping family matters out of State business (Trooper Gate), and, now
any intent on letting her pro life stance influence her political decisions

Did I miss anything?

I wonder how this will play to the national conservatives to whom she appealed when she ran for V.P.?

Will the real Sarah Palin please stand up?

Monday, March 2, 2009

Sarah Palin finally gets around to in-State Gas

Last week, Gov. Sarah Palin introduced legislation regarding a solution to the looming in-State natural gas crisis.

One of the bills introduced by the Palin Administration deals with the permitting process and the involvement of the Regulatory Commission of Alaska in the pipeline construction process. The other expands the portfolio of the Alaska Natural Gas Development Authority from just the development of a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope to tidewater to the development of natural gas resources within Alaska.

This legislation is very important in that in-State natural gas development will now receive the priority that has long been needed to resolve Alaska’s in-State power generation and home heating needs.

My criticism of the Palin Administration is that it took three years to get to this point, when Sarah Palin campaigned on natural gas development and was well aware of the Cook Inlet situation.

Alaska’s Natural Gas Dilemma

In Cook Inlet, reserves have rapidly dwindled to the point that in 2007, the Agrium ammonium nitrate (fertilizer) plant at Nikkiski near Kenai was forced to shut its doors. 65 Alaskans lost their jobs as a result.

For the prior three years to its shut down, Agrium was forced to cease production of ammonium nitrate due to dwindling Cook Inlet natural gas resources. These shut downs would occur during the coldest part of the year when the demand for natural gas for home heating and power generation was at its highest.

The majority of power for the Anchorage and Kenai Peninsula is generated at Beluga across Cook Inlet from Kenai. Chugach Electric owns the gas turbine power plant located at Beluga. Now, that natural gas reserves are dwindling, there is concern that the Beluga power plant may not have sufficient natural gas supplies to produce electricity beyond 2012.

There is a very real concern on the part of Alaskans living in the Mat-Su Valley, Anchorage, and the Kenai Peninsula that receive power from Beluga that one day very soon, the decision will need to be made to either stop natural gas flowing for home heating in order to provide enough natural gas for power generation.

This is not a situation that arose suddenly, but has been increasing in concern, but not priority since the early 1990s.

Both Governor Tony Knowles and Gov. Frank Murkowski focused on large natural gas pipeline projects to take Alaska North Slope natural gas to markets in the lower-48 states. Both ignored the looming shortfall of natural gas in Cook Inlet to the detriment of the employees who lost their jobs at Agrium and the impact of dwindling natural gas supplies have had on the price of power generation. The theory being that the Cook Inlet situation would be mitigated a small spur line off of the main pipeline carrying Alaska’s natural gas south to the lower-48 states, either at Fairbanks and down the Parks Highway south to Anchorage, or from Delta Junction and down the Richardson and Glenn Highways to the Enstar Hub at Palmer, Alaska. A spur line that was never prioritized in the discussions regarding the construction of the main pipeline south.

Natural gas exploration activity in Cook Inlet has been practically dormant since 2000. Much of this was due to the price of natural gas, a shortage of exploration rigs, and the politics of oil.

An interesting aspect to all of this is that natural gas is still being exported to Japan by UNOCAL from the LNG terminal at Nikkiski, Alaska near Kenai, Alaska. Yes, Alaska has an LNG terminal.

The LNG plant is supposed to be taken off-line in 2012 when a lack of natural gas reserves will make it uneconomical to export Cook Inlet natural gas to Japan. The current plan is to convert the plant from an exporting facility to a receiving facility. Meaning UNOCAL and others foresee Alaska . . . importing natural gas to its largest market.

There is a desire on the part of the State to keep this facility in operation and exporting natural gas, because it sets a precedent for marketing Alaska’s natural gas elsewhere in the Pacific Basin if the U.S. market is untenable for LNG.

The Jones Act has been a major barrier in reducing the cost of transporting LNG to the lower-48, as U.S. bottomed ships must be used to transport goods between U.S. ports. The cost of U.S. built tankers raises the cost of shipping that gas to market in the lower-48. Shipping Alaska’s natural gas to foreign markets would not require U.S. built tankers.

An exception to the Jones Act has been sought several times to reduce the cost of transporting Alaska oil and gas to market. Thus far, such attempts have been unsuccessful.

Gov. Sarah Palin, like her predecessors focused initially on the large diameter pipeline project designed to take Alaska’s North Slope natural gas to market in the lower-48. Her Alaska Natural Gas Incentive Act (AGIA) legislation was a controversial process that pitted her against the Alaska oil interests and legislators (mostly Republican) who favored the Murkowski approach of letting the oil companies decide when Alaska’s natural gas would move to market over AGIA.

In-State natural gas development has a bright future. Several promising discoveries have been made in the Nenana basin and in the Copper River basin.

Of course, any development in Alaska is strongly contested by the environmental lobby.
The people of the United States need to understand that Alaska is a storehouse of mineral and energy wealth. One day, it may be that Alaska will export water to the lower-48.

Our Governor has made a major move in establishing the foundation for the beginning of a new chapter in Alaska’s energy development. One day, this foundation will have contributed to the end of using diesel generators for power generation in the Bush.

That is, if our governor will stay focused on Alaska and not pleasing Outside interests who would benefit her political ambitions beyond the provincial needs of Alaskans.