“. . . His views on contraception, gay rights, and even that of higher education all would shove years of progress into the trash bin. . . .”—Daniel D. Grota, Separation of church and state, Rick Santorum blew it, 3 March, 2012 Frontiersman www.frontiersman.com
I believe that Mr. Grota also “blew it” when it came to the issue of the Constitution.
I do not believe that I swore an oath to uphold, defend and to preserve the same constitution that he did. My Constitution is the supreme law of the land that values life, liberty, family, the unborn, our culture, our language and the preservation and defense of our sovereignty. Our Constitution is what provided us with the freedom from tyranny that made the United States the most powerful nation on the face of the earth. Mr. Grota’s constitution decries those attributes and that achievement.
“years of progress” . . . well, if that “progress” is measured in terms of aborted babies, I guess “progress” was made with the lives of 54 million Americans who were sacrificed to the liberal need to change our society from one that was known for its sanctity of life to something much, much darker and draconian. The current call for infanticide is just another step in devaluing life and removing each of us as a creation of God to something whose value is determined by the despot of the moment. A sacrifice that brought us massive illegal migration to fill the job void of these unborn Americans, because of the liberal desire to kill rather to reinforce morality, personal responsibility, and duty—there was a time when getting a girl pregnant was a certain way find one’s self in wedlock.
I guess that “progress” is measured in the number of unwed mothers due to the intense liberal media, liberal entertainment industry, and the passage of laws that prevent exercise by the parents over their children that contributes to the number of unwed teen mothers, and the statutory rape of minor children by adults who are egged on by liberals who say “aw, they will just do it anyway . . . “—no, they won’t if they understand the idea of personal responsibility, morality, integrity and honor. However, we let 13 year old girls get raped by older men—statistically, 12 and 13 year old girls get pregnant by sex with 22 to 40 year old men—and the crimes go unreported so that Planned Parenthood can make a buck and continue the profitable destruction of morality in this country.
If “progress” is the destruction of the family, I guess there is “progress”. The liberal indoctrination of our children in the idea that marriage is something that you throw away if you get tired of the person or angry with them for whatever reason goes unfettered in movies, ads, and television. The State will take care of the female with child. The male has little moral responsibility any more. This has lead to the disaffection from marriage by many women and men. No responsibility or commitment.
Then, there is the ‘progress’ that is the hypocrisy demonstrated in the perversion of marriage by courts and legislators who accede to the liberal and homosexual agenda that demands marriage between homosexuals in churches, even though religion bars such and the 1st Amendment bars any interference by government in religion.
I guess that “progress” is the imposition of a 1st Amendment “right” to view pornography and to display homosexual porn prominently in our public libraries where our children can see this garbage, along with homosexual perversions in public during public parades. I guess that “progress” is the complete nullification by liberal courts and legislators without principle of our duty to protect our children from such objectionable material and conduct.
I guess this “progress” that is referred to is ignoring the continued attack on the 1st Amendment by the homosexual activists and liberals who agree with the agenda. Hate speech? Not as long as the 1st Amendment stands. This is not liberal Europe without a Bill of Rights, even though the liberal courts are going hell bent for leather to rewrite the Bill of Rights.
I guess “progress” is the liberal attack on the Second Amendment across the country through the blatant attempt to disarm the law abiding citizen and to control the purchase and carry of their firearms. Why is it that the liberal always requires the law abiding citizen to “retreat” in the face of an attack upon their lives and property?
I could go on with this, but you get the idea.
I did not swear an oath to defend, protect and preserve the same ideals as did Mr. Grota. Either the pendulum begins to swing back to what our Forefathers actually intended, or, there will be another Great American Revolution. I will not be on Mr. Grota’s side in that one.
Showing posts with label Alaska Constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alaska Constitution. Show all posts
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Will the Alaska Army National Guard be there for us . . .
The congressional super committee that was to allegedly make an effort to reduce the deficit has apparently chosen to play politics. It now appears that an impasse has occurred that will result in $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts over the next 10 years. The portent for Alaska and the rest of the country of this taking effect is something that this governor and this Legislature need to ponder before the next legislative session begins in January.
The automatic $1.2 trillion in cuts will have an immediate and devastating impact upon the military. As a result of current FY 2012 cuts already in place, with additional cuts imposed by the automatic reduction in spending, the military’s portion of spending cuts will rise to $1 trillion. The result of this reduction, says Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta “will be devastating.”
Allegedly, the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operations are over. The troops will be coming home. Unfortunately, the war is not over, as additional areas of operations have been opened in the Middle East and Africa by President Obama. The latest operation being troops and helicopters very recently deployed to Ghana. Syria is now on NATO’s hit list with ever increasing threats and war talk by NATO countries. Another Alaska Army brigade is getting ready for another deployment to Afghanistan, even though the war is allegedly winding down. An Alaska Army National Guard unit was recently deployed to the Middle East.
Defense cuts necessitated by the recession will negatively impact capability, readiness and manpower in both active and reserve components through at least this decade. More military bases will be closed bringing the threat of the Congressional base closing axe upon Alaska’s two major military bases.
Under the Obama Administration, the National Guard and reserves play a major role in Libyan operations, Iraq and Afghanistan, the Balkans (Kosovo), and the expansion of the war into Africa, Libya, and Yemen.
Due to the weakening of U.S. force structure by spending cuts already in place, the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) and the Russians have initiated open military challenges not seen since the Cold War. The Russians have increased their presence and spending in former Soviet Republics in the Caucus Region with their invasion of Georgia (South Ossetia) and have increased their military presence in Moldava, Dagestan, and Chechnya. Russia has signed a treaty with Ukraine for an additional 25 years for the use of the former Soviet naval base at Sevastopol. Recently, the Russians moved two brigades of troops and additional air and naval units to the far north of Russia to once again challenge the West in the Arctic. The Peoples Republic of China has openly warned the U.S. to stay out of disputes in the China Sea with Vietnam and the Philippines. Chinese naval and air harassment of U.S. and Japanese naval units and aircraft continues off the coast of Japan and elsewhere in the China Sea. Both Russia and the PRC have adopted a first strike policy, with the PRC’s military doctrine being very explicit in designating the United States as its primary adversary.
The reality of our military situation is that our forces are stressed and overextended with multiple deployments ongoing at any time, all the while, suffering concurrent manpower reductions and budget cuts affecting readiness and capability. Major airlift capability is now limited with the closure of the C17 production line by the Obama Administration.
Given the realities of the recession, and the underlying causation of overspending for too many years, the impact upon the military capability of the United States will be draconian through this decade.
Entitlements, which have outgrown military spending, will be the last items reduced by politicians who put their reelection above the defense of the country.
With the downgrading of our military capability will come the wolves seeking advantage, first at the periphery of American military reach, then ever closer to our borders as they sense opportunity. This challenge to American power has already begun in our hemisphere. There are almost daily incursions from Mexico by armed paramilitary forces in support of drug smuggling operations. Iran is militarily invested in Chavez’s Venezuela. The PRC runs the Panama Canal and is expanding its influence in the Caribbean. Al Qaida and Hezbollah have a presence in South America, training personnel for infiltration into the Great Satan of America. Meanwhile, Russian TU95 Bear bombers of Cold War fame once again regularly test U.S. and Canadian air defenses.
Submarines of the PRC Navy have embarrassed the United States Navy at least twice during the Obama Administration. The PRC is accelerating development of tactical nuclear missiles intended to deal a death blow to the U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups in the Pacific.
The Canadians will not be much help in any Arctic defense strategy in the face of a declining military. The Canadians have already admitted that they may have to rely upon contractors for personnel and logistics.
One of the more disturbing aspects of the Afghanistan and Iraq operations was the reliance on Russian contractors for air transport of military equipment and supplies.
One of two strategies for maintaining the U.S. military will develop as the recession, inflation, and resulting world civil unrest increase. The increasing turmoil will result in an ever increasing dependence upon the reserves and National Guard for troops and equipment to augment regular military units. Or, the National Guard and reserves will be stripped of their equipment and reduced in manpower in favor of maintaining a viable, standing military.
The regular U.S. military will continue to be reduced, but called upon to do more, given the ever increasing decline in military capability in Western Europe and Canada. The U.S. Navy played a major role in support of the Libyan campaign by having to provide the majority of aircraft for the Libyan bombing campaign.
The impact of the increasing violence into the U.S. from Mexico’s drug wars will undoubtedly force future administrations to defend our borders from the threat of narco terror, further stressing the military.
James J. Carafano, a defense analyst for the Heritage Institute, in his article on State Defense Forces (SDF) “Small Answers to big problems” in the March 23, 2011 Washington Times, advocated for increasing the number of 32 USC § 109(c) State Defense Forces in the U.S. He also pointed out that the greatest resistance to the State Defense Force concept comes from the State Adjutant Generals, for reasons unknown.
In his letter to then Governor Sarah Palin in September, 2008, then LTG Craig Campbell, Commissioner/Adjutant General (TAG), DMVA, envisioned an expanded role for the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), including combat support, and a retention of the ASDF State Military Police Constabulary role as part of the State’s military force structure.
Since 2010, MG Thomas H. Katkus, Commissioner/TAG appointed by Gov. Sean Parnell, has worked purposefully to diminish, disarm, and render ineffective and irrelevant the ASDF. The Parnell Administration acted to disarm and to render ineffective the state-only part of the organized militia in favor of a federal-only emergency military response to disasters in Alaska.
The National Guard belongs to the President, not the Governor, and to believe otherwise is incredibly naive in the face of two U.S. Supreme Court decisions to the contrary.
This action on the part of the Parnell Administration in a time of war calls into question the Parnell Administration’s support of the 2d Amendment and Art. 1 § 19 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
The Legislature is complicit in its silence.
Those Alaskans who value their 2d Amendment rights need to be very concerned. The stage has been set and the precedent established with the disarming of the ASDF for the disarming of the Alaska unorganized militia in an emergency.
This is the first time that I can remember in my 57 years as an Alaskan that the Legislature and the Governor have acted with open eyes and clear intent to make Alaskans less safe.
The automatic $1.2 trillion in cuts will have an immediate and devastating impact upon the military. As a result of current FY 2012 cuts already in place, with additional cuts imposed by the automatic reduction in spending, the military’s portion of spending cuts will rise to $1 trillion. The result of this reduction, says Sec. of Defense Leon Panetta “will be devastating.”
Allegedly, the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan theaters of operations are over. The troops will be coming home. Unfortunately, the war is not over, as additional areas of operations have been opened in the Middle East and Africa by President Obama. The latest operation being troops and helicopters very recently deployed to Ghana. Syria is now on NATO’s hit list with ever increasing threats and war talk by NATO countries. Another Alaska Army brigade is getting ready for another deployment to Afghanistan, even though the war is allegedly winding down. An Alaska Army National Guard unit was recently deployed to the Middle East.
Defense cuts necessitated by the recession will negatively impact capability, readiness and manpower in both active and reserve components through at least this decade. More military bases will be closed bringing the threat of the Congressional base closing axe upon Alaska’s two major military bases.
Under the Obama Administration, the National Guard and reserves play a major role in Libyan operations, Iraq and Afghanistan, the Balkans (Kosovo), and the expansion of the war into Africa, Libya, and Yemen.
Due to the weakening of U.S. force structure by spending cuts already in place, the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) and the Russians have initiated open military challenges not seen since the Cold War. The Russians have increased their presence and spending in former Soviet Republics in the Caucus Region with their invasion of Georgia (South Ossetia) and have increased their military presence in Moldava, Dagestan, and Chechnya. Russia has signed a treaty with Ukraine for an additional 25 years for the use of the former Soviet naval base at Sevastopol. Recently, the Russians moved two brigades of troops and additional air and naval units to the far north of Russia to once again challenge the West in the Arctic. The Peoples Republic of China has openly warned the U.S. to stay out of disputes in the China Sea with Vietnam and the Philippines. Chinese naval and air harassment of U.S. and Japanese naval units and aircraft continues off the coast of Japan and elsewhere in the China Sea. Both Russia and the PRC have adopted a first strike policy, with the PRC’s military doctrine being very explicit in designating the United States as its primary adversary.
The reality of our military situation is that our forces are stressed and overextended with multiple deployments ongoing at any time, all the while, suffering concurrent manpower reductions and budget cuts affecting readiness and capability. Major airlift capability is now limited with the closure of the C17 production line by the Obama Administration.
Given the realities of the recession, and the underlying causation of overspending for too many years, the impact upon the military capability of the United States will be draconian through this decade.
Entitlements, which have outgrown military spending, will be the last items reduced by politicians who put their reelection above the defense of the country.
With the downgrading of our military capability will come the wolves seeking advantage, first at the periphery of American military reach, then ever closer to our borders as they sense opportunity. This challenge to American power has already begun in our hemisphere. There are almost daily incursions from Mexico by armed paramilitary forces in support of drug smuggling operations. Iran is militarily invested in Chavez’s Venezuela. The PRC runs the Panama Canal and is expanding its influence in the Caribbean. Al Qaida and Hezbollah have a presence in South America, training personnel for infiltration into the Great Satan of America. Meanwhile, Russian TU95 Bear bombers of Cold War fame once again regularly test U.S. and Canadian air defenses.
Submarines of the PRC Navy have embarrassed the United States Navy at least twice during the Obama Administration. The PRC is accelerating development of tactical nuclear missiles intended to deal a death blow to the U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups in the Pacific.
The Canadians will not be much help in any Arctic defense strategy in the face of a declining military. The Canadians have already admitted that they may have to rely upon contractors for personnel and logistics.
One of the more disturbing aspects of the Afghanistan and Iraq operations was the reliance on Russian contractors for air transport of military equipment and supplies.
One of two strategies for maintaining the U.S. military will develop as the recession, inflation, and resulting world civil unrest increase. The increasing turmoil will result in an ever increasing dependence upon the reserves and National Guard for troops and equipment to augment regular military units. Or, the National Guard and reserves will be stripped of their equipment and reduced in manpower in favor of maintaining a viable, standing military.
The regular U.S. military will continue to be reduced, but called upon to do more, given the ever increasing decline in military capability in Western Europe and Canada. The U.S. Navy played a major role in support of the Libyan campaign by having to provide the majority of aircraft for the Libyan bombing campaign.
The impact of the increasing violence into the U.S. from Mexico’s drug wars will undoubtedly force future administrations to defend our borders from the threat of narco terror, further stressing the military.
James J. Carafano, a defense analyst for the Heritage Institute, in his article on State Defense Forces (SDF) “Small Answers to big problems” in the March 23, 2011 Washington Times, advocated for increasing the number of 32 USC § 109(c) State Defense Forces in the U.S. He also pointed out that the greatest resistance to the State Defense Force concept comes from the State Adjutant Generals, for reasons unknown.
In his letter to then Governor Sarah Palin in September, 2008, then LTG Craig Campbell, Commissioner/Adjutant General (TAG), DMVA, envisioned an expanded role for the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), including combat support, and a retention of the ASDF State Military Police Constabulary role as part of the State’s military force structure.
Since 2010, MG Thomas H. Katkus, Commissioner/TAG appointed by Gov. Sean Parnell, has worked purposefully to diminish, disarm, and render ineffective and irrelevant the ASDF. The Parnell Administration acted to disarm and to render ineffective the state-only part of the organized militia in favor of a federal-only emergency military response to disasters in Alaska.
The National Guard belongs to the President, not the Governor, and to believe otherwise is incredibly naive in the face of two U.S. Supreme Court decisions to the contrary.
This action on the part of the Parnell Administration in a time of war calls into question the Parnell Administration’s support of the 2d Amendment and Art. 1 § 19 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
The Legislature is complicit in its silence.
Those Alaskans who value their 2d Amendment rights need to be very concerned. The stage has been set and the precedent established with the disarming of the ASDF for the disarming of the Alaska unorganized militia in an emergency.
This is the first time that I can remember in my 57 years as an Alaskan that the Legislature and the Governor have acted with open eyes and clear intent to make Alaskans less safe.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Parnell broke the law.
The Republican Primary was a disappointment. In more ways than one. Not only did Parnell receive the nod to move on to the General Election, but he was given a free pass on his violation of his oath of office. Parnell has violated Article II Sec. 5 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, not once, but twice. Now, we hear that it may actually have been 3 times with the appointment of a State employee to Dahlstrom's seat.
Parnell has deferred owing up to his indiscretions by alleging that he acted upon the advice of an unnamed junior attorney at the Dept. of Law. This excuse completely ignores the fact that Sean Parnell is a lawyer himself. What? He no longer understands the Constitution, much less now apparently has a diminished capacity to understand the English language?
Art. II Sec. 5:
§ 5. Disqualifications
"No legislator may hold any other office or position of profit under the United States or the State. During the term for which elected and for one year thereafter, no legislator may be nominated, elected, or appointed to any other office or position of profit which has been created, or the salary or emoluments of which have been increased, while he was a member. This section shall not prevent any person from seeking or holding the office of governor, secretary of state, or member of Congress. This section shall not apply to employment by or election to a constitutional convention."
What part of "for one year after" does not this governor understand? I think the provision is very clear. Gee, even I understand it.
What I find most disturbing are those who voted for both Joe Miller as a strong constitutionalist versus Lisa Murkowski as the compromised insider who ignored the Constitution. Yet, many of these folks voted for Parnell. How does one reconcile that paradox?
Sarah Palin campaigned on a platform that included integrity. Sean Parnell cannot lay claim to that, given his violation of the State's Constitution, to which he swore an oath to uphold and defend. Which, given the Dahlstrom and Therriault affairs, he did not.
How could one vote for Miller, then vote for Parnell?
How could one then claim the moral and legal high ground over the Obama/Pelosi/Reid trashing of our national Constitution?
Another excuse that I heard was that Faibanks and North Pole hold former Sen. Gene Therriault in such high regard that they were willing to ignore the fact of the constitutional affront by his appointment on the part of Governor Parnell.
Allegedly, the Palin crowd was also a factor, voting for Joe Miller, and then voting for Parnell due to his association with Sarah. Let me remind that Sarah Palin did not select Sean Parnell during the 2006 Primary. Parnell won the slot as her Lt. Gov. by winning the Primary. That he did on his own. I do not recall Sarah Palin going out of her way for Parnell’s election.
The only conclusion to be drawn is that these folks hold the Constitution of the State of Alaska in such low regard that it can be violated with impunity by a sitting governor, so long as that governor is Republican?
There are those who believe in "my party, right or wrong". I am not one of those. I believe in the rule of LAW.
If one can violate one's oath with impunity, then what's next?
I am more than worried about the integrity of the Alaska Republican voter and the hypocrisy demonstrated in this election. Even more troubling is the lack of integrity and honor demonstrated by our current Governor.
Will the new Legislature have the courage to impeach this governor, if he prevails in the General Election?
Parnell has deferred owing up to his indiscretions by alleging that he acted upon the advice of an unnamed junior attorney at the Dept. of Law. This excuse completely ignores the fact that Sean Parnell is a lawyer himself. What? He no longer understands the Constitution, much less now apparently has a diminished capacity to understand the English language?
Art. II Sec. 5:
§ 5. Disqualifications
"No legislator may hold any other office or position of profit under the United States or the State. During the term for which elected and for one year thereafter, no legislator may be nominated, elected, or appointed to any other office or position of profit which has been created, or the salary or emoluments of which have been increased, while he was a member. This section shall not prevent any person from seeking or holding the office of governor, secretary of state, or member of Congress. This section shall not apply to employment by or election to a constitutional convention."
What part of "for one year after" does not this governor understand? I think the provision is very clear. Gee, even I understand it.
What I find most disturbing are those who voted for both Joe Miller as a strong constitutionalist versus Lisa Murkowski as the compromised insider who ignored the Constitution. Yet, many of these folks voted for Parnell. How does one reconcile that paradox?
Sarah Palin campaigned on a platform that included integrity. Sean Parnell cannot lay claim to that, given his violation of the State's Constitution, to which he swore an oath to uphold and defend. Which, given the Dahlstrom and Therriault affairs, he did not.
How could one vote for Miller, then vote for Parnell?
How could one then claim the moral and legal high ground over the Obama/Pelosi/Reid trashing of our national Constitution?
Another excuse that I heard was that Faibanks and North Pole hold former Sen. Gene Therriault in such high regard that they were willing to ignore the fact of the constitutional affront by his appointment on the part of Governor Parnell.
Allegedly, the Palin crowd was also a factor, voting for Joe Miller, and then voting for Parnell due to his association with Sarah. Let me remind that Sarah Palin did not select Sean Parnell during the 2006 Primary. Parnell won the slot as her Lt. Gov. by winning the Primary. That he did on his own. I do not recall Sarah Palin going out of her way for Parnell’s election.
The only conclusion to be drawn is that these folks hold the Constitution of the State of Alaska in such low regard that it can be violated with impunity by a sitting governor, so long as that governor is Republican?
There are those who believe in "my party, right or wrong". I am not one of those. I believe in the rule of LAW.
If one can violate one's oath with impunity, then what's next?
I am more than worried about the integrity of the Alaska Republican voter and the hypocrisy demonstrated in this election. Even more troubling is the lack of integrity and honor demonstrated by our current Governor.
Will the new Legislature have the courage to impeach this governor, if he prevails in the General Election?
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Parnell's Plight
Governor Sean Parnell has dug himself a hole that is deep and wide. Parnell has enough trouble brewing that would cause any sitting governor to start looking at the Help Wanted ads in the local papers. There are four primary areas of concern.
Parnell’s first problem is AGIA.
AGIA was pronounced as DOA by Parnell himself with respect to any expected success of the Open Season. Parnell’s refusal to answer rival Bill Walker’s FOIA request for disclosure of the Open Season is proof that Parnell is playing a delaying game without any expectation of success.
Against AGIA is the reality of the shale gas developments in Canada and the U.S. The Outside gas reserves are estimated to be enough for a 150 year supply of natural gas. The fact of the lack of any permitting to show in the 3 years since the passage of AGIA belie his current assertions that AGIA is alive and well.
AGIA, like Conoco/BP’s Denali project, takes our gas and gas liquids to Canada, thereby benefitting Canada, not Alaska.
Is Parnell acting in the best interests of Alaska by pushing AGIA?
Parnell’s second problem is his contempt for the law with the growing controversy over his appointments of Nancy Dahlstrom and Gene Therriault as his Military Advisor and Oil and Gas Advisor, respectively.
This situation would not be so remarkable were it not for the fact that both Dahlstrom and Therriault were sitting legislators at the time of the creation of the positions to which they were appointed. As ‘advisors’ their appointments did not have to be approved by the Legislature. The problem for Parnell arises with the fact that both appointments were in violation of Article II of the Constitution of the State of Alaska:
There was little comment about former Sen. Gene Therriault’s appointment, except by yours truly and a few others. With the second appointment of Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom, the pundits and the press finally figured out that our governor was ignoring the law.
Is our Governor above the law?
Another indication of the contempt that his governor and his appointees have for the law is the conduct of Gov. Parnell’s MG Katkus in requiring a subordinate to appear in uniform to testify to the House Military and Veterans Affairs Committee in support of Katkus’ appointment as Commissioner DMVA and Adjutant General. This act was unprecedented, and constituted a blatant act of undue influence. This situation was akin to Gene Therriault filling in for the Governor at a campaign function in Fairbanks earlier this summer. Both situations constitute at the very least undue influence on the part of the Governor and by Katkus as Parnell’s appointee.
Parnell’s third problem is the contradiction to any claim that he is working to resolve the Cook Inlet gas supply crisis.
Parnell’s Oil and Gas Division refuses to timely renew expired Cook Inlet oil and gas leases to exploration and development companies. This failure by Parnell’s Oil and Gas Division is incredible in the face of the alleged purpose of the bullet line.
Is Governor Parnell playing politics with a critical gas supply issue to the detriment of Alaska’s largest population segment?
Parnell’s fourth problem that is indefensible and, perhaps, the least recognized by the media, is Gov. Parnell’s decision to virtually eliminate the Alaska State Defense Force as a viable emergency response asset under DMVA.
In 2006, many of the Army National Guard assets were called to federal active duty in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo, leaving the ASDF to perform disaster response. ASDF was called to State Active Duty three times in 2006.
How is reducing the State’s ability to respond to a disaster a showing of leadership?
Are we voters going to let Governor Sean Parnell’s open contempt for the law and his failure in leadership stand?
Parnell’s first problem is AGIA.
AGIA was pronounced as DOA by Parnell himself with respect to any expected success of the Open Season. Parnell’s refusal to answer rival Bill Walker’s FOIA request for disclosure of the Open Season is proof that Parnell is playing a delaying game without any expectation of success.
Against AGIA is the reality of the shale gas developments in Canada and the U.S. The Outside gas reserves are estimated to be enough for a 150 year supply of natural gas. The fact of the lack of any permitting to show in the 3 years since the passage of AGIA belie his current assertions that AGIA is alive and well.
AGIA, like Conoco/BP’s Denali project, takes our gas and gas liquids to Canada, thereby benefitting Canada, not Alaska.
Is Parnell acting in the best interests of Alaska by pushing AGIA?
Parnell’s second problem is his contempt for the law with the growing controversy over his appointments of Nancy Dahlstrom and Gene Therriault as his Military Advisor and Oil and Gas Advisor, respectively.
This situation would not be so remarkable were it not for the fact that both Dahlstrom and Therriault were sitting legislators at the time of the creation of the positions to which they were appointed. As ‘advisors’ their appointments did not have to be approved by the Legislature. The problem for Parnell arises with the fact that both appointments were in violation of Article II of the Constitution of the State of Alaska:
“Section 2.5 - Disqualifications.
No legislator may hold any other office or position of profit under the United States or the State. During the term for which elected and for one year thereafter, no legislator may be nominated, elected, or appointed to any other office or position of profit which has been created, or the salary or emoluments of which have been increased, while he was a member. . . .”
There was little comment about former Sen. Gene Therriault’s appointment, except by yours truly and a few others. With the second appointment of Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom, the pundits and the press finally figured out that our governor was ignoring the law.
Is our Governor above the law?
Another indication of the contempt that his governor and his appointees have for the law is the conduct of Gov. Parnell’s MG Katkus in requiring a subordinate to appear in uniform to testify to the House Military and Veterans Affairs Committee in support of Katkus’ appointment as Commissioner DMVA and Adjutant General. This act was unprecedented, and constituted a blatant act of undue influence. This situation was akin to Gene Therriault filling in for the Governor at a campaign function in Fairbanks earlier this summer. Both situations constitute at the very least undue influence on the part of the Governor and by Katkus as Parnell’s appointee.
Parnell’s third problem is the contradiction to any claim that he is working to resolve the Cook Inlet gas supply crisis.
Parnell’s Oil and Gas Division refuses to timely renew expired Cook Inlet oil and gas leases to exploration and development companies. This failure by Parnell’s Oil and Gas Division is incredible in the face of the alleged purpose of the bullet line.
Is Governor Parnell playing politics with a critical gas supply issue to the detriment of Alaska’s largest population segment?
Parnell’s fourth problem that is indefensible and, perhaps, the least recognized by the media, is Gov. Parnell’s decision to virtually eliminate the Alaska State Defense Force as a viable emergency response asset under DMVA.
In 2006, many of the Army National Guard assets were called to federal active duty in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo, leaving the ASDF to perform disaster response. ASDF was called to State Active Duty three times in 2006.
How is reducing the State’s ability to respond to a disaster a showing of leadership?
Are we voters going to let Governor Sean Parnell’s open contempt for the law and his failure in leadership stand?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)