Anchorage Daily News wants only the liberal discussion

Follows is my letter to Patrick Doyle, President and Publisher of the Anchorage Daily News (www.adn.com).

Mr. Pat Doyle,
President/Publisher
P.O. Box 149001
Anchorage, Alaska 99514

Re: Shannon Moore’s recent column regarding rape and abortion; banning from making comments

Mr. Doyle:

I became engaged in the commenting process to Ms. Moore’s very recent piece on rape and abortion. I considered her piece very offensive. She made bald faced assertions with her comments that were simply libelous in any other context, were the objects thereof not in the public purview–politicians. She also included conservatives in general, which I am, as subjects of her rage. I also noted that the bent of her opinion piece venting her spleen dealt with the subjects of rape and abortion. She offered nothing constructive as to anything to diminish either rape or abortion. Further, Ms. Moore totally ignored the illegal practices in contravention to State and federal law by Planned Parenthood of not notifying the authorities of the rape of underage girls by adult males.

I noted those commenting and realized that with one or two exceptions, the vast majority of comments arose from the left of the community in support of her rabid fomenting against the Republicans mentioned by name, and conservatives in general, thereby including yours truly in that group. Her attack was simply outrageous, inaccurate, and served no purpose other than to divide the community.

I responded to several of the commenters by noting that the platform of the Democratic Party was at opposition with the philosophy and intent of our Framers and Founding Fathers as expressed in the Constitution. I did use the word traitor as a description of anyone who believed that our rights under the Constitution were other than endowed by a Creator, and, therefore immutable by man. As a result, I was also called a ‘traitor and coward’ for my National Guard and Army Reserve service by commenters using the user Ids Frostyone and FrankieFlynn. They did not appreciate my conservative interpretation of the Democratic initiatives assaulting faith, patriotism, family, the value of our children, and supernatural basis for our rights under the Constitution. However, I did not seek their exclusion from the conversation.

In fact, FrankieFlynn evidently had access to a database that showed my military record, as he made derisive comments regarding the length of time it took me to make E-5. Both Flynn and Frosty then labeled me as a coward and traitor, which, taken in context became inclusive of all NG and Reserve members, past and present.

I believe that Flynn used a computer that was either State or Federal to find the information

regarding my military record, which he then used that information, which is privileged, private, and confidential, as the basis to make derisive comments.

Those inappropriate comments did not really bother me, as anyone who is familiar with the reserve components knows, one has to have a slot to justify the rank, and one is not promoted without having a slot allowing the promotion. The Alaska National Guard, and I have been both Air and Army Guard, is relatively small in comparison to the federal military. The Army Reserve at the time had only one unit in Alaska. Therefore, opportunity for promotion was very limited in the units to which I belonged. Just the way it works.

However, it is the use of information derived from a federal or state database that is the issue, and I will be making a complaint to the FBI, the Army and USAF regarding the situation. FrankieFlynn implied in his comments and by his access to the information that he may have been active duty or a civilian employee of the military or the State of Alaska in a capacity that gave him access to the info. He may have violated the law. Banning me, and not taking any action against FrankieFlynn or Frostyone shows agreement with their conduct by virtue of allowing those comments to remain. No reasonable individual could believe that Date of Rank information is in the public domain and readily accessible. Therefore, whomever made the decision to ban my comments discriminated against me, but allowed the illegal use of confidential information to remain, thereby condoning the conduct.

The fact that I have been banned from making further comments on any article in ADN I find discriminatory, given the outrageous nature of Ms. Moore’s inclusion of every conservative minded person as the object of her rant. My banning demonstrates that the ADN is not interested in fostering any community discussion, but rather promoting only one viewpoint. In which case, you have lost a reader and one who has placed many comments contributing to many discussions. I have even had Compass pieces published in the past.

The liberal at ADN who made the decision to ban any further comments on my part served to ignore what was clearly 1^st Amendment protected political speech on my part with my criticisms of the Democratic Party’s policies. My banning made my points about the inability of the liberal mind to tolerate an opposing viewpoint.

I am a 58 year Alaska who writes and will comment upon this hypocrisy on the part of ADN and its liberal bent elsewhere. Your paper’s liberal bent is out of touch with this community and Alaska.

Maybe, one day, the liberals who comment and the management of ADN will cease to be intolerant and allow a public discourse without restoring to ad hominem attacks or the public dissemination of private information on the ADN’s website?

I truly look forward to the day after the coming election. I am looking forward to the collective howl from the liberal community over their realization that they are not in the mainstream of political and social thought in this country.

Regards,

Lawrence D. Wood (Larry)

The need for voter ID

Why would the 5th Circuit's recent decision regarding the new Texas voter registration law be declared unconstitutional?  How can it be deemed discrimination and unduly burdensome so as to act to deny the "poor" minorities in Texas their right to vote? 

The reality is, these three judges, two appointed by Pres. Bill Clinton and one appointed by Pres. George W. Bush, acted to create prejudice and hardship where none existed.

The 5th Circuit was wrong in its decision, it placed conjecture above the need of the country to maintain the integrity of its voting system, and in doing so, violated their oaths to preserve and to uphold the Constitution of the United States.  The Texas ID requirements were universal, not specific to any segment of the population, thereby denying any allegation of the requirement being prejudicial, burdensome or otherwise exclusive.  Further, these federal judges seemingly overlooked the fact that this is a country of rule by majority, a republic.

How does one qualify for welfare benefits?  One applies and proves one's need and identity to qualify.

How does one get a driver's license?  In Alaska and other states, one has to present a birth certificate, or other ID, such as a rent receipt or two witnesses who have either state ID cards or driver's licenses to qualify, after passing a written and driving test.

How does one get a state identification card?  A state ID card is all that Texas was requiring to vote--it is a photo ID.  In many states, such ID is free for the asking.  One just has to apply.

How does one qualify for a political caucus of either party?  One shows ID that matches with voter registration for the district.  One can usually register to vote at the party caucus, but you must still show ID to do so.

How does one cash one's social security check, payroll check, or get cash from one's account?  Most banks and credit unions will require proof of one's identity, usually a photo ID.

How about a library card?   Your 13 year old daughter can get an abortion without your permission, but she must have parental permission to get a library card.   Libraries in most cities want proof of your identity so that they have a means to bill you for the book you forget to return.  That means a photo ID.

What is it to be poor in the United States?  The qualifications to be poor in this day and age require an income of $50,000 or less for a family of four.  Yet, one may have a TV, computer, at least one running vehicle, and rent or own the abode in which they live.

Therefore, how is that the judges of the 5th Circuit deciding the Texas case reached the conclusion that a photo identification readily available was somehow unduly burdensome and prejudicial when such is required during the course of one's everyday business?

Businesses make no provision of economic standing with regard for identification requirements imposed upon their customers.

Voter registration drives amongst the homeless, the poor, illegal aliens, and the elderly are the primary means for expanding the democratic party registrations.  Fear is the primary means used by the democrats to preserve  and to expand their voter base.  The "bad" republicans will take away your benefits!  Ignoring that that "bad" democrats had to take away other's money to provide those "benefits".

Voter fraud is a major concern in U.S. elections.  Yet, there is little in the way of an actual demonstration of widespread identity substitution taking place in elections.

There is continuing evidence of many states and localities maintaining voter registration lists with the names of dead voters, people no longer residents in the state, and even the names of pets as valid voters.  Recently, the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina allegedly found that 30,000 dead residents were still registered to vote in NC.  Therefore, there is a need to audit voter registration lists to eliminate invalid registrations.

The main concern is not so much the idea of someone fraudulently assuming the name of another as it is allowing those not citizens of the United States to vote in national elections.  How can we as Americans maintain our sovereignty if aliens are voting in our national elections?  The influence of those not legal citizens in electing our public officials is a direct threat to our national sovereignty and the supremacy of the Constitution.

Many illegal aliens from Latin America maintain that they are not here for citizenship, but to work, making them illegal migrant workers rather than "illegal immigrants".  Yet, La Raza and other Hispanic activist groups want voting rights for Hispanic illegal aliens to impose their racist political goals upon the states and United States.  The democrats and the 'compassionate' republicans just want their votes, no matter the cost to our sovereignty or to the integrity of the vote.

Muslim activists seek to impose Shari'a law in our cities and states in violation of our Constitution.  Many Muslims are here illegally, and even those here legally, all place Islam over the Constitution.  The goal of Islam in America is to see the U.S. become an Islamic state. 

The liberal democratic party has no scruples regarding the need to maintain the integrity of the vote.  They believe that achieving their political goals and remaining in power exceed the need to preserve the integrity and legitimacy of the voting process.  Their disdain for the Constitution is well established.

It is the integrity of the vote that is important, because without that integrity, the security and sanctity of the republic is at stake.  The vote should be reserved for those who are citizens, only, and who can prove their identity, as they would have to do so during the course of their daily business.