tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post2611504107755101943..comments2024-03-23T08:51:09.577-08:00Comments on Progressive Alaska: An Open Letter to Alan Boraas, Amanda Coyne, Krestia DeGeorge, Mark Dent, Andrew Halcro and Sheila ToomeyPhilip Mungerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14601488767955084836noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-55356429208089779182009-04-07T16:17:00.000-08:002009-04-07T16:17:00.000-08:00Sorry Phil misunderstood your post, but I stand by...Sorry Phil misunderstood your post, but I stand by the bottom of my post about doogan...<BR/>I have never seen such unprofessional, irresponsible emails to people in my life as what he sent out over christmas eve last year.crystalwolf aka caligrlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-23504915909958763672009-04-07T07:03:00.000-08:002009-04-07T07:03:00.000-08:00I wasn't referring to Doogan, I was referring to a...I wasn't referring to Doogan, I was referring to a person who was claiming he had provided the information on AKM to Doogan. He also bragged about other stuff most reporters would rather people didn't know...Philip Mungerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14601488767955084836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-52347685811123660842009-04-07T06:33:00.000-08:002009-04-07T06:33:00.000-08:00"He was way into his cups by then, and may not eve..."He was way into his cups by then, and may not even remember having said what he said at the party."<BR/><BR/>Yes Phil..."too much holiday cheer doogan" needs to spend less time stalking AKM and maybe some time @ AA! I'm sure he doesn't remember all the asinine emails he sent to all of us!crystalwolf aka caligrlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-30452503447953488412009-04-06T15:58:00.000-08:002009-04-06T15:58:00.000-08:00Robert H and HistoryGoddess,Hopefully, we're learn...Robert H and HistoryGoddess,<BR/><BR/>Hopefully, we're learning from this process. I'm far less concerned with whether or not the name comes out on Doogan's source or sources than I am in the answers from the six journalists or bloggers to whom I wrote the letter. <BR/><BR/>If Doogan is, as RH claims, a journalist, he wouldn't have wasted taxpayers' money to spite somebody who had crossed before he had two sources, eh...?<BR/><BR/>One person was overheard by many at a party on March 27th, claiming to be Doogan's source. He was way into his cups by then, and may not even remember having said what he said at the party.Philip Mungerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14601488767955084836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-55039122031095722602009-04-06T15:00:00.000-08:002009-04-06T15:00:00.000-08:00For those who don't see a problem with Doogan's ac...For those who don't see a problem with Doogan's action: Consider the scenario of a peaceful protest gathering that you want to attend regarding a controversial political issue. Would you like to show a "guard" your ID so that your name can be put on a public or government list before you can attend?? BTW...those neighbors of yours who don't agree with you are sent The List...and unfortunately the neighbors don't care about peaceful expression of views...so a brick comes through your window where your 2 yo is playing with Legos on the floor....Or a local politician who's been criticized and is privy to The List sends the sheriff out for a little harrassment...or they don't show up at all when you dial 911?? Or maybe a little cross-burning? Dragging a "fag" behind a truck?Actually...these scenarios have happened. They're not made up....SO, concentrate really hard and maybe the following will get through to your shallow neurons: This is EXACTLY why anonymous free speech via internet or pamphlet has been upheld multiple times by the Supreme Court of the US. The people have a right to anonymous free speech WITHOUT the fear of reprisals from the government or other entities which may be hostile to your views.Lee323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-52382593686721548962009-04-06T11:32:00.000-08:002009-04-06T11:32:00.000-08:00To anon:"Oh boo hoo, are you STILL whining abou th...To anon:<BR/>"Oh boo hoo, are you STILL whining abou this ?<BR/><BR/>Phil, her husband is the treasurer of Alaskan's for Truth."<BR/><BR/><B>So what? John Coale Greta husband is behind SARAHPAC-Greta interview GINO all the time, and at conservative sites they are always TELLING people to donate to SARAHPAC!!!What doogan did was illegal. Using state resources and AKM has a right to know who outed her! </B>crystalwolf aka caligrlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-76516922214583885982009-04-06T08:53:00.000-08:002009-04-06T08:53:00.000-08:00There are a couple aspects to Doogan's revelation ...There are a couple aspects to Doogan's revelation of AKM's identity that I don't hear much about.<BR/><BR/>First - who has taken the time to consider, either before the outing or after, what damage may be done to AKM and family: to their way of life, to their finances, their business/professional life, their safety, their peace of mind?<BR/><BR/>Second - who gets to decide when a pseudonymous blogger's readership is large enough that that blogger no longer "deserves" their express wish for anonymity? What law gives Doogan the right to make that call, in his official capacity, with his official voice, and the weight of his public office behind him?<BR/><BR/>Phil, thanks for what you are doing. I look forward to reading the replies you get.Ennealogichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10700675493688430474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-21957357532016983732009-04-06T07:36:00.000-08:002009-04-06T07:36:00.000-08:00Does that AFT stuff still have people all riled up...Does that AFT stuff still have people all riled up? Where did that originally come from, some pro-palin site? That's utter craziness.<BR/><BR/>Anyone with a SHRED of intelligence would go to Mudflats, do a search for any references by the author for AFT, BEFORE they started throwing around terms like "fucking hypocrites." It wouldn't take long to see that there are very very few references by the author of the blog, and so that argument that it's a front is all bull.<BR/><BR/>SMRAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-6779200823664201372009-04-06T05:38:00.000-08:002009-04-06T05:38:00.000-08:00@4:49"1) If Mr. Doogan has used state resources up...@4:49<BR/>"1) If Mr. Doogan has used state resources up to this point to address, banter, communicate, etc. with AKM, and it has not been a problem, why then is it now a problem merely because he prints her name? It shouldn't be, and it isn't."<BR/><BR/>Using state resources to answer state-related questions is not a problem. Using those resources means he is communicating in an official capacity. Using those same resources for personal reasons IS the problem.<BR/><BR/>"2) ...Doesn't Mr. Doogan, as a journalist have every right to protect his sources? Yes he does..."<BR/><BR/>As a journalist, your "protecting sources" argument could have merit, but he didn't publish this as a journalist. He did it as a government official. Big difference.<BR/><BR/>He was out of line, and I would say this whether he "outed" ANY citizen, blogger, commenter in the manner he did. <BR/><BR/>Government officials are not paid to play detective against citizens who disagree with them. The line should be very, very bright, to quote another Alaskan.<BR/><BR/>JanHistoryGoddesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02962334034096835646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-45295163529701259532009-04-06T05:34:00.000-08:002009-04-06T05:34:00.000-08:00Oh boo hoo, are you STILL whining abou this ?Phil,...Oh boo hoo, are you STILL whining abou this ?<BR/><BR/>Phil, her husband is the treasurer of Alaskan's for Truth.<BR/><BR/>You can't have it both ways, and I'd bet the house that if the tables were turned and these Mudlfat people were R's, you and your little posse would have no problem outing them.<BR/><BR/>You're a bunch of fucking hypocrites if you ask me.<BR/><BR/>Mr Mudflats wants truth and justice, but want's to keep the wife's name off of the blog that pushes AFT.<BR/><BR/>Yeah, lot's of credibility there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-61403657371477632772009-04-06T04:49:00.000-08:002009-04-06T04:49:00.000-08:00Hello Philip,I'm not sure what you meant by the la...Hello Philip,<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure what you meant by the last statements you made. I certainly implied 'what's all the fuss over this..?' As far as dying for their written word, I've read numerous opinions from those who think this is a real possibility in the case of people today such as AKM. It's not impossible, but in my opinion, a little far fetched. It won't be the government in any case. (Cue the creepy music.)<BR/><BR/>With regard to your questions to Boraas, Coyne, et. al., I'd have to raise some questions of my own:<BR/><BR/>1) If Mr. Doogan has used state resources up to this point to address, banter, communicate, etc. with AKM, and it has not been a problem, why then is it now a problem merely because he prints her name? It shouldn't be, and it isn't.<BR/><BR/>2) Did these writers in fact question who provided the information, and simply not publish these details? You may find out soon, but it's moot. Doesn't Mr. Doogan, as a journalist have every right to protect his sources? Yes he does. It's hypocritical to claim he's unethical for revealing AKM, then insist he reveal his source.<BR/><BR/>As I've said before, I'm not a fan of Mr. Doogan, but like many people, I don't think he did anything to merit punishment. <BR/><BR/>Only time will tell if this venue of blogging for change is truly important work. This is why we will have to agree to disagree Philip. I have yet to see any converts on message boards or blogs. <BR/><BR/>Cheers<BR/><BR/>Oh, and Clark... T.S. Don't read if it disturbs you. What disturbs me is that you may actually believe WE ARE the government.Robert Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-57411367053544031772009-04-05T23:54:00.000-08:002009-04-05T23:54:00.000-08:00Robert M said, among other stuff:"I've been accuse...Robert M said, among other stuff:<BR/><BR/>"I've been accused of being a blogger on occasion. I deny it. I comment when I read something to which I have a response. I try to respond as I would in person. I ramble and don't use spell-check. I try to follow one strict rule. If I'm writing something I would not say in person, I probably shouldn't write it. If others did the same we'd probably get along much better."<BR/><BR/>I feel the same way. But that's just you and me. You pulled that same metaphor out I've seen elsewhere, of people dying for their written statements they signed, so "what's all the fuss over this, with so much important work to be done"?<BR/><BR/>I don't accept that. This is part of the important work.Philip Mungerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14601488767955084836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-53590040024587205262009-04-05T23:51:00.000-08:002009-04-05T23:51:00.000-08:00Doogan claims AKM is a "public" figure. He has als...Doogan claims AKM is a "public" figure. He has also claimed several times that AKM "influences public policy".<BR/><BR/>We have already seen several of Doogan's abusive emails to local folks in Anchorage, emails which loudly trumpet that these citizens DO NOT INFLUENCE PUBLIC POLICY.<BR/><BR/>Phil, do you know of one iota of AKM influence on any policy or policy-maker in the entire State of Alaska, at any time in its history? <BR/><BR/>PS: hearty thanks to all those ANONYMOUS critics here, calling themselves ANONYMOUS and criticizing AKM ANONYMOUSLY. Are they all Mike Doogans?AussieBlueSky never Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-70277568681455689282009-04-05T23:48:00.000-08:002009-04-05T23:48:00.000-08:00mudflats did not INCITE anybody to do anything. a...mudflats did not INCITE anybody to do anything. and bob, your long-winded points are disturbing at best. WE are the government. don't go provincial on lynn -- she understands it better than you do. <BR/>i'm glad philip is continuing to stir this story.clarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10860613460678917845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-40436830772148365512009-04-05T23:34:00.000-08:002009-04-05T23:34:00.000-08:00Hey Lynn in Australia,(and to whomever else it app...Hey Lynn in Australia,<BR/>(and to whomever else it applies)<BR/><BR/>I never claimed I was a writer, unless by your definition we here are all writers. I claimed I wrote things. Does that me a writer? Factual reports were my forte, and I stand by my previous posts' statements.<BR/><BR/>I had to laugh when I read your attack on my comment. You are an example of those who take themselves a little too seriously. You chastise Mr. Doogan for shooting the messenger, yet do the same to me when you disagree with my comments. I'm sorry my rambling style and misspelling of a word left you completely confused as to the content. I did address the issues, but apparently you were too intent on critiquing my syntax and grammar to notice. For your benefit, and the benefit of others, I'll use smaller words and sentences this time.<BR/><BR/>Mr. Doogan did not "run a vendetta," nor did he "lash out in a hurtful manner." He did not "shoot the messenger," neither had he "hunted down the one person who called him out." Doogan did not have a "temper tantrum." All your exaggerations are blogspeak for your need to hype emotion rather than fact. Mr. Doogan's job is much more than your description of answering emails, letters, and phone calls, and the one single fact you failed to mention is what actions he actually took. He named a person who was anonymously writing about him and other government officials. Childish? Probably. Unethical, or illegal? Not even. I'll address the issues for you further.<BR/><BR/>The founding fathers of this country wrote things that could easily get them imprisoned, killed or executed. Anonymity kept them alive. <BR/><BR/>The same does not apply to the bloggers of today. The U.S. Constitution provides for rights of privacy. It does not mention 'anonymity'. The Supreme Court of this country has made many rulings regarding our rights to anonymity. Numerous people on these comment boards keep quoting them, yet they misinterpret them. A person has the right (in many instances) to keep their identity hidden. The courts have NOT made any rulings mandating that I have to abide by your secrecy. I can't force you to reveal yourself. I do however, have the right to say who you are if I find out legally. Have I lost you? Probably.<BR/><BR/>Mr. Doogan revealed a person who was insighting others to take pot-shots at the government. That's all he did. In answer to your question Lynn, yes, I have no problem with my elected officials using a pittance (as in this case) of my tax dollars for this reason. My tax dollars are used all the time to find out the sources of fundraisers and such. I see this as a similar situation. Some people place a little too much confidence in their illusion of anonymity. If, and when I'm ever involved in a revolutionary overthrow of the government, I might change my mind. Not until then.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately Lynn, if you are truly "in Australia" (yeah, right), I have to wonder what business is it of yours anyway? After all, you people have given up most of your rights to your government already. Now you want to tell us what rights we and our elected officials have? You don't seem to have an understanding of this Doogan situation other than what you've read in over-publicised, over-rated, self-important blogs. That goes back to one of my points on my original post. It applies to you. Internet bloggers can call themselves "progressive" or any other such nonsense, but it doesn't make their writings gospel. Only in the minds of people like you. They can rant to, and about government officials, but if they want to call them onto the proverbial carpet, they should have the gonads to show themselves, and not hide in the shadows.<BR/><BR/>By the way. If you are going to berate people for their writing errors, you should probably avoid internet comment boards. They are rife with mistakes. We're sharing ideas, not term papers. When you harp on spelling it makes you seem petty, and lacking in knowledge of the subject, and when you start your sentences with conjunctions while doing it, it also makes you look stupid. It's a comment board for goodness sake.<BR/><BR/>I've been accused of being a blogger on occasion. I deny it. I comment when I read something to which I have a response. I try to respond as I would in person. I ramble and don't use spell-check. I try to follow one strict rule. If I'm writing something I would not say in person, I probably shouldn't write it. If others did the same we'd probably get along much better.Robert Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-72047075700507124242009-04-05T23:24:00.000-08:002009-04-05T23:24:00.000-08:00holikachuk,I told AKM in September that AKM would ...holikachuk,<BR/><BR/>I told AKM in September that AKM would eventually be outed and that AKM should prepare for that personally, and otherwise.<BR/><BR/>Something ineffably is taken when you steal a benevolent shadow. <BR/><BR/>Nefarious shadows abound. They haunt the human imagination like nothing else, even redemption.Philip Mungerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14601488767955084836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-8187743922457427932009-04-05T23:00:00.000-08:002009-04-05T23:00:00.000-08:00Faulting Doogan for digging into AKM's identity on...Faulting Doogan for digging into AKM's identity on public time is correct. These legislators spend too much of their time doing things other than the state's business. <BR/><BR/>While you are flaying Doogan for that, you might want to look into the antics of others. From the Governor hiding her emails to the democrats holding a closed door session on Gussendorf we seem to be paying our people to hide our business from us.<BR/><BR/>But screaming about AKM's absolute right to remain anonymous nuts.<BR/><BR/>It would be within anyone's rights to find AKM's identity and broadcast it to the world. She made herself a target with her blog. <BR/><BR/><I>holikachuk</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-57845426011114691722009-04-05T22:48:00.000-08:002009-04-05T22:48:00.000-08:00Jean AK - the story up right now at Mudflats is on...Jean AK - the story up right now at Mudflats is one of the most uplifting in Alaska blog history. Nothing would be added to it by AKM's anonymity; nothing subtracted.<BR/><BR/>If I were Glen Beck, and AKM were a Republican, would Beck have cried while reading it to his viewers....?Philip Mungerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14601488767955084836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-8565764389684305472009-04-05T22:41:00.000-08:002009-04-05T22:41:00.000-08:00April 5, 2009 8:53 PMClark said:"she is anything b...April 5, 2009 8:53 PM<BR/>Clark said:<BR/>"she is anything but mean,...."<BR/>--------<BR/><BR/>...and beyond that, s/he backs up facts with links and quotes. I have never, ever read an AKM story that didn't link its facts somewhere. That's what we all are looking for, and that's why we go there.<BR/><BR/>So if anyone is implying that AKM's articles are baseless and opinionated -- they'd better think again, because that's the LAST thing they are! We read AKM because we can find the real deal there.<BR/><BR/>Jean<BR/>AKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-1288281523784433912009-04-05T22:20:00.000-08:002009-04-05T22:20:00.000-08:00Oh, and who said AKM is a PUBLIC FIGURE?Ask the co...Oh, and who said AKM is a PUBLIC FIGURE?<BR/><BR/>Ask the courts about that one .... betcha that would make a really good new federal court case, huh?<BR/><BR/>Jean<BR/>in AKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-10787401856629423482009-04-05T22:13:00.000-08:002009-04-05T22:13:00.000-08:00Phil, I can only say that *most* of the above post...Phil, I can only say that *most* of the above posters sound far wiser than I. However, I just want to add:<BR/><BR/>Get those answers to your questions! They should be answered. Alaskans deserve the answers.<BR/><BR/>I applaud you for your stick-to-it-iveness.<BR/><BR/>Jean<BR/>in AKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-90967831673900888302009-04-05T21:14:00.000-08:002009-04-05T21:14:00.000-08:00My last comment before leaving this line of conten...My last comment before leaving this line of content...<BR/><BR/>Politics is a contact sport. Enter at your own risk.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-88862048997876920712009-04-05T21:12:00.000-08:002009-04-05T21:12:00.000-08:00And haven't you all heard, there is nothing secret...And haven't you all heard, there is nothing secret on the internet unless it is behind heavy encryption. <BR/><BR/>Although "The secret Bloggers Society" could become a powerful lobby. Oh wait, they won't tell anyone who they are.<BR/><BR/>And I subscribe to Doogan's newsletter because it is the closest thing to his column which I loved so much that I can find. Not a constituent. <BR/><BR/>And a Legislator's job description is much broader than answering letters emails and calls, and sitting in committee and voting on bills.<BR/><BR/>Les is the #1 example of someone who is involved with many many issues outside of his constituent interest and passing laws.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-43216070759838713522009-04-05T21:03:00.000-08:002009-04-05T21:03:00.000-08:00Wow, communicating the name of a progressive/left-...Wow, communicating the name of a progressive/left-leaning blogger is state business? Bizarre.<BR/><BR/>Legislative issues & tasks include communicating a blogger's identity to constituents using state resources (computer/email) to reach a group of people whose names are available to you as a function of your ELECTED POSITION AS A STATE REPRESENTATIVE? Weird.<BR/><BR/>Hands up everyone who would provide their email address to doogan just because...<BR/><BR/>Anyone? Anyone?<BR/><BR/>I suspect that there are many people that email doogan cuz he's their buddy, guys/gals he used to work with, relatives, neighbors, maybe a few of the people that he works with now. And if he'd emailed all of them AFTER THE SESSION WAS OVER, from his own email address, and told all of them who AKM is, well, the matter would be easy -- he's an arse, but nothing illegal or ethically questionable there. But guess what -- that's not how it happened. State. time. state. dime. state. resources. personal. business. It's all very simple, even Christopher should be able to get that.<BR/><BR/>-SMRAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2083200247132907218.post-88210934405916010612009-04-05T20:53:00.000-08:002009-04-05T20:53:00.000-08:00she's a public figure!she's influencing policy dec...<I>she's a public figure!<BR/>she's influencing policy decisions!</I><BR/>it just sounds, i don't know, chickenshit, to be blunt. if you read mudflats since the beginning as i have, you'd know she is anything but mean, vindictive and power hungry. she says what many of us are thinking but don't take the time to parse and put down in words.<BR/>if doogan or anyone else thinks otherwise, sue her ass. good luck with that.<BR/>and you're a public figure because you have a blog? almost everyone i know has one.clarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10860613460678917845noreply@blogger.com