You're Invited to the Third Annual Muckrakers' Ball in Anchorage Saturday Evening

I'll be there!

Saradise Lost - Book 4 - Chapter 21 -- Andree McLeod's Records Request

Have Fun:

AKcomplaint -

The Hacked Climate Change eMails Explained

I've been trying to find the best short article on the right-wing explosion of falsities, half-truths and distortions over the hacked e-mails, purloined from the UK's East Anglia University.

I haven't found it yet, but looking through Glenn Beck-related YouTubes this afternoon, I came across this:

Anti-Gay Lobby Bullies UA Regents and Students

--- by E. Ross

Bent Alaska and the UA student, staff and faculty group asking the Board of Regents to add sexual orientation to the UA non-discrimination policy both got an unusual Facebook friend request the day after Thanksgiving: from Dave Bronson, of the anti-gay Alaska Family Council.

Why did Bronson ask to friend us three days before the regents meeting at UAA, when it was already public knowledge that the students would make their request again? Did he hope we wouldn't notice that he's an employee of the Family Council? Was he that desperate to know what else we might have planned?

Earlier in the week, the Alaska Family Council - a political lobby group unrelated to the university - sent an email blast titled "Don't Let UA Regents Be Bullied By Homosexual Activists," denouncing the students who are asking for the policy change (and who mostly happen to be heterosexual):

"We have learned that activists in the homosexual movement are attempting to convince the University of Alaska Board of Regents to change the university non-discrimination policy so as to give special recognition to homosexuals. If successful, individuals engaging in homosexual behavior will be afforded the same recognition as members of racial and ethnic minorities."

Of course we want the same recognition as other minority groups. And if we're asking for the same rights, then they aren't special rights, they're equal rights.

The Family Council told their members to email each of the 11 regents and pressure them to reject the students' request.

Jessi Angelette, a UAF student leading the effort, did testify at the meeting, saying in part:

"I am here today before you once again to urge you to amend the current non-discrimination policy and to add it to the next meeting's agenda..."

"The Alaska Family Council has sent out an email stating that you the Regents are being bullied by homosexual extremists. This couldn't be farther from the truth. We are a representation of the students you have sworn an oath to educate and protect. There are thousands of students who call the campuses home while trying to attain their education. Isn't it their right to feel protected from being harassed and discriminated against based on their orientation or their perceived orientation where they call home?"

"After doing research of other college and university non-discrimination policies, we have found that many have sexual orientation included in their polices and some of the schools are in states that do not have laws protecting LBGT citizens, such as Alabama. We have also looked at Tier 4 in the school rankings where UAF is ranked and have found only 1/6 of the schools do not have sexual orientation in their non-discrimination policy. These schools have shown that even though their cities and states may not have laws to protect the LBGT citizens, they have taken it upon themselves to insure the safety of their students."

UAA students John and Heather Aronno also support the policy change. In The Bully on Campus at UAA, they quote the Family Council argument that this policy would limit their freedom to insult us, then respond to Jim Minnery, who signed the email:

"...Have you been to UAA Jim? The right-to-life club hands out fliers with a revolver aimed at a fetus. We're not in any danger zone that threatens the suppression of free speech, nor is anyone impeding the free exercise of religion… Unless it's hate speech. You're the one asking people who are otherwise in no way affiliated with UAA to flood board member inboxes and voicemail, and if that doesn't work, barge into a board meeting and scream bloody murder. Again."

The students also note that the Council email links to a faux-college video called "Indoctrinate U: Our Education, Their Politics" and the page only lists past screenings, not the upcoming ones (to avoid protests?) Don't be surprised if it shows in Anchorage next year.

So, which group do you think the UA Regents should give priority: UA students and staff, or an unrelated political lobby trying to force their religious bigotry on our public university?

Please take a moment and contact the UA Regents in favor of the student request. If you are a current or former UA student, staff or faculty member, please mention your connection to the university.

And if you moderate a GLBT Alaska Facebook page, please check profiles before you accept friend requests. You never know who will want to be your "friend."

Saradise Lost - Book 4 - Chapter 20 -- The Crazy Woman Lies About Producing Her Son’s Birth Certificate

Thursday, on the Rusty Humphries radio show, Sarah Palin lied. She insinuated President Obama has never shown his birth certificate, and that she had shown her son Trig's. Both statements are lies.

About President Obama's birth certificate, here's the exchange:

HUMPHRIES: Would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?

PALIN: Um, I think the public, rightfully, is still making it an issue. I don't have a problem with that. I don't know if I would have to bother to make it an issue, because I think enough members of the electorate still want answers.

HUMPHRIES: Do you think it's a fair question to be looking at?

PALIN: I think it's a fair question...

About her youngest son Trig's birth certificate, here's the exchange:

HUMPHRIES: I mean, truly, if your past is fair game and your kids are fair game, certainly Obama's past should be. I mean, we want to treat men and women equally, right?

PALIN: Hey, you know, that's a great point. That weird conspiracy theory freaky thing that people talk about, that Trig isn't my real son, a lot of people say, "Well, you need to produce his birth certificate, you need to prove that he's your kid," which we have done, but yeah, so maybe we should reverse that and use the same type of thinking on the other one.[ emphasis added]

Sarah and Todd Palin have never produced a birth certificate for Trig Palin.

The only document they have produced regarding the boy's birth is a letter from Palin's personal doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, that was issued the day before the 2008 national election. At some blogs, the Baldwin-Johnson letter has brought forth as many questions (PDF) as the documents or purported documents related to George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard service raised.

As part of the messy cleanup on aisle CW caused by Palin's statement on the Rusty Humphries show, Palin's ghost facebook writer has issued the following clarification:

Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask ... which they have repeatedly. But at no point -- not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews -- have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.

Whooh! That cleared everything up, didn't it? No, it didn't.

I live in Wasilla and will have known Sarah Palin for 19 years, come February 2010. The doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, who wrote the letter Palin alludes to in the latter's statement, "you need to prove that he's your kid, which we have done" was one of my wife's doctors for both of our kids, and was both kids' pediatrician.

CBJ, as she was often called locally, was a very public fixture around Wasilla up to the time of Trig's birth. Our daughter attended ballet with one of CBJ's kids for years, and I often saw CBJ somewhere or another around Wasilla or Anchorage at least once a week for well over a decade. Between the time of Trig's birth - early 2008 - and the issuance of the election eve letter purported to be from her, CBJ was far less evident. Since the letter was issued, CBJ has been unavailable to comment on it or on any other matter related to Trig and Sarah Palin:

Cathy Baldwin Johnson has never given a simple statement that Trig Palin was born at Mat-Su Hospital on April 18th, that Sarah Palin is his biological mother, and that she - Dr. Baldwin-Johnson - was physically present at the delivery. She would not do this at the following junctures:

1. Back in April, when Trig Palin was allegedly born. She gave ambiguous statements to the press about the circumstances of the birth (several of which contradicted explicitly statements Gov. Palin made) and then she clammed up.

2. On August 31st (when announcing it would have scotched the necessity of announcing – the next day – seventeen year old Bristol's pregnancy);

3. In the letter released before the election

4. To the ADN [Anchorage Daily News] in December when they asked AGAIN [PDF].

I've written about Sarah Palin a fair number of times, but have avoided taking up the"birther" subject unless it became germane to something Palin herself had said. I've written about the four most common birth scenarios involving Palin and Trig elsewhere, but not here - I'm not a "birther." But many questions have arisen, none of which have been answered by the Palins.

Regarding Palin's statement on the Humphries show, memeorandum now lists 49 articles and blog posts. Of them, only one seems to address the falsity of Palin's claim to have released a birth certificate for Trig:

So Palin is saying that he should show his because she has shown hers. Except she hasn't! And he did! And Palin-logic hurts. Where is the birth certificate, Sarah?

Is Palin going to get a pass on this?

Where's Dan Rather when you need him?

Jane Hamsher Explains "Voice for Choice" on Democracy Now This Morning

Thursday Odds & Ends

I. Review of For the Rights of All: Ending Jim Crow in Alaska.

Alaska Public Broadcasting stations showed this new, partially dramatized documentary on Tuesday evening. The film, which combines historical still photographs and film with recently staged re-enactments of a few key events up to early 1945, is quite good, when compared to other important Alaska-produced dramatized documentaries. The producer's goal of using 100% Alaska resources in the makeup may have somewhat limited the film's access to top flight Hollywood-level actors, but the 1980s locally-produced movie about Sydney Laurence (I can't find a reference to its title) fared worse in this respect. Some of the acting was very good in this effort, though.

The movie's worth, though, is in its powerful context and strong narrative. It gives an excellent overview of Alaska Native rights up to the time of the 1945 legislation. The way it does that is both well-crafted and inspirational. This is a movie that could flesh out Alaska historical studies in all our public schools, and every possible effort should be made to help see that it is shown in those institutions and others.

Here we are, though, almost 65 years after the milestone civil rights legislation inspired by Alberta Schenk Adams and Elizabeth Peratrovich passed the territorial legislature, and civil rights and civil liberties struggles continue. This past spring, summer and fall saw a long struggle in Anchorage for gay rights, that ended in a defeat caused by the same interests that would still have our First People abandon their traditions, in order to be fully "saved."

II. The NOAA Beluga decision.

I've downloaded all 375 pages of the two most important NOAA/NMFS documents on the proposed listing of the Cook Inlet Beluga whale habitat as "critical." They are:

• Draft RIR/4(b)(2) Preparatory Assessment/RFA for the Critical Habitat Designation of Cook Inlet Beluga Whale

• CONSERVATION PLAN for the COOK INLET BELUGA WHALE

You can download them at this NMFS site, although the reports, for some reason, aren't listed under their real titles.

I'm reading them as I have the time (375 term papers have come in this week for me to read and grade, finals coming up next week). Needless to say, this process - we're now in a 60-day public comment period that began on Monday - is going to be one of the most contentious in Alaska history. More on this tomorrow.

III. Rick Steiner on Monday's decision by the Alaska Board of Game Anchorage Advisory Committee, regarding expansion of protections to Denali wolves on state land north of Denali National Park.

University of Alaska Prof. Rick Steiner is once again advocating. The Mudflats is carrying his essay on the Monday meeting, and possible implication of the Anchorage advisory group's 6 to 3 vote in favor of supporting an extension of protections to these wolves.

Steiner's article notes that the board was probably influenced by a large turnout of supporters of this important expansion of protections. The final decision by the Alaska Board of Game will occur in February in Fairbanks, and, as Stephen F Stringham, PhD, a past member of the Kenai advisory board observed in the comment's to Steiner's article:

....even a 6:3 vote in Anchorage for more wolf protection is not likely to have significant influence on the Board of Game. During the two years that I was on a Kenai Peninsula fish & game advisory council, there was very little indication that the BofG paid any attention to any proposal that we authored or forward to them — unless the proposal supported the BofG agendas, none of which included more protection for predators or for eco-tourism. Quite the contrary, such proposals seemed to elicit only contempt by the BofG. Part of that comes from individual mind sets that are locked in concrete and impervious to contrary facts. And part is due to what many believe to be overwhelming evidence that wolf (and bear) numbers need to be drastically reduced to allow “recovery” of moose and caribou populations.

Sounds like there may be a need for some intense activism in Fairbanks in February, eh?

Maddow Explains the Bush, uh.... Obama Doctrine

Not nearly enough mention (none) of the huge growth of the size of our private contractor forces - about 80,000 of whom the Department of Defense cannot even keep track of - under the Obama administration, or about the secret war going on, led by Fundamentalist Christian, Erik Prince, in Uzbekistan, and who knows where else.

Update - Thursday 7:30 a.m: More on "who knows where else" and Erik Prince.

Step Up to the Plate, Dr. Prevo

Dear Jerry Prevo,

Since you used Biblical phrases and injunctions to fight the insidious Anchorage Ordinance #64 earlier this year, some folks in California have been taking your ideas to a new level. It's time for you to take your belief in biblical inerrancy to its full measure.

Or, maybe you weren't truly defending marriage as you've stated time and time again, but merely hating gays:


By the way, it is real (PDF), not a spoof.

The President Adequately Explains the Afghanistan Surge

That's so comforting. I had been concerned that the President's explanation on why we are now doing this would be inadequate.