RedState Endorses Sean Parnell (R-AK)
By The Directors Posted in Alaska | Cleaning House | Don Young | Endorsements | Sarah Palin — Comments (89) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Don Young (R- Don Youngland) is embittered, corrupt, out of touch, and part of the problem in Washington. His fifteen minutes are up and the time has come to send him back to Alaska, though we know he'll be heading to K Street instead.
In the past few years, Don Young voted to force workers into an open, public ballot on the issue of unionization, he voted against reauthorization of the Patriot Act, he voted to expand government funded stem cell research, and he railed against conservatives who wanted to cut earmarks by calling the taxpayer dollars his money. Don Young is also under FBI investigation for taking bribes, illegal gratuities and other unreported gifts from an Alaskan corporation, and he has dubiously forced on the people of Florida a road they don't want all because one of his donors wanted the road.
We fully support and encourage you to support Alaska's Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell in his bid to unseat Don Young in the Republican Primary.
We commend Governor Sarah Palin for supporting her Lieutenant Governor and recognizing that the Republican Party must clean up its own house. Putting Don Young on the trash heap of history is a perfect place to start.
« Sean Parnell: Even or Ahead of Don Young in AK Polling — Comments (6)
RedState Endorses Sean Parnell (R-AK) 89 Comments (0 topical, 89 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
The practice of earmarks and pork are an egregious assault on the tax payer... and the possibility he took bribes should be further investigated. However, i will applaud him on his stance to not renew the USA Patriot act and on his progressive stance on Stem Cell research.
The patriot act was enacted in a very dubious, underhanded manner. Rammed through congress without any discussion let alone time to actually read the bill. It infringes on several of our rights per the constitution / Bill of Rights. Specifically in regards to the first and fourth amendments.
... as for stem cell research, i do not understand all the bashing. I mean it's science, not some voodoo satanic magic. Besides, its not like you have to obtain the cells from aborted or dead infants... you can simply extract them from the umbilical cord, i mean they are disposed of after the birth, why not use them to help someone grow a new liver or a set of lungs?
-james
http://thePoliticus.org
If private companies want to do stem cell research, go for it. There is no reason for the government to be involved in the issue.
I agree... however, the government is already involved in things they shouldn't be. I'd be willing to bet somewhere between 70-80 percent of government resources go to areas where it shouldn't even exist.
At least, if they got involved with this, it would be helping countless Americans. Inversely though, government intervention might side-track the actual progress in the field, mainly due to the old rule that says "anything government touches, breaks".
-james
http://thePoliticus.org
I've met Young on several occasions and consistently found myself wondering, how in the heck did this guy ever get elected?
The last time (which was about 10 years ago), he spun some impossible yarn about his experiences on the golf course. He would alternate between sounding like a brilliant and principled conservative, to utter buffoon.
Whether he is the former, or the latter is of no relevance.... what he is, first and foremost, is one of MANY poster-children for term limits.
[1] I really would appreciate a listing of all the rights that you have lost thanks to the Patriot Act. I've heard "progressives" wail, moan and gnash their teeth on the "loss" of all their Civil Liberties since George W. Bush was elected ... even before 9/11 and the Patriot Act. So please, indulge me, what can you not do now that you could do before thanks to the Patriot Act? With cites to the relevant sections of the Act, please.
[2] Whatever gave you the impression that the GOP rank and file had any sort of opposition to Adult (extraction from umbilical cord, bone marrow, fat cells, etc.) Stem Cell Research? Really, stop reading the New York Times - they lie. We're actually just as strongly in favor of Adult Stem Cell Research as we are opposed to Embryonic (see the difference?) Stem Cell Research.
here in Alaska. We have our Lefties too and, more importantly, more than a fair share of the Black Helicopter types and hard - L libertarians. Also, unlike most states, Alaska has an explicit Constitutional guarantee of privacy, so there are issues under our Constitution that don't arise under the Federal Constitution. Young seemed to jump on that homegrown opposition at least for a while. In any event, other than a couple of resolutions nothing much came of it here and it has faded away except when the Lefties start spouting their talking points.
In Vino Veritas
You sort of don't lack common sense, either.
Creating a market for abortion is NOT good. Absent that, your points are extermely valid. If there is an industry (medicine) that benefits and benefactors, (sick disabled and infirmed) what's the problem?
Industry can take care of that without the interference of the government.
Well said. Young is the poster child for at least the majority of the problems the Republican Party has.
It'll be interesting to see if Gov. Palin and her allies will succeed in their fight against the old guard. They are deeply entrenched, but her 85% approval rating should give her a whole lot of political capital to play with.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
of "A Culture of Corruption" in the Republican Party. We have decried the GWB Administration's reticence to respond to mau-mau attacks on itself and various high-profile Republicans. Now The Directors throw out the "C-word" in the first pp of this post. For the bazillionth time: Don Young has NOT been charged with ANYTHING!
Don Young and many other Alaskans ARE embittered towards the federal government for reasons I've set out here before and don't need to rehash. Don Young may well be out of touch, certainly some, perhaps many, Alaskans think he is out of touch with our State; I don't know what The Directors think he's out of touch with. Don Young may well be part of the "problem" in DC, but he, like most political leadership in Alaska, took the attitude after the price crash of '86 and the many, many failed attempts to bring on more oil production, the failed attempts to keep some timber industry, the failed attempts to secure better control over our fisheries that "since the house was burning, we'd keep warm." The Bridges you all so love to hate were not some special greater transportation appropriation to Alaska, they were an earmark WITHIN Alaska's proportionate share of general transportation funding by the federal government, an appropriation in which every one of your states participated and in which virtually every member made earmarks. Every one of YOUR states had a decade-long building orgy with federal transportation funds too.
Consistently, most here castigate my State over the per capital federal spending here, but you never consider how much of that spending is for the federal government's own purposes; that would at least theoretically be for YOUR purposes. My State is only about a quarter of that island south of Hawaii on your maps, a place that very few of you know anything about and most of what you know is wrong. The rest of it is either Indian land - by action of the federal government - or federal land; that would be your land. Those are your parks, wilderness areas, reserves, and preserves. Elmendorf AFB, Fort Richardson, Fort Wainwright, Fort Greeley (the anti-missle site), Coast Guard Station Kodiak, and all the other USCG presence, and a very long list of other federal properties and military facilities are all YOURS. I won't deny that Alaska benefits from them, but the military isn't here to protect Alaska, though it does, it is here to protect YOU. The USCG isn't here to protect Alaska boaters and fishers, though it does, it is here to protect fisheries that are a major food source for YOU and to guard the Great Circle shipping lanes from The Orient through Alaskan waters that bring things to YOU.
I don't know if Don Young is corrupt or not. If corrupt is defined merely as doing something that someone you know or who supported you wanted done, he and virtually every other political figure in America is corrupt. Certainly every political figure here is; there are only 600K+ Alaskans and everybody knows everybody else. If you mean that he is corrupt as that word has legal meaning, he is innocent until proven guilty by a jury of his peers. And again, he hasn't been convicted of anything; he hasn't even been charged with anything!
In Vino Veritas
Good grief, are you one of Young's staffers? Because I've never seen someone run around defending him so much.
Honestly, you'd be better off just saying nothing and forgetting he exists. He's got a better chance of surviving if we just don't remember him and forget to care too much. The more you defend him, the more we remember that his machine is at work and we need to smash it.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
Why don't you try attacking the substance rather than the man?
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
I could be a Parnell staffer; I do know him quite well, once worked for him when he was co-chair of Sen Finance, and may very well vote for him in the Primary.
My issue is the denunciation of Young as corrupt when he hasn't been charged with anything and he and several other Alaska Republicans have been "investigated" by leak, rumor, and innuendo for over a year now while the Democrats feast on the carcass of my State Party.
I'm sure you'll be happy to welcome a couple of new Democrats to Congress next January just so you can be rid of the "corrupt" Stevens and Young.
In Vino Veritas
$850,000 in legal fees in ONE YEAR doesn't give the appearance of innocent. If he really did nothing wrong, I would expect him to be a little more forthcoming to at the very least the people who donated all that money. His donors have the right to know what over 3/4 of a million dollars is being spent on. The same goes for the residents of the entire state. Don Young has said repeatedly acted in a manner that is covert and very non-transparent. If you didn't vote for him or donate money to him he doesn't work for you, and he'll let you know it.
He canceled a press conference in the Valley because the Anchorage paper had the audacity to cover it and maybe ask him a few questions about the legal fees.
Stevens and Young have done a lot of good for the state, we wouldn't be where we are today without them. Good and Bad. They've been there (Washington) a little to long and have lost touch with what Alaska wants and needs. This has been a long time coming, I'm glad we're going to have a true conservative running. I've only posted a few times here and obviously lean a bit or a lot to the left on most issues, I voted for Palin/Parnell and I would do it again in a heartbeat. Financial restraint and clear open transparent government are things that anybody should be able to get behind. Uncle Ted is probably going to do okay this time around, I don't see another strong conservative standing up to run against him. The Democrats in Alaska are a spineless bunch, I don't expect them to put up a moderate yet strong enough person to run against him. This is at least a start.
But Democrats aren't feasting on the carcass that is the state party unless you define Young and Stevens as the state party. Palin has 85% approval ratings and anybody associated with her wing of the party is likely to win in the general election easily.
It's Young, Stevens and their wing of the party that the Democrats are feasting on. And that's because they are the only ones capable of losing to the Democrats.
Innocent till proven guilty is fine in a court of law. That doesn't mean other people can't make valid, common sense judgments as to the likelihood of someone's guilt and vote them out of office accordingly.
I don't know if your attitude is the result of the issues being too close to you, or just being naive, but it's this kind of head-in-the-sand thinking that got the national party where it is now. This is why, for example, Montana now has 2 D Senators even when Bush got 60% of the vote in the state. Thank God Palin is there to clean house before the Democrats do it for us, and make no mistake, if we don't clean our own house, they will do it for us.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
You only know what you read in the press about Alaska; I know all these people personally and have spent the last thirty years involved in the Alaska polical system at some level, some of them quite high in both the Executive and Legislative branches.
I know that we have gone from veto-proof Republican majorities in both house to a coalition Senate and a very, very shaky majority in the House. We lost my long Red district and several others last election. So, yes, at the level that means most to me, the State Legislature, the Democrats are feasting and fully and rationally expect to continue the feast this November at both the State and Federal office level.
So, stick to whatever little burg or postage stamp sized state you know something about.
In Vino Veritas
Your inability to see the forest for the trees here is nothing short of hilarious. I just hope the rest of the party in Alaska isn't so blinded.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
... we really need to stop doing the Democrats' work for them by convicting Republicans simply based on the fact that they're under investigation. There's a place for cynicism in politics but automatically assuming guilt whenever a politician is accused of something is less a sign of wisdom than a fashionable pose. These are actual people - where do they get their reputations back when no charges are brought?
To be honest, I'd like to see Don Young call a press conference in front of the Department of Justice and openly challenge them in a fire and brimstone speech to either charge him with something or cease and desist their whisper and leak campaign against him until they can.
One, I'm not convicting him of anything, that's something that's done in a court of law. You vote, support, oppose, etc based on less evidence. That's just the way things are.
Two, there is a difference between giving someone the benefit of the doubt and being naive.
Given the amount of corruption that all ready has been proven in Alaska, given the things that are clear and uncontested and given Young's behavior, I think you'd have to be naive to believe that at the very least he wasn't dancing on the edge of the law on purpose in order to get things that he wanted in a way that is not good for the country.
If Young's behavior was exemplary, his character unquestionable, and his judgment consistently sound, perhaps I'd be more willing to give him the benefit of the doubt even given the weight of what's going on now. But that's not the case. In fact, the opposite seems to be true.
If the extremely unlikely happens, and I stress extremely unlikely, and he's completely exonerated of any wrongdoing, I'd feel bad for him. But I'd still say the same thing I'm saying today: Given the situation, and given the fact that the office is bigger then just a man, he has to go.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
... I did not use the word "convict" in the legal sense.
Second, the guy is an Earmarxist - that's bad enough. But to assume from that fact and nothing more than unproved innuendo from unscrupulous leakers at the DOJ that he has been engaged in activities that he knew were bad for the country is going too far.
And I'm not being naive by not automatically assuming that he is corrupt. Bottomline, he is perceived to be corrupt. Too bad for him, in politics, that's usually more than enough.
He should resign the seat so a Republican who is better able to hold it can get settled. But it doesn't mean he should be tarred and feathered without even being indicted on his way out.
Since you aren't using the word "convict" in a legal sense, does that also mean you aren't using the word "corrupt" in a legal sense?
Because I cannot possibly imagine any definition of the word "corrupt" other then the legal sense that would possibly not apply to the things that are clearly known about Young and are, in fact, undisputed.
And while we are at it, why do you assume that the leakers in the Justice Department are unscrupulous? For all you know, they have bosses that have specifically worked in such a way to protect Young, and thus, they are doing the only thing they can do to make sure the information gets out that their unscrupulous bosses are covering up?
Do I believe this? No, of course not. I think you are probably right that DOJ people are acting in an unscrupulous way. They've done so before. Given the weight of the evidence in this case, I think it's pretty safe to say that you are correct and that is in fact the case.
However, I don't see why the same logic wouldn't apply to Young. Given what we know, it seems clear that bad things were going on even if they were barely on this side of legal. Just as I assume that you are right about the justice department people, I'll assume that I'm right about Young. That's subject to change, of course, but it seems very likely that both are correct.
Looking at evidence presented and saying "That's pretty damning, unless something else major is shown to refute this, he's got some serious problems," and coming to the political conclusion that Young needs to go is not tarring and feathering him. It's just the truth as I think most people see it.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
Going by your standards, every single politician or public official would need to go after a week on the job.
______________________________________
Donate to the Rs in Close Senate Races through Slatecard
Uhh, no, not really.
How in God's name would you argue that? All politicians accept campaign donations? Fine. But that's not my standard and you know it.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
... you will meet a lobbyist, an acquaintance of someone unsavory, say things that can easily be twisted.
You can be made to "appear" corrupt very easily ...
You have no idea what, if any, evidence USDOJ has. You have no idea what the motives of the investigators and FBI SAIC might be. You have no idea even what their political affiliations may be - yes, Virginia, even the FBI plays politics, and it's not always the Administration's politics.
Right now, child, there's more D AGs than R AGs; every one of them can investigate any R they want and leak and hurl innuendo to their heart's content. For whatever reason, we Republicans are too nice to play this game. Even the CIA and KGB were able to work it out so that they weren't just exchanging dead agents. The Ds don't need our help to label our officeholders as corrupt. Maybe Young is, maybe he isn't; you DON'T KNOW.
There's plenty of reasons to oppose Don Young, though I suspect you don't have a clue what those are from and Alaska perspective, but there is NO formal charge of corruption against him, there is no evidence, as opposed to circumstance and innuendo, that has been made public against him.
I'm not really defending Young, in fact will probably support Parnell. What I'm objecting to is Republican fratricide, and you don't seem to be able to comprehend that.
In Vino Veritas
You seem very intent on refuting points that I'm not making. You're doing a good job, unfortunately, it doesn't do you any good.
I never said I "knew" he was guilty of anything illegal. What I said is I think you'd have to be naive, given what we do know, and given what we know about Young, to believe he wasn't at least dancing on the edge of illegality.
Oh, and what the heck does state AG's have to do with anything? He's not being investigated by a state AG, he's being investigated by the feds. Are you seriously suggesting that just because it's possible that there are political prosecutions happening that we should assume all prosecutions are political? I can't honestly think of what else you would mean by this in the context of the rest of your argument.
And fratricide is good sometimes, it depends on the situation. It was good when Sununu took out Smith in the NH primary. It was good when Palin beat Murkowski in the Alaska primary. It is good that Doolittle decided not to run again based on pressure that he step down. It WOULD have been good if Rheberg had run against and beaten Burns in the Montana primary. We'd have been better off if Tom DeLay had lost his primary, even though I continue to believe he did nothing illegal. There are lots of other examples.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
Unless he gave them the evidence . That happens, you know.
which can be waltz, tango, foxtrot, disco, twostep, or county commissioner kickback, which is one from a similar situation the seventies.
When people decide they won't get caught, or won't get prosecuted because of their close associations with the attorneys, well that's more like stomping on the laws.
(Not to be confused with native stomp dance or pow-wows.)
I think this is what we had here amoung the 'yes' men. It is good to see the Directors of this blog creating a dichotomy of the ones they decide to support, rather than being in the 47th car in a train wreck.
in this. I know better than most here the reasons that replacing Young might be a good idea, but why do WE convict him. Sure, if that is your wont, cast him to the outer darkness for the porking and obnoxiousness. But accusing him, Hell, convicting him, of a crime before charges are even file is just doing the Democrats' work for them.
In Vino Veritas
I've been thru this before with you, and your an idiot. You totally missed the point here, seem mentally incapable of comprehending the point, so, if you want to get into an insult contest, my money is on my being able to do it better than you, but the moderators might object. So, my best advice is that you take my earlier advice and stick to whatever little burg you actually know something about.
In Vino Veritas
You accusing me I am missing the point is like Barack Obama's pastor accusing me of being controversial.
I've comprehended the point you seem intent on making again and again, namely, that Don Young is innocent till proven guilty (if you are attempting to make another point, you're failing), just fine.
The problem is, however, that your point is totally irrelevant to the situation and you are far too blind to see it.
And I never insulted your intelligence, I said you are blind to something because you can't see the forest for the trees. Big difference.
If the moderators wouldn't object, I'd tell you just where to shove that advice of yours.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
... is not, yet (if it ever will be), a reason to be cited for kicking him out.
He's been too long in Congress, he's out of touch, he's too arrogant, he's an Earmarxist, he's a weaker candidate than Parnell, etc. are all good reasons.
He's corrupt, however, is not. Every single one of your comments here posit that as fact. I'm objecting because there's really nothing to back it up.
Actually, I've never called him corrupt on this thread. What I said was that given the amount of corruption that has already been proven in Alaska, (See: Frank Murkowski's chief of staff), given Young's behavior and actions, etc. it's naive to believe that he wasn't at least dancing on the edge of the law.
If "dancing on the edge of the law" is OK when it comes to pay-to-play type laws for you, then fine. It's not fine for me.
That said, as I've addressed in your previous comment to my other post, if convict isn't meant in a legal sense, then neither should corruption be. I don't know if he's legally guilty of something. I do know that everything I know about him, his history, and recent events, suggest that he is, at the very least, "corrupt" in the layman's sense of the word, and that it would be better for the country if he was gone.
And actually, you are wrong about the investigation not being a good enough reason. Even if he's guilty of nothing, even if the investigation is a witch hunt, it still makes him virtually unelectable. That's just the facts. Politics isn't always fair.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
...especially with your fighting on his home turf when all you've got is a Swiss Army.
If you don't have a loaded gun, better start digging.
Some DON'T cry about their guilt.
And if you voted for a democrat tomorrow I could forgive you,too. But I like the dog idea better.
Former State Senator and congressional candidate Jim Duncan signed a stipulation with the state
with many provisions that prevented his honest services or representation of a grievance. This was to neutralize his conflict of interest in taking a job as Business Manager straight out of His Commissioner of Administration. Many of his Administration cronies came with to take over the AFSCME Local 52 to install the "do nothing" policy. It neutralized a worker’s ability to get a law or contract enforced, and denied access to the grievance process.
But at the time for the Managers and Labor Relations ‘professionals’ it seemed seemed sensible and would make breaking the law or violating a contract as easy as stealing candy from a baby. I am pretty sure this will come in to the now 'Widespread’ investigations that have now incarcerated eight and counting.
Like for instance these were some of Jim Duncan’s stipulations with taking his AFSCME Local 52 position:
12) You agree to continue your voluntary compliance with the Ethics Act by recusing yourself from involvement in any matter which was pending while you were Commissioner [ ].
13) You agree to comply fully with the Executive Branch Ethics Act by avoiding any work for Local 52 on any grievance arising prior to your departure from state office on December 1, 2002. You will also avoid work on any grievances under the 2002-2003 Collective Bargaining Agreementarising after your departure from state office if those grievances require interpretation, application, or administration of the 2002-2003 CBA [ ].
Is this why Jim wouldn't file a grievance when presented inescapable evidence of Contract and Statute violations? Me thinks this is a fraud to pretend to be representing a contract when he can’t. He did continue enabling violations of the ethics act, too. His signature is right there. Let's see if I can find it.
Ahh there it is, five pages of stipulations right here:
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603Stip1.jpg”>Page 1
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603stip2.jpg”>Page 2
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603Stip3.jpg”>Page
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603Stip4.jpg”>Page 4
< A HREF=””>Page 4
(Sorry about the quality of thise links, but it's hard to get ANY copy due to protectionism and obstructionists.)
Pretend to be a union Business Manager, and receive Business Manager pay after making that sort of agreement with the state, I think that makes you more of a Racketeer than a Business Manager. It seemed such a good plan for the Management involved at the time. There may no way to revoke this apparently illegal contract, other than do to him the same thing that happens when Legislators take bribes.
I know one person who got to play out his Denald Trump "Your Fired" fantacies with impunity, but other than that is failed miserably and dre attention to ethics problems in the State of Alaska.
Maybe the DOJ will do something to Jim. Maybe they will look into his political phone banks run out of a state facility after hours, and his double dipping into federal payments at state rest homes. One can only hope the investigation is widespread enough to include AFSCME Local 52.
and all your other noms de psychosis?
Actually, the document you're quoting is statutorily confidential, and whoever you got it from stole it.
In Vino Veritas
Is your story different now? It's not what you said elsewhere is it.
Back here you were discussed how it was a public file. WhaT is it going to be for tne next time?
You are developing some serious credibility problems.
By the way, I was going to mark that STOLEN FROM DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, but I actually just borrowed it....
JIM DUNCAN"S CONFLICT OF INTEREST STIPULATION:
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603Stip1.jpg”>Page 1
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603stip2.jpg”>Page 2
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603Stip3.jpg”>Page3
< A HREF=”http://www.fileupyours.com/view/170527/092603Stip4.jpg”>Page 4
Ther you go. For some reason thos didn't paste off the clipboard correctly the first time.
Now was it a public file as you say, or was it a confidential file, as you say. Pick one and only one, and it can't be both even for the sake of Bullshit.
I guess it's actually a somewhat public file by now, isn't it? Or as it says on the comment period that it was open for public comment.
You need to read the posting rules and watch your language.
Cut him some slack. Achance has been running around mocking and bullying everyone who doesn't agree with his usually uninformed opinions. If he got carried away in responding, its only natural.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
You need " quotes not ” quotes for your href tag to work, and you should close the tags with a </a>
absentee
I do wish that people like you would find a somewhat less intrusive way to masturbate.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
what have you ever done? Those of us who have actually done something in politics and government know what it is like to be accused by our political opponents of everything under the sun with out the slightest factual basis, what it is like to have ethics or corruption charges made just because the other side can. Just when did you stop beating your wife? How do you afford your lifestyle? Some guy that somebody saw you talking to in some watering hole got a government contract; ergo: you corruptly steered it to him. That's life in the big leagues boy.
In Vino Veritas
Your comments seem to say as much... I doubt that what he has done in the world of politics is as relevant as your expertize though (at least according to your statements)... Or are you just a bully...?
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
...both comments and blogs. Then you'll have a much better understanding whom you're addressing. I'll clue you into one thing, though, he's not a retired politician.
too "agressive" for another member of this elite club. Either he needs to specify his arguments or Not... Just defaming him does no good if we do not know his arguments.
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
He started this subthread by calling out Achance personally, attacking him as a shill for Young.
So I'd like to know the answer to Art's questions, too. If RandomGuy is going to call out other posters, then he should step out from his pseudonym.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
I was "clearly" joking about him being a Young staffer. If that wasn't clear, I apologize. I've just never seen someone so incredibly unable to see the forest for the trees and so completely unable to see what's pretty obviously going on.
Anyhow, just in case he actually is a Young staffer, I'll put my cards on the table, I certainly have nothing to hide: I'm in my 20's. I'm a law student in Washington D.C. I've worked in politics a fair amount before for various candidates in Washington State where I'm from. I have no money and even less influence. I know a fair amount of people who work in politics in both D.C. and along the I-5 corridor in Seattle. That's about all the news that's fit to print.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
... and try to comprehend the fact that politics is a dirty business, and you can be as honest as the day is long and still have accusations of corruption thrown at you each and every single day until people begin to think that since there's so much smoke, there must be fire, ergo you're crooked.
To this day, the contracts given to Halliburton are decried as epitomizing corruption by the Bush Administration ... yet no one has bothered to refute the fact that only Halliburton and its various subsidiaries was capable of doing those tasks. But it has stuck, mostly due to repetition.
Capiche?
as to politicians...I have to disagree a bit... To get into politics requires someone who is ambitious and desires power. To say otherwise is to deny facts. There are those who initially get into politics with good purpose, but eventually get drawn into the lowly world of semi-corruption, ie, a bit of money for you, a bit of help for me...
All in all, there are very few that get into politics that are decent and honest individuals. Those that do tend to be overcome by the rest of the corrupt politicians...so, yes, I am a bit bitter and biased toward anyone who runs for office. The future is not bright...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
Oh, gee, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info. Gee, I can't believe I hadn't thought of that before!
Of course it's a dirty business. Of course you can get accused of corruption with no evidence. I don't believe everything that comes out about every politician. I continue to believe that Tom Delay was innocent of any legal improprieties, especially anything charged to him by that idiot Ronny Earle. Ethical ones, I'm still up in the air about, he was dancing on the line for a few of those things.
But if anything, that proves the point: Delay needed to go. He went too late, as it turned out, but at least he had the decency to give us a chance EVEN WHEN he was innocent. And there's a whole lot more evidence that he was a victim of a politically motivated prosecutor then there is for Young.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
where you have to expect the worst.
Something legitimate to keep in mind. If you don't know, it is worth asking. But common sense, and what someone described as a "hard wired human instinct" should work well enough.
Sometimes not.
You can't change your stripes or your writing style, but you can change where you post. No go on back to the ADN blog where they're more tolerant of fools.
In Vino Veritas
Since you've asked, yes, I have. I worked on a campaign where we were accused by the Governor of racism because we dared to suggest that our opponent had a gigantic conflict of interest since he wanted to remain the director of an Indian Tribe after elected, and that said tribe was constantly seeking money and other favor from the State Government even though it paid no state taxes and was exempt from most state regulations.
To make it worse, I'm part Native American myself. So yes, I know a little something about being accused of something I didn't do and having the other side not have to prove it.
The difference is, our campaign wasn't running around with weasel words, nor did we try to hide anything we did. We threw it out in the open and let the voters decide. Something Young should have done a long time ago. We lost that race by 500 votes.
My meger existence as a law student is funded by student loans, odd jobs, and generosity from my parents, and I certainly wouldn't have difficulty proving that.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
you did seem to have worked for a political party or individual as seen by your responses to Achance. I just did not think it fair that your comments seemed to be without merit (even with reading Achance's previous comments). I can understand some anger though so I bow out of this...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
you've been in either law or politics for twenty or thirty years; we'll see what a purist you are then.
In Vino Veritas
if you've been in either law or politics for 30 years, you have to be jaded. No chance of honesty or reasonable jurisprudence. I do feel sympathy though...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
I've just learned to expect the worst and be pleasantly surprised when I don't get it. And, actually, I do get pleasantly surprised from time to time.
In Vino Veritas
fact that you are a long time lawyer. I can't help but feel some sympathy but you after all got into that field with knowledge of the results. I assume that your are on the prosecution side...otherwise, there would be more cases that you were thankful for saving the innocent than freeing the guilty.
If I'm wrong and your are on the political side...then you gather what you reap and nothing is good in the long run.
At any rate, I don't envy your position...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
but I used to be the boss of a bunch of them. Alaska is a heavily unionized state and I and my staff represented the State in dealing with the unionized employees. I retired as director of labor relations on July 1, 2006, and now if I can tear myself away from the "honey-do" list or from my boat I'll take a little work from whomever will pay me for it; the unions pay a lot better than the employers BTW.
In Vino Veritas
or a politician... Sounds like your are a man of honey-do means...heh. Anyway, I guess I figured you very wrong from your comments. My apologies and may you have a great retirement (I'm with you there..ha)...
Formally known as Deagle... "Golf is a way of life..."
No thanks. You'll probably be dead by then.
Of course, your death won't likely affect your sight. There is no way possible you can be blinder then you are now.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
I'm glad it is a part of the US and I do realize that much of what goes to The Last Frontier is indeed for federal lands. Most people don't get that though. Hubby and I really didn't either until we went last June and saw how vast that great land was.
I have no opinion one way or the other about Don Young. He's not my SOB, so I will trust what you say since you know better than the rest of us.
Tschuss!
This is a great thing here - for the Republican Party, for Alaska, for all Americans.
The national GOP has supported RINO poster-children Arlen Specter and Linc Chafee against conservative challengers, and what did that ever get the GOP?
Kill the terrorists
Protect the borders
Punch the hippies -- Frank J
You're rolling a lot of different issues into one issue. First off, Chafee isn't the same as Specter, and second, neither are like Young. You might not like all of them, but what they represent and the problems they present are very different things.
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
I'm glad he's in the Senate. Sometimes he does need some guidance and influence from his conservative constituents but I think overall he does more good than harm. You also have to cut him some slack since he's from Pennsylvania, not Alabama.
Why do we let the Alaskan government continue to harvest fish that BELONG to the lower 48 states??? The fish that were hatched in Washington, Oregon and California belong to the people in those states. Kinda like the cattle ranges before barbed wire eh?? No one would argue that the brand didnt belong to you... read genetic markers of Sacromento fish. Stop the destruction of of the salmon run- Boycott Alaskan salmon. Maybe Alaska can start to farm raise some fish??
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Plus, both the name and the "prose" have a familiar ring to them. Perhaps my old pal salmonshark is back in a new retreaded form. This site doesn't take kindly to retreads.
And just in case you're serious, the salmon populations are the healthiest they've been in fifty years, a goodly percentage of them from Alaska's own hatcheries. Not our problem that the SEA and SFO fishtrappers practically wiped them out before Statehood and the western states dammed up all the salmon streams.
And friends don't let friends eat farmed fish!
In Vino Veritas
Not really.
Salmon fisheries are being closed down by the feds, and probably it's not all dams to blame. I hear Alaska's F&G budget from the Fed was cut by $7 mil. That could probably be better spent somewhere other than a state with widespread corruption.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/13/MN7EVIMQO.DT...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/12/MNSLVHTM5.DT...
Perhaps you could point to the "Goodly Percentage" you describe in this data report of troll caught fish in Alaska. I see miniscule percentages. (You may have to open an excel program to get it to come up.)
ftp://www.taglab.org/Reports/FI048270.dif
Maybe you can look and tell us where the "goodly percentages" actually come from.
And what was that about opening your mouth versus remaining silent?
Acme Thunderer - Nickel Plated Brass
Introduced in 1884 - the Acme Thunderer was the worlds first and is still the leading pea whistle. Offering total reliability, control, and power to the user. It is now the worlds best selling whistle, there is not a major league or sport that has not been graced by this whistle.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
...and face the fact you have stolen the fishery resources of Oregon.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
If you bring up this topic again in a thread where it is offtopic, such as this one, I will disable your account. Bringing this up in irreelvant threads is a disruptive behavior.
Is that clear?
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
While I panned Redstate's endorsement of Paul Broun as an unnecessary waste or money, we learned in 2006 that a corrupt, investigated Repulbican will lose no matter how red the state (see Montana, Burns, Conrad for detail).
I suspect that I will send out two more contributions this year. McCain ($250) and Parnell ($250).
It's good to see that Young is into self-destruction.
I have no idea if there is video of this particular interaction, but to have a candidate start out with "I beat your Dad, and I'll beat you, too."
I think some people are missing the point here.
It matters not whether Young is actually corrupt. The fact of the matter is he is weak politically. If we have learned anything from Conrad Burns, it is that the GOP cannot afford to let these jokers take us down with them when they have ethical problems, even if they are not, technically, "corrupt". This is not a court of law, but a court of public opinion. Young has had over three decades in Congress, and he has not done much to warrant re-election (from our point of view). Granted, he has sent a lot of pork back to Alaska. But clearly, this is not helping him electorally. So why should conservatives, who don't like pork, who want a more ethically pure Congress, and who want the GOP to regain Congress, support him?
It is time for Don Young to go. He should retire, and if not, he should be beaten in the primary. Good luck, Sean Parnell.
PS: Yes, technically, the Directors should not label Young corrupt without an actual conviction. (Bad directors.) But once again, who cares? People malign Congressmen all the time, and they have since the beginning of our form of government. For example, I think Hillary is corrupt, even though she has not been convicted of anything. (You can be sure I will stop saying this ...NOT.)
Here is the crux of the initial complaint against Ben Stevens, which was whittled away by the protectionism AK Attorney General's office, and dismissed. It might have gone nowhere after that.
http://notes4.state.ak.us/pn/pubnotic.nsf/0/014fa5fc50b122cd892570810064757b/$FILE/663-06-0036+Review+Recall+of+Senator+Ben+Stevens.pdf
Here's where Ted and his son Ben's conflict of interest in the complaint was short circuited to the Ninth Court of Appeals just two months later.
http://www.fileupyours.com/files/169911/Hear%20this.doc
And 10 months after that the DOJ public integrity section made the first raid of it's kind ona state legislature, looking for PPT tax legislation, Veco Bribes, and ethics violations.
Acme Thunderer - Nickel Plated Brass
Introduced in 1884 - the Acme Thunderer was the worlds first and is still the leading pea whistle. Offering total reliability, control, and power to the user. It is now the worlds best selling whistle, there is not a major league or sport that has not been graced by this whistle.
Dude has been in Congress almost as long as I've been along!
This cause is a good one. Hopefully we can raise some funds for him along the way.
http://www.myelectionanalysis.com