[Dan Halberstein]

Originally posted by Laura Heidy-Halberstein:
In Alaska or in The United States, Tim?

Okay you're way out of line Lo. Alaska is in the United States.

It's not like we're talking about Panama

Heh.

[Tim Murphy]

My father had friends who shot wolves from ski planes on open ice. I don't think it very sporting, in fact it appalls me, but certainly they landed and brought home the carcasses, and claimed the substantial bounty offered at the time. I believe wolf hunting is now banned.

Like Governor Palin I am opposed to gay marriage and very much in favor of equal employment rights. She vetoed a bill denying health insurance to same-sexed partners of Alyeskan employees.

Obviously her approval rating is Alyeskan. Half the people in the Lower 48 don't know who she is, but I have watched her career the last two years with considerable interest. I suggest that Spherians show a little deference to the people who elected her to govern a landmass one third the size of the continental US, where Little Diomede is 800 yards from Russia. How many of you pouring derision on this choice have been to The Great Land, have seen the Alaska Pipeline, have hiked in brown bear country? You people are SO provincial.

[This message has been edited by Tim Murphy (edited August 31, 2008).]

[Daniel Haar]

Tim, I'll show some deference to the good people of Alaska if you show some to the good people of Illinois, who are almost 20 times more numerous than the population of Alaska, and who elected Obama to be one of their top law-makers

But aren't we all called upon to search our own minds and consciences (of course taking in to account the many and varied opinions of others) to reach our own judgments about who should be elected to our nation's top political office? So, while I may not ultimately defer to Alaskan opinion when voting in November, after the results are in, I can promise you I will defer to the collective decision of the nation and accept whichever ticket wins as the new president and vice-president.

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by Tim Murphy:
My father had friends who shot wolves from ski planes on open ice. I don't think it very sporting, in fact it appalls me, but certainly they landed and brought home the carcasses, and claimed the substantial bounty offered at the time. I believe wolf hunting is now banned.

No, that's the thing, Tim. It's not. In fact it's been encouraged since Gov. Palin took office.

Earlier in the thread I pointed out the following:

I'm much more upset at the idea that Sarah Palin has been instrumental in getting The State of Alaska to allow aerial hunting of wolves and brown bears. I'm upset that she thinks grown men with rifles shooting defenseless animals while hovering above them in small planes and helicopters is sporting behaviour.


I'm much more upset that she was offering a $150.00 bounty for each wolf killed because wolves are the natural predators of caribou and moose and she apparently believes that man is the only animal which should be allowed to kill caribou and moose. I'm upset that she refused to quit allowing the bounty to be paid in spite of various lawsuits and the fact that the majority of Alaskan citizens opposed it until The Supreme Court of Alaska stepped in and disallowed it for her. I'm upset that The Alaska Board and Game Commission is still attempting to reinstate the bounty and that the Alaska Board and Game Commission is appointed and controlled by, you guessed it, the Governor of Alaska.


Eaf, who lives in Alaska pointed out the article I cited was incorrect - that the people of Alaska were very much in favor of continuing the aerial shooting of wolves and bears -

A ballot initiative to stop the aerial (same-day) shooting of bears and wolves failed by popular vote just a few days ago, so obviously a majority of the population is okay with it. We are a red state, after all.

-eaf

I cannot post the links to the articles about Gov. Palin because for some reason they stretch the width of the thread too widely but I'd be glad to supply them by email if you wish to confirm the above.

Like Governor Palin I am opposed to gay marriage and very much in favor of equal employment rights. She vetoed a bill denying health insurance to same-sexed partners of Alyeskan employees.

Which she did under duress and only after a ruling from The State Supreme Court ordered her office to do. She publically disagreed with the ruling and supported a democratic advisory vote from the public about creating a constitutional amendment on the matter.

While the previous administration did not implement same-sex benefits, Palin complied with a state Supreme Court order and signed them into law.[28] She disagreed with the Supreme Court ruling[29] and supported a democratic advisory vote from the public on whether there should be a constitutional amendment on the matter.[30]

Palin's first veto was used to block legislation that would have barred the state from granting benefits to the partners of gay state employees. In effect, her veto granted State of Alaska benefits to same-sex couples. The veto occurred after Palin consulted with Alaska's attorney general on the constitutionality of the legislation.[29]


http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.co...on-gay-ri.html

In other words, she was looking for a loophole to get her out of it and the attorney general told her there wasn't any. If you call that supportive I respectfully have to disagree with you.


I suggest that Spherians show a little deference to the people who elected her to govern a landmass one third the size of the continental US, where Little Diomede is 800 yards from Russia.

True enough - and while we're taking that into consideration I'd suggest that you take into account that while the landmass is large, the population is small. In fact, it is the third to the last state in order of population. Only North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming are less populated - edited to remove D.C., which, as someone pointed out to me, is not a state. We do, however, pay taxes, even without benefit of representation - which makes us count - at least to those of us who live and work here.)

Elected officials represent people not landmass. It's not the size of the state which matters, it's what's inside the state that counts.

Just to put it into perspective, Sarah Palin represents 683,478 people, while Gov. Schwarzenegger represents 36,553,215. That's almost 36 MILLION more people that he bears responsibility for. To say nothing of how many more votes he probably amassed to acquire to win the office - or how many more people support him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_population


How many of you pouring derision on this choice have been to The Great Land, have seen the Alaska Pipeline, have hiked in brown bear country?


I hardly see where anyone, with the exception of possibly Anne, has been derisive. In fact, I've been sticking up for Gov. Palin in places. Virtually everything which has been said in this thread, outside of the pregnancy rumors, has been firmly rooted in facts which are proven and readily available. I fail to see how reporting a truth is "pouring derision" on anyone.

You people are SO provincial.


'Tis ok, tho, if Gov. Palin gets her way no one will be hiking in brown bear country for very long. Then we'll all be forced into provincialness.

If nothing changes, state lands used by the bears near the 114,400-acre sanctuary in Southwest Alaska will be open to hunting as of July 1, clearing the way for a fall hunt.

Opponents say it's not sporting to hunt the McNeil River bears, which are accustomed to humans and routinely come to within 10 or 15 feet of small groups of bear viewers allowed into the sanctuary each summer. Supporters say the bears are fair game when they wander outside the sanctuary.

The Game Board, which is appointed by the governor to regulate hunting in Alaska, voted to open the state lands to brown bear hunting at the request of hunters.

McNeil, created by the state 40 years ago, is arguably the best place in the world to view brown bears. That's because two things make McNeil exceptional; how close the bears will safely come to humans and how many there are at the sanctuary.
http://dwb.adn.com/news/alaska/wildl...-8527665c.html


Lo



[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited August 31, 2008).]

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by Daniel Haar:
Tim, I'll show some deference to the good people of Alaska if you show some to the good people of Illinois, who are almost 20 times more numerous than the population of Alaska, and who elected Obama to be one of their top law-makers

True enough, Daniel.

In the 2004 Illinois Senate race Barak Obama received
3,597,456 votes, and and his closest opponent had 1,390,690 votes. He won with 70% of his state's vote.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...Illinois,_2004

In the 2006 Alaskan Governor's race Sarah Palin received 114,697 while her closest opponent had 97,238 votes. She won with 48.3% of her state's vote.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_...election,_2006

It doesn't matter how big in size your state is - what matters is how many people inside that state support you.

Lo

[Jerry Glenn Hartwig]

I did a little research and Palin seems an interesting person.

She has executive experience, and no, she's not an ecologist but seems to have worked for the people she represents. She's changed her mind on a few issues when it seems contrary evidence came up to indicate she was wrong. (The bridge and the state-run dairy farm).

It seems the Trooper she wanted fired was investigated by his own department and suspended for wrong-doing (illegal activities indicated) but the suspension was reduced after pressure from the police 'union'. The Chief she fired stated his refusal to fire the Trooper "may be part of the reason" he himself was fired. Not the entire reason, and not definitely.

She's as much an unknown to the majority of the country as Obama was), but she's only running for VP. Given McCain's questioned health, she may well take over if they're elected.

The constituents who know her best apparently approve of her, the exception being the ecologists (I'm making a large assumption with this comment, based on a little information *grin*).

She's pro-life, pro-guns, defines marriage as between 'one man one woman'.

In short, she and Obama are both question marks. Big ones, to me.

We shall see.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Posted by Daniel Haar

I can promise you I will defer to the collective decision of the nation and accept whichever ticket wins as the new president and vice-president.

And that is why democracy, though flawed, is still the best alternative we've got.

Hooray!

[David Rosenthal]

Originally posted by Tim Murphy:
I suggest that Spherians show a little deference to the people who elected her to govern a landmass one third the size of the continental US, where Little Diomede is 800 yards from Russia. How many of you pouring derision on this choice have been to The Great Land, have seen the Alaska Pipeline, have hiked in brown bear country? You people are SO provincial.

Tim, I think Daniel and Lo have responded well to this, but I couldn't resist as it seemed to be one of the silliest things I have ever read by you.

Why should anyone show deference to an electorate for its choice? People elect idiots, criminals, and scoundrels all the time, not to mention bad politicians.

Unless you meant to suggest we show deference to Palin for having been elected. But that is just as silly. Show respect perhaps, if she deserves it, but deference? No. Show deference for the office, maybe, but not for the office holder, who in our unique system is supposed to be one of the people, representing the people, and working for the people.

If we show deference to elected officials simply because they got themselves elected, then we abdicate our civic duties and cede control of our government. And in a democratic system already as flawed and unrealized as ours, such considerations are doubly, triply, quadruply important.

By the way I have vacationed in Alaska and hiked in bear country there, though I haven't seen the pipeline. It was a relatively short visit, which I enjoyed immensely, but which doesn't seem to be having much impact on the formation of my opinions about Palin one way or another. Of course I have never been to Russia and I have all sorts of opinions about Putin. Meanwhile, having spent most of my life in California hasn't given me as much insight into the election of its governors as I might wish I had, and it certainly hasn't helped me develop feelings of deference for any of them or for the voters of the state as a group.

David R.

[David Rosenthal]

Originally posted by Daniel Haar:
I can promise you I will defer to the collective decision of the nation and accept whichever ticket wins as the new president and vice-president.

I do not understand this. I get the part about "accept[ing] whichever ticket wins as the new president and vice-president." But why "defer to the collective decision of the nation." Those two phrases are not equivalent, or even necessarily related. What if the collective decision sucks? Skepticism and vigilance are as important as any benefit of the doubt. I say remain engaged, try to be constructive, but make demands and watch carefully, and be ready to raise your voice when you feel you must.

All this talk of deference is making me very nervous.

David R.

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by Tim Murphy:
You people are SO provincial.

Ok...now that I've responded and Daniel and David - I've had time to think about it.

You're kidding right? You're pulling our leg from Fargo, ND - those of us who live and work in California and New York and Chicago and in the Nation's capital, Washington D.C. Those of us who didn't "watch live television for the first time in 3 years" as you remarked about yourself not so very long ago. Those of us who daily rub shoulders with Muslims and Indians and Palestinians and Iranians and people from all over the world and from every walk of life. We are people who work in the foreign services, who routinely breakfast with translators and writers and Greek historians and translators and whose friends and neighbors are members of the U. S. symphony and Chinese diplomats and war correspondents and where we are Jewish and our next door neighbor wears a full burka to go downstairs and get the mail and yet we chat regularily when we meet. And where we all coexist peacefully and happily without blinking an eye because, for us, it's normal.

It's not so hard to figure out which parts of America are more or less provincial once you look at it through non-serious eyes.


You were funnin' us!!!


See, I DO have a sense of humor - it's just delayed, is all.

Lo-Laughing



[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited August 31, 2008).]