Federal Judge Strikes Down Alaska Marriage Ban

In a somewhat unusual move, a federal judge in Alaska released his ruling today striking down Alaska's ban on same sex marriage.  Given that Alaska is located within the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which struck down the laws in Nevada and Idaho last week, the defenders of anti-gay discrimination have nowhere to appeal the ruling since this week's 9th Circuit ruling is binding precedent for Alaska.  One can just imagine what batshitery will likely come from the lips of Sarah Palin, a/k/a the White Trash Cretin from Anchorage.   Alaska Dispatch News has details.  Here are excerpts:

A federal judge ruled Sunday that Alaska’s ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, paving the way for gay couples to begin marrying in the state for the first time.

“The court finds that Alaska’s ban on same-sex marriage and refusal to recognize same sex marriages lawfully entered in other states is unconstitutional as a deprivation of basic due process and equal protection principles under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,”  U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Burgess wrote in a order in the case Hamby v. Parnell, released Sunday.

The Hamby suit was filed in May by five same-sex couples. It challenged the state’s constitutional amendment limiting marriage to one man and one woman, approved by voters in 1998.

The ruling comes less than a week after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled to overturn similar marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada. Same-sex marriage advocates said the 9th Circuit ruling would likely lead to the quick overturn of Alaska’s ban on gay marriage because the bans were similar and Alaska also falls under the jurisdiction of that court.

Will "Brand Loyalty" Hold the Senate for the Democrats?

Image by Luke Shuman

With a number of tight Senate races around the country some are now contending that the political equivalent to brand loyalty may be what helps the Democrats fend off the GOP attempt to take control of the U.S. Senate.   Four races in particular - Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia and Louisiana - have Democrats running candidates from local state political dynasties where name recognition could make the difference with undecided voters.  Added to this is the better brand image the Democrats hold over the GOP brand best known for being the party of "no" and its reverse Robin Hood policies of stealing from the poor to give to the rich.  Here are highlights from a piece in the New York Times:

Three business school professors recently set out to discover what accounts for regional differences in product choices by consumers.

Although about 60 percent of it had to do with regional sales and marketing, a startling 40 percent stemmed from what they described in The American Economic Review as “persistent brand preferences.” Past experiences with the product or memories of family and friends using it shaped their buying decisions.

Democrats’ hopes of holding the Senate this fall rest significantly on the political equivalent of that “brand capital.” In four states that usually lean Republican, Democrats will be running candidates from families with multigenerational records of political success — the Pryors of Arkansas, the Landrieus of Louisiana, the Begiches of Alaska and the Nunns of Georgia. If at least two of the four legacy candidates can eke out victories, the Democrats’ chances of holding the Senate will be better than even.

Already, both parties are applying the lessons of brand loyalty from the corporate world. The Democratic candidates are going to great lengths to remind voters of the candidates’ political legacies.

[I]n an era when voters so often grow disenchanted with those they send to Washington, the easy familiarity of a political dynasty could tip a close race.

“It’s not trivial,” the Democratic pollster Mark Mellman said. “When you go to McDonald’s, you know what kind of hamburger you’re going to get. With a Landrieu or Pryor or Begich, you have some real idea of what you’re getting. And it’s something you like.”

National polls show the Democratic Party itself holds a brand advantage, with higher positive and lower negative ratings than Republicans. But political geography makes that broad measure mostly irrelevant to the fight for the Senate.

Democratic legacy candidates have not been shy about trying to offset their disadvantages by capitalizing on family reputations.

Matthew Gentzkow of the University of Chicago pointed to at least one factor that’s also relevant to political campaigns: the “stock of advertising exposure” that accumulates over the years for individual consumers.

For Republicans this year, it won’t be easy to take out Senator Landrieu, Senator Pryor or both. Counting their own campaigns as well as those of her brother and his father, the Landrieus and the Pryors have appeared on fall statewide ballots in 15 elections over the last 40 years.

None have lost yet.

U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) Comes Out for Gay Marriage

A third Republican U.S. Senator has come out in support for gay marriage - Lisa Murkowski who beat back a GOP challenger and won reelection as an independent.  What tipped the balance for her?   Meeting and getting to know a same sex couple.  Her conversion to a supporter of marriage equality underscores the power of being out and living your life without apologies.  Murkowski talks about her new support for gay marriage in an op-ed entitled "The Pursuit of Happiness – Without Government Interference."  Here are some excerpts:

Not too long ago, I had the honor of nominating an Alaskan family as “Angels in Adoption,” a celebration of the selflessness shown by foster care families and those who adopt children.  They arrived in Washington, DC, a military family who had opened their doors to not one child but four siblings to make sure that these sisters and brother had the simplest gift you can give a child: a home together.  We had lunch together, and they shared their stories with me.  All the while, the children politely ate lunch and giggled as content youngsters do.  Given my daily hectic Senate schedule, it’s not often that I get to sit down with such a happy family during a workday – and I think of them often, as everything our nation should encourage.

I bring them up because the partners were two women who had first made the decision to open their home to provide foster care to the eldest child in 2007.  Years later – and after a deployment abroad with the Alaska National Guard for one of them – they embraced the joy and sacrifice of four adopted children living under the same roof, with smiles, laughter, movie nights, parent-teacher conferences and runny noses.

Yet despite signing up and volunteering to give themselves fully to these four adorable children, our government does not meet this family halfway and allow them to be legally recognized as spouses. After their years of sleepless nights, after-school pickups and birthday cakes, if one of them gets sick or injured and needs critical care, the other would not be allowed to visit them in the emergency room – and the children could possibly be taken away from the healthy partner.  They do not get considered for household health care benefit coverage like spouses nationwide.  This first-class Alaskan family still lives a second-class existence.

The Supreme Court is set to make a pair of decisions on the topic of marriage equality shortly, and the national conversation on this issue is picking back up. This is a significant moment for our nation when it comes to rethinking our society’s priorities and the role of government in Americans’ private lives and decisions, so I want to be absolutely clear with Alaskans. I am a life-long Republican because I believe in promoting freedom and limiting the reach of government.  When government does act, I believe it should encourage family values.  I support the right of all Americans to marry the person they love and choose because I believe doing so promotes both values:  it keeps politicians out of the most private and personal aspects of peoples’ lives – while also encouraging more families to form and more adults to make a lifetime commitment to one another.  While my support for same sex civil marriage is something I believe in, I am equally committed to guaranteeing that religious freedoms remain inviolate, so that churches and other religious institutions can continue to determine and practice their own definition of marriage.

This thinking is consistent with what I hear from more and more Alaskans especially our younger generations.  Like the majority of Alaskans, I supported a constitutional amendment in 1998 defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, but my thinking has evolved as America has witnessed a clear cultural shift.  Fifteen years after that vote, I find that when one looks closer at the issue, you quickly realize that same sex unions or civil marriages are consistent with the independent mindset of our state – and they deserve a hands-off approach from our federal policies.

First, this is a personal liberty issue and has to do with the most important personal decision that any human makes.  I believe that, as Americans, our freedoms come from God and not government, and include the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence:  life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. What could be more important to the pursuit of happiness than the right to choose your spouse without asking a Washington politician for permission?    If there is one belief that unifies most Alaskans – our true north – it is less government and more freedom.  We don’t want the government in our pockets or our bedrooms; we certainly don’t need it in our families.

Secondly, civil marriage also touches the foundation of our national culture: safe, healthy families and robust community life. In so many ways, sound families are the foundation of our society.  Any efforts or opportunity to expand the civil bonds and rights to anyone that wants to build a stable, happy household should be promoted.

I recently read an interview where Ronald Reagan’s daughter said that she believes he would have supported same-sex marriage, that he would think “What difference does it make to anybody else’s life? I also think because he wanted government out of peoples’ lives, he would not understand the intrusion of government banning such a thing. This is not what he would have thought government should be doing.”

Like Reagan, Alaskans believe that government works best when it gets out of the way.  Countless Alaskans and Americans want to give themselves to one another and create a home together.  I support marriage equality and support the government getting out of the way to let that happen.

Living out and not hiding your life can be frightening at times, but the rewards can be amazing and the impact one has in changing hearts and minds can be monumental.  The epiphany of Lisa Murkowski is but one example.  It is examples like this that re-enforce the boyfriend and my determination to never deny who we are or make apologies to anyone.

Anchorage Voters Reject Gay Rights Protections

In yet another example of the constant message of inferiority and bigotry that LGBT citizens still receive across much of the country on a daily basis, voters in the City of Anchorage, Alaska, have kicked LGBT residents to the curb and voted down measure that that would have extended basic civil rights protections to gays. We hear constantly about anti-gay bullying in schools, but that pales in comparison to this type of message - or that being spewed by GOP presidential candidates. And we wonder why gay youth have such a disproportionately high suicide rate? And it should come as no surprise that those who opposed the measure were those self-congratulatory hate merchants of the "godly Christian" set. It's enough to make one want to vomit. Here are highlights from the New York Times:

On Tuesday, supporters of gay rights in the city [of Anchorage], Alaska’s largest, took the issue out of the mayor’s hands — but the end result was the same. In a citywide ballot measure, voters overwhelmingly rejected language, known as Proposition 5, that would have added protections for people regardless of “sexual orientation or transgender identity” to the city’s civil rights laws.

The vote followed an unusually loud and expensive campaign for a city ballot measure in Anchorage. The organizers of Proposition 5, a group called One Anchorage, included prominent politicians from both sides of the aisle (Alaska’s United States senators, Lisa Murkowski, a Republican, and Mark Begich, a Democrat, both said they supported it), and the group outspent the opposition more than 4 to 1.

Opposition was led by conservative religious leaders in Alaska, including within the Roman Catholic Church, and was financed largely by one source, the Anchorage Baptist Temple and its leader, the Rev. Jerry Prevo.

Opponents ran ads suggesting various situations a new law would create, including one in which a church would not be able to prevent a cross-dresser from working in its day care center.

“It’s basically just a way to still be homophobic but just use different language,” Julia O’Malley, a columnist for The Anchorage Daily News, said in an interview. “That’s really what this debate is about. It hasn’t changed.”

Once again, the promise of freedom of religion for all and equal protection under the law in America is shown to be an utter lie and farce. There are days that this country utterly disgusts me.

Alaska Judge Strikes Down State Tax Law That Discriminates Against Gay Couples

It's an unlikely legal ruling out of a generally far right state, but in my view it's right on the money in terms of legal correctness. What am I talking about? A ruling out of Alaska that struck down a law that permits older married couples to take a property tax deduction that is as much as twice as generous to married couples as it is to unmarried couples who own their home together. The court held that the law failed to meet the equal protection requirements of the Alaska constitution and deprived three same sex couples equal protection under the law. The reasoning of the ruling - which parallels recent federal court rulings against DOMA - needs to be extrapolated and applied all around the country. Think Progress has more details and here are some excerpts:

Alaska law permits older married couples to take a property tax deduction that is as much as twice as generous to married couples as it is to unmarried couples who own their home together. Because gay couples are unable to marry in Alaska, this means that people in committed gay relationships are excluded from the favorable tax treatment enjoyed by straight married couples.

Yesterday, however, a trial judge in Anchorage, Alaska struck down this law for violating the Alaska Constitution’s guarantee of that “all persons are equal and entitled to equal rights, opportunities, and protection under the law”:
The court finds that the legislation fails to pass even the minimal scrutiny that economic burdens trigger. [...] If the policy underlying the Tax Exemption’s additional benefit to married couples is the recognition that people in long term, committed relationships build their lives together, then there is no reason to distinguish between married couples and couples who would make the marital commitment but for their sexual orientation.

If this decision is upheld on appeal — and there is good reason to believe that it will be — it could have sweeping implications for gay rights in Alaska. Because the court concluded that one anti-gay law does not survive the lowest level of constitutional scrutiny under the state’s constitution, the court’s rationale provides a powerful precedent suggesting that any law that discriminates against gay couples cannot survive scrutiny.

Alaska’s constitution expressly forbids marriage equality — although it does not forbid gay couples from enjoying the package of legal rights normally associated with marriage. Nevertheless, there is nothing in Alaska law that prevents the state courts from recognizing the right of gay couples to join together in civil unions.

"Pro-Life" Republicans Kill Bill to Insure Low Income Children

One of the worse examples of the utter hypocrisy of so-called "pro-life" Republicans and their hate-filled self-congratulatory Christian base is the way in which they want no one to have an abortion, yet once the child leaves the womb, they don't give a damn about the health and welfare of the child. The hypocrisy - not to mention horrible callousness - of these people is truly stomach wrenching. It is certainly one reason I do not want to have the term "Christian" applied to me. If these people are what it means to be a Christian, then I'd much prefer to be a pagan or a member of some other faith tradition. The latest display of the foul and callousness towards children comes from Alaska where the GOP members of the legislature killed a bill that would have provided health care coverage to the truly poor and needy. You know, the exact sort of thing the Gospels report Jesus as endorsing. But not in today's GOP. Here are highlights from Think Progress (also the source of the photo):
*
[T]he Alaska Senate shot down a health bill that would expand a program that provides medical services to the low-income children and pregnant women. The 14-year-old program, Denali Kid Care, is specifically “designed to ensure that children and teens of both working and non-working families can have the health insurance they need.” The bill seeks to “restore the original income eligibility threshold established more than a decade ago, raising it from the current 175 percent to 200 percent of the federal poverty line” — a move that bill sponsor State Sen. Bettye Davis (D) said would cover nearly 1,300 more children and about 250 pregnant women. But the bill — which passed the Senate last year 15 to 4 — failed this year. The obstacle? A woman’s right to choose.
*
The Alaska Supreme Court holds that the state must fund medically necessary abortions if it funds medically necessary services for others with financial needs. The mere possibility that a woman could have even a “medically necessary” abortion under this health insurance program was enough for Republicans to stall the bill
*
According to Davis, the program expansion “might” fund 22 abortions. But that hypothetical number was enough for 9 Republicans and 1 Democrat to block coverage for over 1,000 Alaskan women and children. “Six Senators who voted for the measure last year voted against it today.” Only one Republican — state Sen. Lesil McGuire — supported the measure, stating “that the Senate cannot turn its back on pregnant women who need help.”
*
While Davis reserved the right to reconsider the bill later, Alaska Gov. Sean Parnell (R) — who vetoed the very same bill last year over abortion — said “he cannot envision a scenario in which he’d support an expansion.

Alaska Wingnut Wants Sex Outside Marriage Made Illegal

I and others have said before that the Christianist jihad against LGBT citizens is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the true Christianist agenda. Much much more would be criminalized if they had their way and inflicted a theocracy on the nation. Contraception would illegal, so would premarital sex and anything comprising "sodomy" under the far right definition. Now one nut job in Alaska - an appointee of Governor Sean Parnell to the panel that nominates state judges - has come out in the open and testified that he would like to see Alaskans prosecuted for having sex outside of marriage. The loon is Don Haase (pictured above left). Oh, an did I mention that he has held a leadership role in Eagle Forum Alaska? It certainly explains his batshit crazy insanity. Here are some highlights from Anchorage Daily News:
*
Gov. Sean Parnell's appointee for the panel that nominates state judges testified Wednesday that he would like to see Alaskans prosecuted for having sex outside of marriage.
*
The candidate, Don Haase of Valdez, also admitted under questioning by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that his official resume failed to disclose his leadership role in Eagle Forum Alaska, which advocates for social conservative issues. He most recently was president of the organization, but resigned when he learned of his nomination, he said.
*
By the time the hearing on Haase ended -- there was some 40 minutes of questioning by the panel's three Democrats, some questions suggesting that Haase had attempted to scrub clean a record of extreme beliefs -- his nomination may turn on an issue of geography, not personal values.
*
Haase would replace a member from Ketchikan, whose departure leaves the council without a public representative from Southeast Alaska's First Judicial District. Valdez is in the third district, headquartered in Anchorage. The state constitution mandates that council appointments be considered by "area representation." That has been interpreted to mean one public member from each of the state's three most populous judicial districts, . . .
*
Haase -- pronounced "hays" -- has done electrical and mechanical design work at the trans-Alaska pipeline terminal in Valdez since 2000, first working for Veco, then for CH2M Hill. . . . . His resume listed such extracurricular activities as his roles in producing and starring in local plays for tourists and being a member of the Valdez Snowmachine Club.
*
One blog post on the Eagle Forum Alaska site praised efforts at criminalizing adultery in Michigan, and Paskvan asked Haase if he thought it should be a felony in Alaska.
*
"I don't see that that would rise to the level of a felony," Haase said.
*
Paskvan: "Do you believe it should be a crime?"
*
Haase: "Yeah, I think it's very harmful to have extramarital affairs. It's harmful to children, it's harmful to the spouse who entered a legally binding agreement to marry the person that's cheating on them."
*
Haase said he opposed judicial activism, and cited the U.S. Supreme Court's decision legalizing abortion in Roe v. Wade as an example. In his campaign for state House last year, Haase made his opposition to abortion a central theme. Abortion is also a prominent theme on the Eagle Forum Alaska blog.
*
One has to wonder how Governor Parnell came up with Haase as a nominee. He's clearly unqualified in terms of selecting judicial appointees - not to mention a religious extremist nut. I wonder if Haase is one of Sarah Palin's know nothing crowd?

Former Aide's Leaked Manuscript Trashes Sarah Palin

I find Sarah Palin to be an insult to one's intelligence. She's unqualified to be dog catcher in a small village much less to run for any national office. Add to that the fact that she's a pathological liar and a self-absorbed shrew and you pretty much get the image of Palin found in Frank Bailey's leaked manuscript. Bailey was one of Palin's aides from her time as half-term governor of Alaska. The book that hopefully grows out of the manuscript ought to be required reading amongst the Kool-Aid drinking GOP base, but I suspect it will be described as "all lies" by Palin's ignorant by choice followers. Oh, and did I mention that Bailey says Palin violated election laws? The Anchorage Daily News has details on the tell all manuscript that shows the true, unvarnished and ugly Palin. Here are some highlights:
*
The manuscript opens with an account of Palin sending Bailey a message saying "I hate this damn job" shortly before she resigned as Alaska's governor in July 2009, less than three years into her four-year term. The manuscript goes on for nearly 500 pages, a mixture of analysis, gossip and allegation.
*
Bailey, a political insider who joined Palin's 2006 campaign for governor and became part of her inner circle, has never before told his version of the Palin story. Bailey has consistently refused requests for interviews and did so again Friday. The book was co-written with California author Ken Morris and Jeanne Devon of Anchorage, who publishes the popular anti-Palin website Mudflats.
*
Bailey wrote in the book that he and his co-authors put together the manuscript with the help of more than 60,000 e-mails he sent or received while working for Palin.
*
[I]n Bailey's telling, the reality was nasty. Minor slights became obsessions, according to Bailey, demanding revenge and if possible, destruction of the opponent's reputation. "We set our sights and went after opponents in coordinated attacks, utilizing what we called "Fox News surrogates," friendly blogs, ghost-written op-eds, media opinion polls (that we often rigged), letters to editors, and carefully edited speeches," Bailey wrote.
*
One chapter asserts Palin broke election law by coordinating with the Republican Governors Association during her 2006 campaign for governor. State candidates can't team up with soft-money groups such as the Republican Governors Association, which paid for TV commercials and mailers in Alaska during the election in a purported "independent" effort.
*
Palin is a menace and needs to be returned to the political wilderness - the sooner the better for America.

8th Grader Gets it Right: Same-Sex Marriage Should be Legalized in All States of America

It amazes me sometimes how insightful children can be. In a letter that will no doubt case Christianists wetting themselves and convulsing on the floor, an eighth grader in Juneau, Alaska, in an opinion piece letter makes the case for gay marriage nationwide. Obviously, it is this attitude of today's youth that terrifies the Christianists and anti-religious freedom set who are Hell bent to enact as many anti-gay policies as possible. Here are some highlights from Emily Adams' piece in the Juneau Capital City Weekly:

*
"Homosexuality is not a disorder and thus there is no need for a cure." This is a quote from the American Psychological Association. Why should people who are homosexual not have the same rights as people who are heterosexual? Therefore same-sex marriage should be legalized in all states of America.
*
Mos*t people aren't bothered by same-sex marriage. In a poll using one hundred people, eighty-six of them said that they aren't bothered by same-sex marriage. Currently four states (Vermont, Iowa, Massachusetts, and Connecticut) have same-sex marriage legalized. Nine countries also have legalized same-sex marriage (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, and Canada).
*
[P]eople disagree with homosexuality because they believe God hates homosexuals, but in the Bible it does not say that God hates homosexuals. In fact there are six things the Lord hates: "The Lord hates haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies, and a man who stirs up dissension among brothers" (Proverbs 6:16-19). . . . And so God does not hate homosexuals. Furthermore, although the Bible says God hates hands that shed innocent blood, there are numerous hate crimes against homosexuals.
*
There are horrible hate crimes against homosexuals and same-sex couples that physically and mentally harm them. Research indicates that 31 percent of gay youth were threatened or injured at school. Kids, no matter what their sexual preference, should feel safe at school. How can they feel safe if they are worrying about if they are going to go home healthy or even alive? On February 19, 1999, in Sylacauga, Alabama, computer programmer Billy Jack Gaither, 39, was brutally beaten with an ax handle. His throat was cut, and his body was set on fire. One of his convicted killers, Steven Mullins, testified he killed Gaither because he was "queer." Should homosexuals constantly be worried about these sick killers and hateful people? Homosexuals are people too, and they deserve to feel safe and as important as the rest of us.
*
We have already gone through this type of hatred. But when African Americans stood up for their rights there was a huge change. All of this happened because they got sick of being hated and feeling less important, and they did something about it. I don't think our amazing country needs to go through another depressing time. That is why we should legalize same-sex marriage in every state in America.
*
Would that more sanctimonious, self-congratulatory false Christians - often motivated by a lust for money or power - had the wisdom of this eight grade student.

Divorce Rates Higher in States with Gay Marriage Bans

Click image to enlarge

Data and statistic whiz Nate Silver has done some research and while divorce has slowed somewhat nationwide - some couples are staying together due to the bad economy and their inability to support two residences - one of the states with by far the largest decline in divorces is Massachusetts. All those tales of gloom and doom vis-a-vis heterosexual marriage have not occurred in the state that has allowed gay marriage for the longest period. Meanwhile, Sarah "Bible Spice" Palin's home state of Alaska has had the largest increase in the divorce rate of any state (+17.2%). I'm sure FRC will ignore this data as it wages its religious war against LGBT citizens. Here are some highlights from Nate's blog to supplement the chart above:

*
Over the past decade or so, divorce has gradually become more uncommon in the United States. Since 2003, however, the decline in divorce rates has been largely confined to states which have not passed a state constitutional ban on gay marriage. These states saw their divorce rates decrease by an average of 8 percent between 2003 and 2008. States which had passed a same-sex marriage ban as of January 1, 2008, however, saw their divorce rates rise by about 1 percent over the same period.
*
As is somewhat visually apparent, those states which have tended to take more liberal policies toward gay marriage have tended also to have larger declines in their divorce rates. In Massachusetts, which legalized gay marriage in 2004, the divorce rate has declined by 21 percent and is the lowest in the country by some margin. It is joined at the top of the list by Rhode Island and New Mexico, which do not perform same-sex marriages but idiosyncratically also have no statute or constitutional provision expressly forbidding them, as well as Maine, whose legislature approved same-sex marriage only to have it overturned (although not banned constitutionally) by its voters.
*
On the other hand, the seven states at the bottom of the chart all had constitutional prohibitions on same-sex marriage in place throughout 2008. The state which experienced the highest increase in its divorce rate over the period (Alaska, at 17.2 percent) also happens to be the first one to have altered its constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage, in 1998.
*
At the very least, I would be surprised if there were any statistical evidence that interpreting the right of marriage to apply to same-sex couples would be injurious to heterosexual couples in any material way.

Nation and Senate Dodge a Bullet

Wahoo!!! The Associated Press is reporting that Ted Stevens has gone down to defeat in Alaska thereby saving the U.S. Senate and the nation from the frightening prospect of Sarah Palin appointing herself to replace Stevens had he won and then been tossed from the Senate next year. The last thing needed is for Caribou Barbie to land in the Senate and be in a position to continue to spread more of her idiocy nationwide. Leave her in Alaska where her potential to do damage - not to mention irritate anyone with a brain - will be limited. Here are some highlights:

*

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Sen. Ted Stevens, the longest serving Republican in Senate history, narrowly lost his re-election bid Tuesday, marking the downfall of a Washington political power and Alaska icon who couldn't survive a conviction on federal corruption charges. His defeat to Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich moves Senate Democrats closer to a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority.

*

Stevens' loss was another slap for Republicans in a year that has seen the party lose control of the White House, as well as seats in the House and Senate. It also moves Democrats one step closer to the 60 votes needed to overcome filibusters in the Senate. Democrats now hold 58 seats, when two independents who align with Democrats are included, with undecided races in Minnesota and Georgia where two Republicans are trying to hang onto their seats.

*

Begich will be the first Democrat to represent Alaska in the Senate in nearly 30 years. He is the son of Nick Begich, Alaska's third congressman, who died in a plane crash 1972 while running for re-election.

Palin To Rape Victims: Bring Your Checkbook

While the storyline is that John McCain selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to appeal to women voters, I continue to be dumbfounded by Palin's anti-women agenda both while mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, and now on the campaign trail where she doesn't support equal pay for equal labor. Other than Christianist women who want to remain bare foot and pregnant and in the home, I do not see what Ms. Palin has to offer women voters other than her gender. Does McCain really think women are that stupid? Apparently so. Of all the things that have come out about Palin one of the cruelest is the fact that under her watch Wasilla was the ONLY jurisdiction in Alaska to charge rape victims for rape kits which cost between $300 to $1,200 apiece. Imagine. You've been raped, Mayor Sarah wants your to have to pay for the rape kit, and then, if given her way, you'd be forced to carry your rapist's child since all abortions would be illegal. Here are highlights from Huffington Post:

*

So, for four years - from 1996, when Palin took office to 2000 when this law was passed - Palin didn't seem to have a problem with charging rape victims to solve their own crime. And if she did, she certainly didn't communicate that to her hand-picked Police Chief, who didn't have a problem with it. I guess that's one way to be a "Maverick."

*

As much as this seems like a post about Sarah Palin, it's really not. It's about John McCain. What I want to know is at what point in the vetting process, after going through Mayoral records, did the McCain campaign learn that Palin condoned the charging of rape victims the cost of processing rape kits? And after they found out, before he selected her, did he discuss the matter in the extensive discussions he had with Palin about her record and her views?

*
Oh wait, that's right he didn't do any of this, because he made his decision after a short phone call. And now he has, on his ticket, someone who didn't seem to think that charging rape victims for forensics processing in their rape cases was all that big of a problem. Or, at least it wasn't a big enough problem to use her "responsibility" to change the policy.

McCain's Horrendous VP Pick

I have spent a goodly amount of time pondering John McSenile's pick for the Vice President slot on the GOP ticket. I guess I am baffled because McSenile and the GOP minions have relentlessly complained that Obama lacks foreign policy experience, etc., yet McSenile then proceeds to select a running mate with ZERO foreign policy experience and who has served only two years as governor of a state with a smaller population that numerous cities around the country. Here are a few facts on Alaska:

*

In 2006 Alaska had an estimated population of 670,053 and ranked 48th out of 50 states by population. Alaska is the least densely populated state, at 0.42 people per square kilometer (1.1 per square mile), with the next state, Wyoming, at 1.97 (5.1 per square mile).

*

For a frame of reference, the cities of Norfolk and Virginia Beach combined have a larger population that Alaska and the Hampton Roads area as a whole has two and one half times the population of Alaska. Thus, whatever "executive experience" Ms. Palin may have, the mayors of MANY cities in the USA have more arguably have more experience since they represent larger populations. I would also add that we all know what the nation received from Wyoming in the former of Emperor Palpatine Cheney. Do we really want another small state mindset at this level of government?

*

In addition to her utter lack of experience, Palin seems to have some potential ethical issues (have you noticed how the candidates of God's party on a whole always seem to have more ethical/moral issues in their personal lives than the allegedly Godless Democrats?). As CNN reports, it is said that Palin abused her power as governor to fire a state official who would not fire Palin's former brother-in-law who has divorced Palin's sister:

*

[S]he is under investigation for her firing of a state official, Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. She has been instructed to hand over documents and recordings of telephone conversations as part of the inquiry, which grew out of allegations that she sacked Monegan for refusing to fire her former brother-in-law from the state police. She has denied wrongdoing.

*
But Palin acknowledged that a member of her staff made a call to a trooper in which the staffer suggested that he was speaking for the governor. Palin has admitted that the call could be interpreted as pressure to fire state trooper Mike Wooten, who was locked in a child-custody battle with Palin's sister. She suspended the staffer who made the call.

*

Seems a bit odd to me that a staffer would take it upon them self to make such a phone call. Putting aside her possible abuse of power, Palin is also troubling because she appears to be a Kool-Aid drinking member of the Christian Right. She has even gone so far as to state that Creationism - p i.e., religion - should be taught in the public schools. Here are highlights from the Anchorage daily News:

*

The volatile issue of teaching creation science in public schools popped up in the Alaska governor's race this week when Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.

*

The teaching of creationism, which relies on the biblical account of the creation of life, has been ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court as an unconstitutional injection of religion into public education.

*

No wonder the Christianist base of the GOP is elated with Palin as the VP candidate, particularly since she's anti-abortion and supports an anti-gay amendment to the Constitution.

Priest Abuse - Absolute Power

Newsweek has a sizable article (http://www.newsweek.com/id/93626) on the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal in Alaska that adds details to a post I did some time back. I welcome such articles in national publications like Newsweek in the hope that sooner or later lay people in the Church and the larger society will wake up and demand a complete house cleaning within the Church. Naturally, I am not holding my breath awaiting that day's arrival, but the more coverage there is of the Church's dirty, disgusting history, the better in my view. Such disclosures should be thrown in the face of Pope Benedict XVI and the other senior clerical frauds who live like potentates and pretend to be pious and religious yet close their eyes to what has gone on for decades, if not centuries, and do nothing. Here are some highlights:

Like most other children, he also spent many days inside the weather-beaten little Catholic church, helping the Jesuit missionaries who held such powerful sway over Eskimo life. That meant doing what you were told—even if it was wrong—and staying silent about it. For Cheemuk, now 53, the past was buried for decades, through a lifetime of struggling with shame, anger and alcoholism. "I remember Mom asked me why there was blood on my underclothes," he said one recent frigid night in his cramped house in the Eskimo village. His sat alongside his wife, sometimes breaking into tears. "I was afraid to tell her what happened. I thought I might go to jail."

More than 110 children in Eskimo villages claim they were molested between 1959 and 1986, raped or assaulted by 12 priests and three church volunteers. Families and victims believe that another 22 people were sexually abused by clergy members but have since killed themselves.

Chris Cooke, a partner in an Anchorage law firm that has represented Eskimo victims, voices outrage over the staggering level of abuse by priests and church volunteers. "They had absolute power over the people and the culture," says Cooke. "They had language power. They had political power. They had racial power. They had the power to send you to hell. There was nowhere for victims to turn." Chase Hensel, a retired anthropologist and expert on Yupik Eskimo culture, says the lasting damage cannot be overstated. "You see the alcoholism, the severe mental problems, people in and out of jail," he says, "and you wonder, how do you put Humpty Dumpty back on the wall?"

Patrick Wall, a former Benedictine monk and Catholic priest who has served as a consultant to Roosa and other lawyers in the Alaska suits, said the Jesuits knew these missionaries were predators. These priests "had abused elsewhere," he said, "and then were unleashed in the most uncontrolled environment."

Broken and ruined lives, and no one in high authority within the Church has ever been punished. Benedict XVI and his predecessors are nothing but fraudulent hypocrites. Why anyone still gives them any deference whatsoever is dumbfounding.