National Public Radio Runs A Half-Hour Infomercial For The Tea Bag "Party."

Today, I listened to a segment on National Public Radio's (NPR) “Talk Of The Nation,” hosted by Neal Conan.

The topic: Tea Party To Hold Its First National Convention.

Conan's guests were Mark Skoda, the founder of the Memphis Tea Party, and Ron Elving, NPR's senior Washington editor.

Mr. Skoda was the first guest, and after giving a brief rundown of his own “conservative Republican” background, he trotted out “the politicians aren't listening to the people!” meme.

Skoda went on to say that the Tea Party (while not a “party per se”) differed from the two major political parties because they want to “hold both parties accountable for fiscal responsibility,” etc. etc. etc., of course very quickly glossing over the fact that the it was his pals, the “conservative” Republicans, under the leadership of “conservative” George W. Bush, that spent us into the hole we're in today.

Skoda was followed by Mr. Elving, who waxed eloquent about How Very Very Important™ the Tea Party Movement is, and for fun, Elving threw in a few derogatory innuendos about the Tea Party anger against “the establishment” and “the elite” (smart people = elitists = bad).

Long story short: The segment was a half-hour commercial for the “we're mad as hell, and we're not gonna take it anymore” Tea Baggers.

Obviously pre-screened, there wasn't a single caller who was not part of the Tea Party movement.

Yeah, I know the show was about their “convention,” but what the hell? Not one person who might have a differing view was allowed to participate.

Neil Conan did not once ask a caller if they had a suggestion, idea, or proposal.

Not ONCE.

I'm guessing that it's because if he's nothing else, Neal Conan is always polite.  If he'd asked for a specific, the callers would have sounded like even bigger idiots.

One of the callers DID catch my attention: “Mike” from Wausau IN, a Tea Party member who said “we're tired of not being listened to."

There you have it.  That's it.  That's pretty much the Tea Party's platform, in a nutshell. "We're mad 'as hell cause no one's listening!"

Their solution to that problem?   Shout real loud.  Swarm town hall meetings and shout at your elected representatives.  Let loudness drown out logic and lucidity. 

Civility is for pussies!

Here's a suggestion for you, Mike in Wausau:

Come up with something that's worth listening to.
Stop going to town hall meetings and screaming incoherently at people.
Maybe learn to spell, even.

To Neal Conan and NPR:
I'm disappointed.

Your network was the last bastion of responsible journalism out there, and you've now become like the rest of the mainstream media, encouraging and cheering on stupidity from all walks of life.

Dang.  Why didn't you have the “convention's” keynote speaker, Sarah Palin on air to talk? Her incoherent word salad of “common-sense solutions, you betcha” would have capped the half hour off perfectly.

Oh, wait.

You would have had to clear that with Fox News, and Mara Liasson wouldn't want you cutting in on her action... since she still works for both NPR and Fox, doesn't she?

Senator Al Kookesh: The Luca Brasi of Sealaska, Inc.?

Well, State Senator Al Kookesh's heavy-handed threats against the community of Craig are not an isolated incident, despite Sealaska CEO Chris McNeil's efforts to smooth them over by saying Kookesh's remarks were "incongruous" and made in an "unguarded moment."

Kookesh seems to have a history of making Mafia-like threats to Southeast Alaska communities that might step out of line and oppose Sealaska.

According to Jack Ozment, Assembly Member of the City and Borough of Sitka, Senator Kookesh made very, very similar comments in a 2008 meeting in Sitka.  The Assembly was considering a resolution opposing the Sealaska lands bill.

Kookesh "reminded" the Assembly that

"... as a state senator I’ve done a number of things that benefit Sitka. And I just want to remind you of it because I’m an Alaska Native and I’m doing good things for Sitka."

Senator Kookesh also reminded the Assembly that every year, he votes on the budget for Mt. Edgecumbe School (a state-supported boarding school in Sitka for rural Alaskan students)... and that it would be devastating for Sitka if Mt. Edgcumbe were to close again. (emphasis mine)

Pretty subtle, Albert.

Unlike his comments to the Craig City Council, Kookesh DID try to cover his ass a little with a "clarification":

“I’m a state legislator. I’m a member of the state Senate. Those comments I made about helping Sitka are the same comments I would make to any community in Southeast Alaska. I would not, no matter what you do on this resolution, do anything to hurt Sitka. I’ve got family members and a lot of cousins and relatives who live here. So my commitment of course is to Southeast Alaska.”

(As an "enforcer" for Sealaska, I'm pretty sure Southeast Alaska = Sealaska in Albert's mind.)

Here's the problem with that, Senator:

The damage has been done, and it's obvious that you've run around making Southeast Alaska communities an "offer they can't refuse."

With these sort of tactics, your political career, like the fictional Luca Brasi, could wind up "sleeping with the fishes."

Just sayin'.

Ethics? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Ethics! The Strange Case Of Senator Albert Kookesh

The verbatim quote from State Senator Albert Kookesh (D-Angoon) in this morning's Anchorage Daily News  is sort of jaw-dropping.

Kookesh was speaking before the January 7 Craig City Council meeting.  Craig is a community of about 1,100 souls, located on Craig Island, on the western edge Prince of Wales Island.  Prince of Wales Island is historically the site of a lot of logging activity, and historically, a lot of contention over the same.

Kookesh was there to try to convince the City Council to drop any possible opposition to S 3561, a bill introduced by Alaskan Senators Murkowski (R) and Begich (D).  The measure will benefit his employer, regional native corporation Sealaska, by transferring some 80,000 acres of publicly-owned land into Sealaska's name... thus helping to clear the way for continued logging of the old growth forest.

Now, the Craig City Council has yet to take any action, they're still discussing it.  A small place that needs jobs and economic opportunity should weigh very carefully the pros and cons of development.  Some of the council members are also shareholders in the Sealaska.  They recognize the potential conflict of interest here, so they're doing their best to be judicious about the matter.

Back to Mr. Kookesh:

In addition to being the State Senator that represents the community of Craig, Kookesh is the Sealaska's current board chairman as well as a director for a subsidiary, Sealaska Timber Corp.  Kookesh is also co-chairman of the Alaska Federation of Natives, the largest statewide Native organization. Its members include the regional Native corporations and villages around the state.

Perhaps, when he went there, Albert had the best of intentions, and had planned on wearing only his Sealaska hat.  But he apparently couldn't resist mentioning that in addition to being a big shot with Sealaska, he also holds the power of economic retribution over the good citizens of Craig:

“I’m the state senator that represents Craig. I’m not a vindictive person. I see you’re going to have your 2010 capital projects on the table here tonight. And who’s it going to go to? It’s going to go to me. And to (Rep.) Bill Thomas, who is also a Sealaska board member. We have to be good neighbors. There are times you are going to need my help and Bill Thomas’ help. And this is a time we need yours. (emphasis mine)

It should be noted:  Even though Albert dragged his name into the mix, State Representative Bill Thomas, R- Haines (who, besides being a Sealaska board member, sits on the Alaska State House Finance Committee) had the good sense to stay away from the City Council meeting.

I wasn't there, so I have no idea what Senator Kookesh's comments sounded like, but from the quote, it certainly appears to me to be a threat ... or "encouragement" worthy of Vito Corleone.

Several members of the council (including one who used to be the police chief) thought so, too.

Threats of this sort are clearly illegal.  From the state ethic's law:

A legislator may not directly, or by authorizing another to act on the legislator’s behalf... agree to, threaten to, or state or imply that the legislator will take or withhold a legislative, administrative, or political action, including support or opposition to a bill, employment, nominations, and appointments, as a result of a person’s decision to provide or not provide a political contribution, donate or not donate to a cause favored by the legislator, or provide or not provide a thing of value;

But, someone has to file a complaint... and any outrage expressed by some members of Craig's council may never come to fruition in the form of an ethics complaint against Senator Kookesh.  Why?

Because it's been publicized.

In typical legislative cover-your-ass fashion, Alaska's ethics law currently prohibits publicizing an ethics complaint made by anyone against a legislator. Under the "confidentiality" protection the legislature gave itself, if the complaint is publicized by the complainant, the complaint will be dismissed- even if it may be valid.

So that pretty much precludes anyone in Craig who talked to the Anchorage Daily News about it.  They've already violated the "confidentiality" clause.

Perhaps a member of the Alaska Legislature's Ethics Committee will take it into their own hands to investigate.

But I doubt it.

Local Politics: Social Responsibility vs. Creating Public Policy By Ham-Fisted Coercion

Forgive me in advance, but some history is required.

After having been passed by the Kenai City Council on December 16, 2009, Resolution 2009-68, which would add Kenai as a signatory to The Alaska Coastal Communities Global Climate Change Compact was up for a reconsideration vote during the January 6, 2010.  You can learn more about it here.

During reconsideration of a previous vote, public testimony isn't scheduled. In fact, the City Council Agenda, published in the Peninsula Clarion, specifically stated that there would be no public testimony taken.

But Mayor Pat Porter and council members Joe Moore and Barry Eldridge oppose the measure.

They'll have to explain why they do, I can't speak for them.

Personally, I happen to think that the measure is a proactive approach by Alaskan coastal communities, and is relatively benign, regardless of one's feelings about global climate change or its causes. The cities of Petersburg, Homer, Dillingham, Gustavus, Seward, the City and Borough of Sitka, and the municipality of Juneau are all signatories. The Kenai Peninsula Borough was a signatory, but rescinded their action at the January 5 Assembly meeting. Again, you'll have to ask them why, I can't fathom it.

So Porter, Moore and Eldridge had the meeting packed with like-minded citizens, all intent on having their say to defeat, under reconsideration, the already-passed measure. Since public testimony was closed, their plan was to allow each person three minutes under the “Unscheduled Public Comments” (a portion of every meeting's agenda).

Except that's against the rules.

Unscheduled public comments are reserved solely for items not on the agenda.

Now, Mayor Porter knows all about this rule.

She invoked it during last year's MAPS rezoning, interrupting and publicly scolding people affected by the rezone who attempted to comment when the MAPS  rezone issue was on the agenda.

So it wasn't ignorance on her part. It was a connivance.

But something happened that Porter didn't foresee:

When she set her "testimony" plan in action, Council member Mike Boyle (very properly) called a point of order, noting that holding what amounted to a public hearing using the “unscheduled public comments” part of the agenda would be inappropriate, and possibly even illegal under Alaska's Open Meetings law.

The Mayor, who chairs meetings, overruled Mr. Boyle's point of order.

Boyle appealed the chair's ruling to the entire Council, and he was upheld by a vote of 4-3.

Council members Boyle, Marquis, Molloy and Smalley voted “yea,” Porter, Moore & Eldridge voted “nay.”

Thus, Porter's ruling was overturned, and no testimony (con or pro) would be taken by improperly using  “unscheduled public comments.”

Immediately after the Mayor's ruling was overturned, Councilman Molloy (the sponsor of Resolution 2009-68) moved that the measure be postponed to the January 20, 2010 meeting, in order to have a yet another properly-noticed public hearing. That motion also passed by a 4-3 vote, with Porter, Moore & Eldridge voted opposed. In fact, member Joe Moore (attending telephonically) was so angry that he threw a temper-tantrum and quit the rest of the meeting.  Why didn't Porter, Moore and Eldridge want a properly noticed public hearing?  I don't know, I can only surmise.

If you can suffer through it, watch the meeting here.

Now you're caught up... and I haven't even got to the point of this post:

A ham-fisted attempt to affect public policy by threat and coercion.

I know. Right now you're probably saying “wtf?” to yourself.

Let me explain.

Since the initial passage of this resolution, council members and the City Clerk have been inundated with emails.  Lots of emails.

Some are in support of the resolution and  the Alaska Coastal Communities Global Climate Change Compact itself, some are against both the resolution and compact, and take issue with global climate change itself.

Some of the “against” emails are pretty blunt.

They range from the “passage of this will hurt our local industries” to “if you pass this I'll never vote for you  again and/or I'll work for your defeat in the next election.”

That's understandable. It comes with the territory for any elected  official, you aren't going to make everyone happy.

But the nastiness of one particular "anti-resolution" email jumped out at me.

It was penned by a man named Dennis Gifford, an employee of the Tesoro Alaskan Refinery in Nikiski, and the message was sent from his company email address.

He wrote:

“In closing, I will do my civic part; I will not support anyone in any re-election campaign, that signs on to this compact. I will actively help any person running against them; with my wallet, and in any discussion with friends, family and co-workers. I will pursue the company I work for, to reduce any donations to the community of Kenai (why should they support a community that no longer supports us?).  (emphasis mine)

Other than the fact that he's Mayor Pat Porter's son-in-law,  I really don't know much about Mr. Gifford.

He might be a bigshot with Tesoro Alaskan Refinery, and in a position to actually deliver on his threat. Or, perhaps he is just another cog in the machine, and this is an act of self-aggrandizement on his part (or to make his mother-in-law happy).

But threatening programs like the Boys & Girls Club, the Challenger Learning Center, “Caring for the Kenai,” and local youth sports with monetary retribution is not only out of line... it's sleazy and wrong.

Go check out the “Social Responsibility” policy page of his employer's corporate website.

“Being a dick to the community because local government doesn't do your bidding” just doesn't  seem to be part of Tesoro's published policy.