By Dan Fagan 
Publisher
The Alaska Standard 

Today is a day for the history books. August 24th, 2010.

America has been seized by liberals like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Mark Begich. These leftists are spending us into oblivion while they propose one policy after another designed to grow government and take away our freedom. They are aided and abetted by Republicans in name only like Lisa Murkowski.

But on this day, August 24th, 2010, this beloved nation and its people began to turn. They birth their revolution with the unthinkable. Unseating one of the strongest political dynasties in the history of the republic.

Originally appointed by her daddy, Lisa Murkowski was considered senator for life despite being a liberal representing a conservative state.

No one will ever beat Liberal Lisa the pundits proclaimed. She’s too powerful. The entrenched power structure would never let it happen. Defeating Liberal Lisa would be the equivalent of unseating the British monarchy in pre-American revolutionary times.

But what the pundits didn’t realize is when times become dire, when a nation is in peril, people often find deep within themselves a rare courage. A courage defying the odds and they press forward knowing the stakes are high and the very survival of a nation can be at risk if they don’t succeed.

On this August 24th, 2010, I believe Alaskans are going to witness something close to a miracle. The turning of a nation will begin in Alaska today from one that depends on government to one that craves self-reliance, independence, and freedom. On this day, we will do our founding fathers proud.

Today is the day Alaskans say no more. No more politicians spitting on the constitution that made this country what it is today. No more politicians who refuse to honor, respect, and protect the sanctity of life. No more Republicans who go along to get along. No More!

Liberal Lisa is a fine person, mother, and wife but her understanding of the role of government mirrors that of Mark Begich and Barack Obama. When Lisa Murkowski says she’s OK with government run healthcare as long as it is a program that works it gives us a window into her soul. She has been duped into believing government knows best. But government does not know best. All politicians who think so must go. In this revolution, all liberals must go whether they be Democrat or Republican. 

Alaskans don’t care that Murkowski represents a dynasty with a campaign treasury of millions. They don’t care that she has powerful forces behind her. This is America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. One vote, one person.

We are a people tired of big government. We are tired of government growing and our freedoms shrinking. We are tired of Washington D.C. politicians setting themselves up as our ruling class. We are tired of a corrupt ruling class mortgaging the future of our children away by spending trillions and trillions on government programs that don’t work. Enough is enough!

Let the revolution begin today in Alaska. Let us send a message to the Republican Party nationally; trample on the constitution and you trample on us. Co-sponsor cap and trade, vote for so called stimulus packages, vote to approve the most anti-gun attorney general in U.S. history, promote the culture of death and we will defeat you.

Today is the day we turn this great freedom-loving nation. Today is the day a dynasty ends. Today is the day Alaskans take a stand for freedom by defeating Lisa Murkowski. 

Let freedom ring! Today is the day America finds its soul. This is the day America saves itself.

On this day, August 24th, 2010, Alaskans will lead the way to a better, stronger, freer America.  

By Dan Fagan 
Publisher
The Alaska Standard 

I know I am not the only conservative in Alaska dumfounded with the national right wing media’s infatuation with Sarah Palin.

Most Alaska conservatives who pay attention and focus on issues instead of personality realize Palin was a disaster as governor. Her tax policy alone, if not reversed, will and frankly already has cost thousands of Alaska jobs.

If you are like me you have a difficult time getting over all she has done to our state and then the way she quit in the middle of her mess to pursue more fame and fortune. 

I know I am not the only conservative in Alaska who believes this way.

Which brings me to Joe Miller. There are plenty of my fellow conservative Alaskans who plan to vote against Joe simply because of his association with Sarah.

This is in my opinion a huge mistake. Our country is in peril right now with Barack Obama and Mark Begich running things. Their polices will bring this nation to its knees if not reversed in short order.

The problem with Lisa Murkowski is she’s a liberal. She has voted over and over and over again with Democrats. She doesn’t even deny it justifying her liberal voting record as votes for Alaska not her party.

Well since when did cap and trade legislation become a pro-Alaska policy? She’s co-sponsored cap and trade legislation that would cripple the state.

Our nation is in peril like no other time in its history. The enemy within is making progress and Murkowski flirts with and aids and abets the enemy more than any other Republican Senator up for re-election. 

Joe Miller on the other hand is a staunch fiscal and social conservative. I know it’s hard to understand why Miller would align himself with Palin. I know it makes you want to vote against him for that reason alone.

But our country is in peril. Let’s rise above the vindictive pettiness Palin displays on a daily basis and let’s pick a conservative candidate for the U. S. Senate.

A word for my pro-life friends. If for no other reason than your love and respect for the sanctity of life vote for Joe and against Lisa. Lisa is pro- death culture in the most ardent of ways. She even believes it’s okay for the government to use your taxpayer money to pay for abortions.

A radical pro-abortion group singles out Murkowski, along with Olympia Snow and Susan Collins as their three favorite Republican Senators.

The Senate plays a major role in who gets appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the court plays a major role in the abortion issue.

Just as Barack Obama would have never been able to pass Obama Care without Mark Begich, the day could come where liberal Lisa Murkowski will vote against a Supreme Court justice that would have been the swing vote to finally end abortion in this country.

Can you imagine voting for a candidate that was instrumental in continuing the slaughter of innocent children?  It is not a far-fetched scenario.

Obama Care would have never passed if it were not for the Alaskans who voted for Begich. What leftist policies will liberal Lisa bring us if we give her another six years?  

Let’s vote for Joe despite Sarah. Our country is in peril and it’s no time for pettiness. 

By Bill Walker
Republican Candidate for Governor

Our state is at a turning point.  The pipeline is two thirds empty and oil production continues to decline at an alarming rate.  Unless a gas pipeline is built to bring cheap energy to Alaskans and provide an alternative source of revenue to fill state coffers our next generation will not enjoy the same level of prosperity.  That is a fact.

Although Governor Parnell refuses to release the results of Exxon and TransCanada’s open season that closed on August 1, we do know that any bids received were heavily conditioned.  We also know that the United States no longer needs Alaska's gas.  Breakthroughs in tapping shale gas formations have led to gluts in North American natural gas markets.  The federal government estimates the lower-48 now has a 100+  year supply of natural gas, and that its price will be depressed for at last 35 years.  Consequently TransCanada’s CEO says an Alaska project is not a priority.

In response Governor Parnell suggests that AGIA allows for a gas pipeline to Canada or Valdez and thus all bases are covered.   However, TransCanada has stated that the Valdez option will only be bid in the initial open season and subsequent open seasons will only include the Canadian route.  But what Alaskans do not know is that TransCanada will have exclusive control of the Valdez route under AGIA and will essentially block that exit for Alaska's gas. 

Parnell is staying the Canadian course even though Alaskans will pay 90% of the costs for the next Canadian only open season and this is in addition to a subsidization of up to $20 billion, almost double the $13 billion in incentives Governor Murkowski proposed under the Stranded Gas Development Act.

If Parnell is truly advancing the Valdez LNG export option, why has he not worked with Mitsubishi Corporation, the largest global purchaser of LNG, and Sempra LNG which owns the only LNG receiving terminal on the West Coast?  Why does his administration not have a continuous presence in Tokyo, Seoul and Taipei as it does in Alberta?  Why did Parnell applaud the recent FERC decision to require reapplication for one of the environmental permits obtained for the Valdez LNG option rather than challenge yet another move by the federal government to hinder our resource development opportunities?  Why did his administration commission a $12 million study to discredit the Valdez LNG option and fail to renew the state right-of-way permit for the project?  Parnell's campaign theme is Action not Words.  However, his words say he is also aggressively pursuing the Valdez route but his actions prove the contrary.

Ted Stevens and Don Young both recently recognized that Canadian and lower-48 gas markets are saturated and our future lies in Asia.  To ensure economic prosperity for the next generation, the state must take the reins and aggressively pursue the development of a gas pipeline to Valdez with a spur line to South Central.  The project would be financed by world markets through long-term LNG contracts secured before a shovel hits the ground and built and operated by the private sector.  We have a world class opportunity and the All-Alaska Gasline provides a world class solution that puts Alaska first by delivering low cost energy to our homes and businesses, putting Alaskans to work and igniting our economy for decades to come.

Bill Walker is a lifelong Alaskan and Republican candidate for governor.  He is a businessman and an attorney specializing in municipal and oil and gas law and also served as Mayor of Valdez at age 27.  He and his wife have raised their four children in Anchorage where they have been active in church, community and youth activities.

By Jim "Little Jimmy" Lottsfeldt
Alaska Standard Contributor

It's a sad end to the 2010 Primary Election.  The media and institutions like the University of Alaska, League of Women Voters, and certain civic clubs have sidestepped a role we desperately need them to play; hosting real, meaningful debates between candidates.

•For the first time in his career, Don Young has faced a well-funded, credible opponent in the Republican primary.  By Election Day, Young will have never debated SheldonFisher.

•APRN's Steve Heimel declines to interview Young's opponent, Sheldon Fisher, on "Talk of Alaska."  Heimel says it's because Fisher isn't polling high enough.  Fisher asks him what poll he is referring to and Heimel answers there is not actually a poll, it's just his belief.

•Young has spent three years declining questions about Coconut Road scandal because "his lawyers advised him not to comment" since he was under investigation.  Two weeks ago he announces the investigation is over--and no one in the media asks him a substantive question about Coconut road or the other scandals he was implicated in.

•Incumbent Governor Sean Parnell has strategically avoided as many debates as possible in order to"sit" on his lead.  In fairness, there are more debates for Governor than any other office, but Parnell --who was never elected Governor--can execute a strategy of missing most debates without any of the media or institutions calling on him to participate more fully.

•Tea Party candidate Joe Miller has had upwards of $600,000 spent on his campaign, has received national endorsements, and the only debate was a farce.  It was a joint appearanceon Public TV"s "Running."  The moderator was ridiculously lame and even then the public would have been served to see Miller and Lis aMurkowski battle for a longer period of time.   The moderator was more concerned about keeping the time on her watch than the quality of the interaction.  Murkowski or Miller could have been in mid-confession on the location of Osama Bin Laden's cave and this moderator would have interrupted them because they were using more than 15seconds.

The only consistent proponent of meaningful debate has been the Dan Fagan talk show, which is not the unbiased platform all the candidates deserve.  No criticism of Fagan here; it's just he's an unabashed proponent of a certain philosophy and candidates.

KTUU, the ADN, and many others have abandoned the Federal races, and only given the Governor's race a minimalist's idea of attention.

When the laughably bad "Running" is considered a debate, we should all realize our democracy is the victim of benign neglect.

And we wonder why more good people don't run for office.

By Mike Dingman
Alaska Standard Contributor 

Sunday promised to be an interesting night, and it lived up to the hype. KTUU, Channel 2 hosted a gubernatorial debate at the Wendy Williamson Auditorium on the UAA Campus. The debate was well attended by a diverse group excited to hear what the different candidates had to say. Young and old alike the audience wore T-shirts, buttons and sported signs with their favorite candidates name on them. The audience sat quietly and politely and listened intently to the entire debate.

The evening started with an innocuous encounter between Ethan Berkowtiz and Hollis French who are both vying for the Democratic nomination. Berkowtiz expressed his concern about the declining oil production on the North Slope after French claimed that all was well with North Slope oil production. “There will be oil flowing down the pipeline as long as I am here and everyone who is listening, that is my belief”. Berkowitz countered with the facts on the declining oil production saying “You call the pipeline one- third full some might say its two-thirds empty” explaining that it is going to decline by about 5 to 6% a year.  French continued to repeat the bullet points that he clearly had memorized before the debate such as “Secure the future” and “Keep that oil tax in place”. French even had his own” Al Gore-esque” moment when he explained that “in 2008 we put five billion dollars in the lock-box”, explaining why ACES is a successful tax plan.

When the Republicans took the stage, you would have thought that Hollis French had come back on the stage. Starting off the questioning, Acting Governor Sean Parnell claimed that AGIA is “one of the best ways to get a pipeline built”. He continued to say that “we are closer to a pipeline than we have ever been” word for word what Hollis French had said earlier in the evening. Parnell continued by claiming that the Trans-Canada pipeline plan was “moving forward with private sector money” even though the money that that plan is moving forward with is the 500 million dollars that was given to Trans-Canada by the State of Alaska – Not exactly private sector money Mr. Parnell.

As the Republicans continued Parnell continued to tie himself to AGIA, ACES and Hollis French continuing to say that everything is fine in Alaska’s economy. He claimed to have worked on “getting Alaska’s spending under control” even though the budget that he signed was 10% higher than the previous year’s budget. Clearly Parnell and French live together in the same fantasy world where oil is not on the decline, jobs are abundant on the North Slope and oil companies are jumping over one another to be the first to explore new areas. In reality, oil production is declining at an alarming pace, AGIA has harmed our chances at ever building a natural gas pipeline and ACES has completely halted new exploration by the major producers. All the while Bill Walker continued to try to make himself relevant by inserting himself into the discussion during the Acting Governor’s answers and answering every question (including one about how to solve the homeless problem) by stating that we need an all Alaska gas pipeline to Valdez.

In the middle of all of this was Ralph Samuels. Mr. Samuels was the adult in the room while the kids ran around telling stories about how great things are. Samuels explained that “tough decisions are going to have to be made” and that “we are going to have to look 10, 15 and 20 years down the road” not just budget for tomorrow. Samuels says that we have missed our opportunity to build a large scale pipeline. He stated that “in the last four years while we’ve been kinda piddling around with AGIA the world fundamentally changed, the shale gas in the United States, in Europe, in China, it has driven down the price as the supply has gone up globally, and for right now I believe our window for the time being has shut”. He said since we wasted  four years we should do what we can to help ourselves with a bullet line helping out communities in Alaska. He also was the only one that pointed out that “the dirty little secret of gas pipelines – gas doesn’t generate as much revenue as oil”. Most estimates say that for gas we will get about 35 cents on the oil dollar. For that reason Samuels says whether or not we get a gas pipeline we will have to rein in spending and have more fiscal restraint in our state budget.

The primary election is looming and Alaska’s future is on the line. Tuesday is an important day for important men who understand the complexities of the oil and gas issues in Alaska. Tuesday is for men who understand that oil production is on the decline and now more than ever we need to be incentivizing investment not punishing it with higher taxes. It is clear that on Tuesday you have your choice between Hollis Parnell or Sean French and the man who truly understands the complexities of the oil and gas issues and the budget issues in Alaska – Ralph Samuels. 

By Ilona Farr MD
Alaska Standard Contributor

Dear Fellow Alaskans;

It is vitally important for Alaskans to Vote Yes on Proposition 2. It requires notification of a parent or relative, or in case of a poor home situation a judge, before a life changing surgery on a minor child.

As a physician I must obtain consent on a minor child before seeing them, yet currently a minor child can have invasive surgery which can cause physical (infertility, bleeding, infection) and lifelong mental (depression, suicide, drug and alcohol abuse) problems, without a parent even knowing their children are having a procedure that deprives them of grandchildren. Minor children who are pregnant should have an responsible adult involved who can provide objective support throughout their decision making process, and afterward, or if needed get them out of dangerous home situations.

This vote will have far reaching implications over what rights we have as parents over our minor children. We are talking about the rights of over 200,000 parents versus approximately 125 minor children who choose to terminate their pregnancies every year. Most of these are not from abusive homes, so we are talking about <10 children per year who need judicial bypass for this surgery and need assistance getting out of abusive situations. 

My concern as a parent is if a minor child can have a major surgical procedure without parental notification (not consent)-- what rights will we have as parents in the future? We must Vote Yes on 2 to preserve our rights as parents.

By Dan Fagan
Publisher
The Alaska Standard 

Who are you planing to vote for in the Republican primary for the Alaska U.S. Senate seat? Tell us if you are voting for Lisa Murkowski or Joe Miller and leave a comment telling us why. You must register to leave a comment. 

By Dan Fagan
Publisher 
The Alaska Standard 

It is up for debate whether Lisa Murkowski meant she didn’t think Obama Care should be repealed when she told Channel Two News she didn’t think Obama Care should be repealed just days after the legislation passed.

But what is not up for debate are her words at a townhall meeting weeks before the Obama Care vote. There is no wiggle room in her comments and no getting out of the fact she states she is clearly okay with the idea of government taking over the health care industry.

Listen for yourself and make up your own mind. Click on the audio link below to hear the clip. 

Photo courtesy of themudflats.net

By Dan Fagan
Publisher 
The Alaska Standard 

Maybe one of the biggest reasons it’s not a good idea to elect lawyers like Sean Parnell is not because they know the law, but they know how to get around the law.

A document uncovered by activist Andree McLeod reveals the Parnell administration once again skirted the law and then tried to cover it up.    

The latest Parnell scandal involves former state employee Dan Saddler and his filing to run for the open seat created by the illegal hiring of Nancy Dahlstrom.

State law prohibits Saddler, who was a state employee, from registering to run for office with the Division of elections while on the state payroll. But that’s exactly what he did. 

Alaska Statue 39.25.160(e) reads…

An employee in the classified, partially exempt, or exempt service who seeks nomination or becomes a candidate for state or national elective political office shall immediately resign any position held in the state service. The employee's position becomes vacant on the date the employee files a declaration of candidacy for state or national elective office. This subsection applies to employees in the exempt service…

Here’s how it all went down. Dan Saddler on the 12th of May of this year took a three-hour leave from his state job to go to the Division of elections to file to run for Nancy Dahlstrom’s seat. Dahlstrom had just announced a couple of days prior she was stepping down from her House seat to take a job in the Parnell Administration. 

Some may wonder how Sadler could make such a life changing decision on such short notice unless he had known for some time Parnell planned on hiring Dahlstrom. Remember Dahlstrom told me she had been talking with the Governor for months about her new position. It’s not a stretch to assume Saddler, a loyal foot soldier for Palin/Parnell, was the hand picked replacement for Dahlstrom.

But as is normally the case with the Parnell team, going by the book was not how Saddler handed his filing for office or resigning. The law required Saddler first resign his state job then file for office. But when Saddler filed on the 12th, he was still a state employee.  In fact he filled out a leave slip for three hours so he could have time off from his state job to go file for office. He then returned to his job at the state office building and sent out a resignation letter using his state e-mail account some three hours after he had filed to run.  

Some might argue what’s the big deal? So Saddler should have resigned first and then filed. It was only a few hours. That may be true but here’s where things get sticky.

The leave slip Saddler filled out to go file for office was negated several days later. Gov. Parnell’s staffer, Linda Perez, cancelled the leave slip and then fudged the paperwork to make it look like Saddler actually quit May 11th instead of the 12th. Perez knew Saddler violated the law by filing for office while still a state employee and tried to cover his tracks by negating his original paperwork.  

While Saddler may have innocently made a mistake by not resigning before filing, there was nothing innocent about the Parnell administration changing state documents to cover up for his violating state statue.

This is a clear pattern with the Parnell team. They seem to be quite adept at getting around the law or covering their tracks when they do violate the law.  

Keep in mind Parnell illegally hired two legislators and both of them had the decency to quit and yet the Governor has still yet to admit he did anything wrong.

And Parnell’s Attorney General, Daniel Sullivan, has yet to fulfill his promise to answer questions about the Dahlstrom hiring on my show.

If Parnell took questions, I suppose he would probably say the same thing about this situation as he did about the two times he broke the law by hiring sitting legislators. He would again insist he did nothing wrong.

Law school seems to have paid off quite well for Sean Parnell. He sure is good at getting around the law. 

By Leslie Lorentzen
Alaska Standard Contributor 

Dr. Monique Karaganis shared her personal and professional opinion concerning Ballot Measure 2 in the ADN on July 27 ("Measure 2 could put girls' lives at risk"). Though I am not a medical professional, I share my opinion as a once-abused adolescent.

I am the daughter of a teen mother who had four children by the age of 23; her first at the age of 14. The father of my older brother attempted to kill him and my mother on more than one occasion. You could say that my father was a kind-of savior to my mother. She was swooped from the arms of death and into a half-life. I say half-life because it was not whole. My father was an alcoholic and did drugs. He gave my brother his first joint; he was known at times to get out his gun to make a point; and he sexually abused me from age 12 to 14. I understand what it is like to be an adolescent at risk.

Dr. Karaganis does not share in her op-ed the medical philosophy of her own pediatric practice found on her web site. She says, "Our focus is on education because you, as a parent, will be there with your children all the time." (www.polarpediatrics.com/about_us.html) There is a problem, however, in that the status quo in Alaska does not allow the parent the option to be "there" for our children "all the time."

A child cannot get a mole cut off without parental knowledge, a child cannot take a Tylenol without consent, but a child can have an unwanted fetus surgically removed and be given prescription medication as a result of the procedure. She can have this all done without the parent having to be notified whatsoever.

Ballot Measure 2 may be primarily about parental rights but it also has the fringe benefit of shedding light into the darkness of abuse -- perhaps allowing a child to get the intervention and help so desperately needed before further harm and abuse occur. Secrecy is the womb of abuse. I lived for years being told not to tell. It was in telling that I finally got help. Otherwise, when help is needed most, the child is left in the dark with nothing but an empty womb and a broken heart. No guidance and help through the tumult of emotions that come along with abuse and abortion. Only dirty little secrets.

I have one question for Dr. Karaganis and Ballot Measure 2 opponents. How can Alaska parents, or this Alaska community, be there for our children all the time? The only honest answer is that currently we can't. We're not allowed.

Leslie Lorentzen is an Anchorage writer, mother and survivor of childhood abuse. E-mail, leslielorentzen@msn.com.  

By Cliff Groh
Alaska Standard Contributor

An outpouring of grief has washed over Alaskans regarding the tragic passing of Ted Stevens. The former U.S. Senator died last week in a plane crash near Dillingham. In addition to Stevens, that accident took the lives of Dana Tindall, of Anchorage, a telecommunications executive; Tindall's daughter, Corey, a high school student; Washington, D.C., lobbyist Bill Phillips, a former chief of staff for Stevens; and the pilot, Terry Smith, of Eagle River, a retired Alaska Airlines chief pilot. The survivors were former NASA Administrator and ex-Stevens staff member Sean O'Keefe; O'Keefe's son Kevin, a student; Washington, D.C.-area lobbyist Jim Morhard; and Phillips' son Willy, a student.

Signs of mourning for Ted Stevens are all over. Large streetside signs reading "GOD BLESS TED STEVENS" and "HE LOVED ALASKA AND WE WILL MISS HIM SEN TED STEVENS" appear four blocks apart in Anchorage. A funeral home runs a radio spot in heavy rotation urging people to sign the official guestbook at its parlor and receive a program about the former Senator's life.

There are no fewer than four events marking the end of his life in Anchorage this week. There was a Catholic mass Monday; a viewing of his casket today at his old home church, All Saints Episcopal; a procession tonight following that viewing from All Saints to Anchorage Baptist Temple; and finally the official memorial service at that megachurch on Wednesday at 2 p.m. The Anchorage Baptist Temple can hold more than 4,500 people, and Vice President Joe Biden is expected to be among those in the pews.

Love and Admiration

There appear to be several strands in this mourning for "Uncle Ted," who served as U.S. Senator for Alaska for 40 years. For his family and friends, there is the obvious love for a man who was dedicated to those close to him.

For many others who crossed his path over the years, there is affection and admiration for his many fine qualities-intelligence, hard work, devotion to Alaska and the interests of Alaskans as he saw them. Alaskans also treasure the bluntness that carried its own kind of charm: the skillfully used temper, the Incredible Hulk and Tasmanian devil ties, the tough-guy statements like "Senator, that's not a threat, it's a promise." If the legendary Governor Jay Hammond personified Alaskans' image of themselves as independent pioneers who run trap lines and build their own cabins, Ted Stevens personified the Last Frontier's scrappy fighter side.

 Grief Over the Loss of a Glorious Past

The mourning over the man who worked in Alaska public life for well over five decades also seems to reflect a nostalgia for an earlier time-the era in the 1950s and early 1960s when statehood was won and people worked to build the new state. Back then, Alaskans seemed more united, the politics seemed purer, and the Great Land seemed greater. Ted Stevens was the last prominent link to that period, and some of the grief seems to come from that longing for a time that now seems more glorious and less complicated.

Mingled with that nostalgia may be a strong sense of regret among Alaska voters. Stevens only lost re-election after a jury returned guilty verdicts against him on seven felony counts eight days before the general election in 2008, and a poll taken after the case collapsed the next year reportedly showed that the then 85-year-old Stevens would have won 2-1 if the election were run again.

Thanks, Ted, for the Spending and the Helpful Laws

Then there is the gratitude. Ted Stevens delivered for Alaskans. People usually focus on the dollars, and there were billions and billions of those. Stevens concentrated most of his Capitol Hill career on his service on the Senate Appropriations Committee, where he ultimately ascended to the post of Chairman. In that capacity, he showered so much federal funding on Alaska that the state's newspapers routinely used the term "Stevens money" without quotation marks to describe projects and programs from Washington, D.C. As Stevens said in his farewell Senate address, "Where there was nothing but tundra and forest, today there are now airports, roads, ports, water and sewer systems, hospitals, clinics, communications networks, research labs, and much, much more."

Ted Stevens was the man who brought home the bacon (or the pork, as observers outside Alaska often called it). In the words of the writer Michael Carey, Stevens became "something of a frontier fertility god-worshipped, propitiated, feared."

But Alaskans tend to have some sense that Ted Stevens' contributions to the state came in places other than the federal budget. As a Department of Interior official, Ted Stevens helped bring statehood. As a U.S. Senator, he played major roles in legislation that created Alaska Native corporations (the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, or ANCSA), helped make Alaska's fisheries sustainable, and allowed the construction of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) that has brought so much wealth to Alaska's economy.

Sophisticated insiders also recognize that Ted Stevens' distinctive accomplishments in legislation required a shrewd sense of the possible, a knack for timing, a willingness to compromise, and even that seemingly un-Stevens quality of patience. As Mark Regan has noted, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1978 (ANILCA) depended on Stevens' brokering a very complex compromise, and the law would not have passed without Stevens' almost infinitely patient work. Regan has also pointed out that Stevens was almost entirely responsible for passing legislation rescuing the Native corporations allowing them to sell their net operating losses; this move was only possible because Stevens and his staff saw how to do it.

"If Ted Stevens hadn't been there, land issues might still be uncertain, many Native corporations might have gone under, and fishing rights might still be as snarled as they were in the early 1970s," Regan told me. "We can remember and celebrate him not for bringing home so much bacon, but for working out arrangements which have made it a whole lot easier for us to live and work together as Alaskans."

The writer Charles Homans observed that "In the view of his constituents he was less Alaska's senator than its patriarch, the leader who guided Alaska's transformation from a territorial outpost to a modern petrostate."

Alaskans seem to understand the correctness of the observation of the Almanac of American Politics that "No other senator fills so central a place in his state's public and economic life as Ted Stevens of Alaska; quite possibly no other senator ever has."

Only a Career Member of Congress Focused on Alaska Issues Could Stay Above the Fray and Command Respect Across Alaska's Factions

Ted Stevens only kept his status as an icon across the decades, however, because he didn't do what at least one of his Senate staff members thought likely 35 years ago. In 1975, a Capitol Hill aide to Stevens told me that there was speculation among the staff that the Senator would ultimately go back to Alaska and cap his career by serving as Governor.

Stevens' long-time Senate colleague Frank Murkowski did that in 2002, and that move ended up destroying his image in the state. Murkowski went from routine re-election over 22 years in the Senate to finishing third in his own Republican primary when he ran for re-election as Governor in 2006.

Sen. Murkowski kept winning re-election because as a Senator he did not have to make decisions that divided Alaskans. Gov. Murkowski lost badly when he ran for re-election as Governor in part because he made some tough calls, which had him take aggressive positions on fiscal questions like state budget cuts vs. reductions in Permanent Fund Dividends vs. bringing back the state income tax on individuals.

Ted Stevens, on the other hand, stayed an Alaska hero because he maintained a laser-like focus on fighting for Alaskans against the federal government. He worked to get federal dollars for Alaska projects and programs; he maneuvered to make federal law favorable to Alaskans; and he stood up for individual Alaska constituents against federal agencies. As the state's fierce lobbyist, clever lawyer, and superombudsman, Stevens was almost a cross between a Western hero played by John Wayne and star attorney Perry Mason of TV fame, the kind of champion you want on your side when the stakes are high and the odds are long.

Stevens was a gladiator for Greatlanders in the arena of Washington, D.C. Even if he didn't always win, Alaskans could always see that he was trying his hardest. As U.S. Senator for Alaska, Stevens was the captain of the Last Frontier team, or even the chieftain of the Alaska tribe.

All that would have gone out the window if Ted Stevens had left the U.S. Senate to return to Alaska as Governor. As the state's chief executive, he would have had to takes sides among Alaska's warring clans on various issues, particularly fiscal matters. Stevens' popularity would have plummeted, especially if falling oil prices forced him to make tough calls on budget and tax issues. The diminutive scrapper's famously irritable and pugnacious personality would have not have worn as well with Alaskans if he had become the state's chief executive. Serving as Governor would have made it much harder for Stevens to hang onto the idealized view of Alaska society he seemed to have as a Senator, which allowed him to believe that all boats would rise together if he just kept pouring enough federal dollars into the ocean. As Governor, Stevens would no longer have been "Uncle Ted"-he could easily have become in many Alaskans' eyes "that knucklehead in Juneau."

Ted Stevens was a smart man who worked hard for a long time to promote the best interests of Alaska as he saw them. His stature as an Alaska legend was immeasurably aided by his decision to stay in the U.S. Senate, where as a top-ranking federal official he could best fight the feds on behalf of his constituents.

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

...

By Bob Griffin
Alaska Standard Contributor

Some of my good friends and fellow conservatives seem to be leaning toward supporting Sen. Murkowski during this primary season. This support for Lisa seems to be based mostly on the principals of hope and change.  They really hope she'll change and become more conservative this time.

They're hoping that she'll change her voting patterns. During her short senate career, she has sided with the Democrats more than 300 times, earning her perennial title as one of the "Top 10 most Liberal Senate Republicans" in ratings conducted by National Public Radio, NationalJournel.com, mediamatters.com, voteview.com, politifact.com, humanevents.com and many more.

Sen. Murkowski's record is especially telling in the areas of social and fiscal conservatism where she routinely ranks in the top 3 most liberal Republican Senators. This contributed to her being described in the Huffington Post as "a center-right Democrat".  My friends tell me, "We hope that will change".

The hope is that she'll change her views on abortion, and her public support for taxpayer funded abortions.

The hope is that she'll change her position on forced unionization, having failed to ever respond to the candidate questionnaires from the National Right To Work Committee.

The hope is that she'll change her pattern of voting 87% of the time in favor of recent major appropriations bills that Republicans opposed.

The list goes on and on and on...

If there's one thing that I've learned in my short 50 years on this planet; there's very little hope of significantly changing the world view of someone as seasoned as Lisa Murkowski. If we as conservatives choose to send her back to Washington, Sen. Murkowski will certainly interpret that as a voter mandate approving of her frequent trips "off the reservation".

Prediction: If we reelect Lisa Murkowski; six years from now, we'll be having this same discussion. I hope I'm wrong (for a change).

By Bob Griffin
Alaska Standard Contributor 

Some of my good friends and fellow conservatives seem to be leaning toward supporting Senator Murkowski during this primary season. This support for Lisa seems to be based mostly on the principals of Hope and Change.  They really hope she'll change and become more conservative this time. 

They're hoping that she'll change her voting patterns. During her short senate career, she has sided with the Democrats over 300 times, earning her perennial tile as one of the "Top 10 most Liberal Senate Republicans" in ratings conducted by National Public Radio, NationalJournel.com, mediamatters.com, voteview.com, politifact.com, humanevents.com and many more.

Senator Murkowski's record is especially telling in the areas social and fiscal conservatism where she routinely ranks in the top 3 most liberal Republican Senators. This contributed to her being described in the Huffington Post as "a center-right Democrat".  My friends tell me, "We hope that will change".

The hope is that she'll change her views on abortion, and her public support for taxpayer funded abortions.

The hope is that she'll change her position on forced unionization, having failed to ever respond to the candidate questionnaires from the National Right To Work Committee.

The hope is that she'll change her pattern of voting 87% of the time in favor of recent major appropriations bills that Republicans opposed.

The list goes on and on and on...

If there's one thing that I've learned in my short 50 years on this planet; there's very little hope of significantly changing the world view of someone as seasoned as Lisa Murkowski. If we as conservatives, choose to send her back to Washington, Senator Murkowski will certainly interpret that as a voter mandate approving of her frequent trips "off the reservation".

Prediction: If we reelect Lisa Murkowski; six years from now, we'll be having this same discussion. I hope I'm wrong (for a change).

By Nick Allen
Telegraph.UK 

A decision to rescind endorsement of the drug would reignite the highly charged debate over US health care reform and how much the state should spend on new and expensive treatments.

Avastin, the world’s best selling cancer drug, is primarily used to treat colon cancer and was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2008 for use on women with breast cancer that has spread.

It costs $8,000 (£5,000) a month and is given to about 17,500 women in the US a year. The drug was initially approved after a study found that, by preventing blood flow to tumours, it extended the amount of time until the disease worsened by more than five months. However, two new studies have shown that the drug may not even extend life by an extra month.

Click here to read the rest of the story. 

Parnell's Failed Record from Ralph Samuels on Vimeo.