Alaskan Politics (statewide and nationwide) (Ketchikan, Chevak: zip code, design, reservations)

[Siouxcia]

Originally Posted by Glitch

This entire investigation is a partisan witch hunt by the liberals who can't stand Governor Palin's conservative principles.

Here we go again. Blame the liberals. The liberal papers are spinning the facts. WRONG!!! Her own flip-floppings are to easy to prove; as I did regarding the earmarks and the bridge. This woman isn't even smart enough to cover her tracks.

I'm pissed as hell at McCain for choosing her. Now what!?!

[stiffnecked]

Link to a good article on Native Sovereignty in Alaska. Just remember there have been a number of significant changes since then.

A Primer on Alaska Native Sovereignty, by Douglas K. Mertz

B. Indian Country. If federal Indian law as construed in the contiguous United States is to be applied to Alaska, the bulk of governmental powers which a tribe may exercise are available to it only within Indian country. Indian country is defined as reservations, dependent Indian communities, and allotments.26 Since all but one Alaska Native village are outside reservations, and almost all allotments are rural fishing and gathering sites, advocates of Native sovereignty have had to claim that the areas around Native villages are dependent Indian communities. Although the courts have addressed the definition of dependent Indian communities for decades,27 they have only just begun to address the question in regard to Alaskan Native villages.
It is clear that the existence of dependent Indian communities in Alaska is a factual question. Although some villages have suggested that lands granted to village or regional corporations in ANCSA could be considered Indian country almost by definition, the courts have never adopted the suggestion.28 The only court of appeals decision of relevance states that the existence of Indian country must be determined by a factual examination, using the factors already laid out by courts of appeals in cases from the contiguous states.29Those factors were more recently summarized by the U.S. Supreme Court as whether the area was set aside by the United States for the protection of dependent Indians, under the supervision of the U.S.30 In several pending cases in the District Court it appears that the court will look most intensely at the degree to which the community is in fact dependent on the United States and whether the U.S. treats the area like a de facto reservation.31

[LoneStarJerry]

Originally Posted by Siouxcia

Her own flip-floppings are to easy to prove;

As are Obama's.

[akck]

Originally Posted by Siouxcia

As for citing facts about Palin's support for the 'Bridge to Nowhere', you're kidding right? You are "Alaskagirl" afterall. She used that support in her quest for Govenor. She only removed her support AFTER Congress said 'whoa'! McCain had her earmark requests on
Palin states she supports McCains platform of NO EARMARKS. The following from her lipsticked 'pitbull' mouth, February of this year.

My opinion is that she supported the project to get elected. All the wording I've seen though, makes it sound like she didn't fully support it. In other words, there were enough weasel words in her statements so she could back out of it. She basically killed the project when she cut the state's portion of the funding from the budget. Her vocalization of dropping the project was likely the result of the bad press, but as stated, she already killed it budget-wise, so it wasn't necessarily because of public pressure.

[Glitch]

Originally Posted by Siouxcia

Hmm, maybe I and most other posters didn't know the date of the conception of the Pledge of Alligance but I did know it was 'new', twentieth century new. When I don't know something, I don't 'fake it' by pretending to know it. Only makes you look stupid when you do.

As for citing facts about Palin's support for the 'Bridge to Nowhere', you're kidding right? You are "Alaskagirl" afterall. She used that support in her quest for Govenor. She only removed her support AFTER Congress said 'whoa'!

Palin states she supports McCains platform of NO EARMARKS. The following from her lipsticked 'pitbull' mouth, February of this year.
newsminer.com • Palin: Setting the earmarks opinion straight

McCain had criticized earmarks from Palin - Los Angeles Times

The Bridge to NoWhere
PolitiFact | As candidate, yes; as governor, no

No spins, just her own words!

Apparently you do fake it, judging by your post. I see lots of spin and misinformation in your links. First and foremost, the much quoted "Bridge To Nowhere" phrase the AP created is not only very insulting but also inaccurate. The federal funding was for TWO bridges, the Gravina Island bridge and the Knik Arm bridge. Sarah did indeed support both bridge projects when she ran for Governor, up until July 2007, when she changed her mind and no longer supported the Gravina Island bridge. She did not change her mind because of Congress. She changed her mind because she had just vetoed more than a billion dollars of capital spending projects and to go ahead with the Gravina Island bridge project would appear hypocritical. None of the federal funds were sent back to Congress, the Gravina Island federal funding was used on other state transportation projects instead. Sarah continues to support the Knik Arm bridge, which would serve more than 30,000 daily commuters and provide a vital secondary access to the Kenai Peninsula.

These lesser-48ers complaining about Alaska's paltry few million in federal funds for transportation projects, while California and Massachusetts consume tens of BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars on their Metro-Rail and "Big Dig" projects are nothing more than partisan hypocrites.

[Siouxcia]

Originally Posted by Alaskagrl

I am sincerely interested in learning more about Palin's stance on these issues, her voting record, and any rationale she's come up with for other issues the OP mentioned.

Google is your friend!

[Siouxcia]

I don't understand why the ballots can't be printed in Alaska Native languages. Those languages were in place long before English even existed. Why the need to Americanize the Alaska Native. Once their language goes, so goes their culture. Sad.

[akck]

Originally Posted by Siouxcia

Who is 'spinning' now?

Never said it was fact or true, just a possibility. And never said I believe it. The whole thing is too much of a nitpick to have much importance.

[arctichomesteader]

In 1996 the federal government came in and usurped Alaska's Constitution by giving "rural" Alaskan residents preferential treatment.

On federal lands, to be accurate. In most states, federal lands are under state fish and game rules. Such as VT and the national forest lands: hunting, fishing and trapping is governed by state fish and game laws, not federal rules. With Alaska and subsistence hunting/fishing on federal lands and waters, there are federal rules. And making heads or tails out of all the state and federal subsistence rules is a nightmare.

[Siouxcia]

Originally Posted by akck

My opinion is that she supported the project to get elected.

So, she lieds to get elected? Hmmm, puts another spin on her 'ethics'....