Plot to defeat Sen. Lyda Green exposed..

Update April 17, 2008
Reliable sources report that Linda Menard has only registered as a Republican in March of this year! Wow, you just have to admire her commitment and dedication!

Update April 14, 2008
If you have come here via the link at the profanity laced Progressive Alaska blog, that's good, because there, you won't find the opening paragraph where I specifically stated that this 'theory' was purely speculative, and was omitted when Mr. Munger lifted the remainder of my post, which by deceptive intent, removed it from it's original context. As for the "drug user's comment, I was talking about Ms. Church's attempt to repeal MEA's drug testing by-law. I was not accusing Burchell or Kincaid of possibly failing that test as he falsely assumed.

Original post:
A possible plot to defeat Senator Lyda Green has been exposed by a big-mouthed liberal blogger. A Frontiersman article regarding School Board member Linda Menard's challenge to Senator Lyda Green's seat in the August 2008 Primary election has a new twist thanks to a blogger who has perhaps inadvertantly exposed the possibility that Mat-Su Assemblywoman Michelle Church is preparing to run for Senate on the Democratic ticket. Of course, this is pure speculation on my part, but I'm willing to bet on it.

From the Frontiersman blog:

Phil Munger wrote on Apr 10, 2008 7:15 AM:
http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2008/04/08/local_news/doc47fb4de0e895c387853187.txt
"Linda Menard voted against out-sourcing the school custodial contracts. Good for her. The out-sourcing has been a DISASTER. The schools are a mess. Try to find a custodian? Good luck! Try to find a custodian who can speak English? Good luck, again! Try to find a custodian who is an American citizen? Even harder. I'm hoping Linda puts up a good fight, beats Lyda Babcock, and then loses to the Dem in November. We don't need a little change - we need a LOT. Go, Michelle!"

"Go, Michelle!"

What does that comment mean? In my opinion, it implies that Mr. Munger has knowledge that Mat-Su Assemblywoman Michelle Church is planning to run against the August Republican primary winner.

Fact: Gov. Palin dislikes real Republican Lyda Green.
Fact: Gov. Palin likes fake Republican Linda Menard
Fact: Gov. Palin will support fake Republican Menard in the Republican primary.

Scenario 1: Fake Republican Menard defeats Green, runs against Church. Citing a family crisis, fake Republican Menard drops out at last minute, handing seat to Church by default.

Scenario 2: Green beats fake Republican Menard. Palinbots, Menard's, Greenies, Lib's and drug user's (who want to run for MEA), all lend support to Church in attempt to beat Green. Green and Church battle it out in November and the Anti-Lyda crowd will play out the dirtiest campaign you will ever witness in your lifetime.

This is not paranoid, this is just knowing what Liberals will do to win. Deceive the voters to win at any cost. Just like they did against Proposition 1 and MEA.

"Green Tags" An Enron scheme to sell "Green Energy" Twice

Post lifted from American Wind Energy Association (1997)

Many of you have probably heard about Enron's "Green Tags" proposal, which would essentially allow the "greenness" of a resource to be sold separately from the power itself. The concept is essentially the Renewables Portfolio Standard without the requirement attached. In fact, AWEA and the other renewables industries recently made an almost identical proposal in California as a way to track and verify renewable energy claims in the absence of disclosure requirements, and as a way to add flexibility to the green market. So, my guess would be that most of the renewables industries would support the Green Tags concept. However, there are some in the environmental and renewable community who fundamentally oppose the notion of trading environmental "bads" and "goods." They think that if you want to market renewables, you should do business with them directly. Even those who agree on the concept may disagree about which resources deserve "green tags" and then we get into all of the issues I went over a moment ago. But I think it's a concept that deserves our serious attention, with the caveat that it would be an interim solution to a problem that is best solved through industry-wide disclosure requirements and a national renewables portfolio standard.

http://www.awea.org/policy/gm970530.html

Mat-Su Proposition 1

Update: Anti-Property Rights Advocate Len Barson of the Washington State Nature Conservancy gave anti-Prop 1 group $1,665, he was also instrumental in derailing a similar Washington State property rights initiative in 2006, as were many of the others listed below, and curiously but not surprizingly, the anti I-933 campaign used similar wording in their propaganda: "But initiative opponents say I-933 is so vague and poorly worded that enterprising landowners could seek waivers allowing them to do almost anything on their property." Source: Seattle PI

Update: $12,000 contributor Cynthia Wayburns parents were instrumental in locking up 100 million acres of Alaska with their support and promotion of ANILCA.
Locking up Alaska land must run in the family.

Prop 1 Proponents had more financial support from Mat-Su than did opponents..
See what tons of OUTSIDE money can buy you?

$41,000 Va. Nature Conservancy
$25,000 The Partnership Project, Inc. (Radical DC Environmental Group)
$12,000 Cynthia Wayburn (radical environmentalist Seattle millionaire)
$10,000 Cook Inlet Region
$5,000 Douglas Walker (location unknown)
$5,000 Alaska Center for the Environment (Radical Environmental Group)
$5,000 Paul Brainerd (Radical environmentalist Seattle billionaire)
$1,665 Len Barson (Washington State TNC)