Tuesday, October 14, 2025
Home Blog Page 11

Remembering the day President William McKinley was assassinated: Sept. 6, 1901

17

On this day in 1901, President William McKinley was shot by socialist-anarchist Leon Czolgosz during a public reception at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, NY, setting in motion a chain of events that would change the course of America.

Czolgosz, influenced by radical anarchist writings and figures such as Emma Goldman, viewed political leaders as oppressors. On Sept. 6, he approached McKinley and concealed a revolver in a handkerchief, firing two shots at close range, hitting the president in the abdomen. The president initially survived the attack, but he succumbed to his wounds after eight painful days, dying on Sept. 14.

President William McKinley

Following McKinley’s death, Vice President Theodore Roosevelt assumed the presidency.

Czolgosz was apprehended immediately, confessed to the crime without showing remorse, and declared he acted in service of the anarchist cause. He was quickly tried, convicted, and executed by electric chair on Oct. 29, 1901, at Auburn Prison in New York.

The assassination shocked the nation and heightened fears of anarchist violence. It prompted tighter security measures for public officials and influenced the development of anti-anarchist legislation and stricter immigration controls.

McKinley became the third US president to be assassinated, joining the ranks of Abraham Lincoln, who was shot by pro-Confederate radical John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865, and James A. Garfield, shot by Charles J. Guiteau, who died on September 19, 1881, after lingering for 80 days following the attack. All three were Republicans targeted by radicals of varying ideologies. Only one Democrat president has been assassinated — John F. Kennedy in 1963.

McKinley was the last president to have served in the Union Army during the Civil War; he was the only one to begin his service as an enlisted man and end it as a brevet major. He inherited a depressed economy, advocated for the gold standard, and raised tariffs to protect American manufacturers and factory workers from foreign competition. He was also commander-in-chief during the Spanish-American War.

Mount McKinley bears his name as a lasting tribute to his legacy.

In 2015, the Obama Administration killed that name and officially named it Denali, the moniker used by some Alaska Native tribes historically. As one of his first acts upon returning to the presidency in 2025, President Donald Trump restored the name Mount McKinley in federal usage as a tribute to the president, and honoring his achievements and tragic and painful end to his life.

Trump, too, was the target of leftist would-be assassins, surviving two attempts on his life in 2024.

Murkowski fights Trump with legislation renaming Mount McKinley ‘Denali’

House passes first bill, begs President Trump to change the name of Mount McKinley back to Denali

Alex Gimarc: Trump is throwing elbows at Lisa by restoring the name of Mount McKinley

Bob Bird: False compassion

By BOB BIRD

Compassion is good. False compassion enables the perpetuation of what originally summoned the compassion. An obvious example would be to sympathetically pat the head of a starving orphan, hug them, and then move on.

A less obvious example is to watch a homosexual be insulted or beaten by playground bullies, treat their wounds, and then tell them that being a homosexual is perfectly fine.

It is unnatural to pour milk into an automobile gas tank, to drink gasoline, or for men to lie with men, or to pretend that they are women. Whatever excuses might be made on behalf of those who do these things, no one can reasonably call them “natural”.

Not too long ago, homosexuality carried a stigma. It was both social and institutional. Those who were afflicted with this spiritual and psychological problem, lived an underground lifestyle. It was an affliction not only found within slums and dark alleys, but also hidden among suburbs and white-collar executives. No one who practiced it was proud of it, while others who wanted to rid themselves of this “monkey-on-the-back”, often sought professional help, whether through psychiatry or clerical privacy. 

In the military, it meant a quick dismissal from service, usually characterized by the famous “Section 8 discharge”, although that also included many other mental disorders. 

But the point about homosexuals in the military was mainly over morale. What man wanted to go into a communal shower with someone known or suspected of being sexually attracted to them, or was shopping for a willing partner? “Blanket parties”, fist-fights and reluctance to obey orders from someone with this malady would necessarily reduce military efficiency. 

Now, let’s suppose there is a known or suspected homosexual, in an all-male combat foxhole team. One guy is tired of the verbal abuse the suspected homosexual has endured, so he is defending him. Even though the guy is “straight”, the foxhole now has a serious morale problem. 

Heterosexual promiscuity also once carried a stigma. No divorced-and-remarried politician could escape censure. It hounded Nelson Rockefeller’s efforts at winning the White House, and even indirectly Gerald Ford — who was never divorced, but married a woman who was. It did not necessarily mean it was an adultery-caused divorce, but the possibility existed. 

Teen pregnancy also was almost equally taboo, with the lion’s share of blame always falling unjustly upon the girl. Promiscuity among consenting adults was shameful, living together outside of marriage was euphemistically called “playing house”, and family members talked about their relatives being in a “common law marriage”. 

The point is, we suffer from a cultural problem of false compassion, where we now calls these unnatural things what they are not: natural. And, if we have somewhat corrected the problem of ridiculing homosexuals, we have created a false compassion by making what was once seen as a pitiable and treatable psychosis, to enabling it into a “new normal”. 

We should not dress up these abnormal relationships by going through the ceremonies and nomenclatures of marriage. Marriage existed before governments. It has always been a man/woman thing, even in polygamy. 

In the most decadent days of the Roman Empire, homosexual relationships made no pretense of being married. Marriage means procreation of children, and not through a laboratory. Adoption was a noble option. Their children required the acceptance of the responsibilities of raising them, a spousal sharing of the expenses, joys and sufferings, and an unswerving trust, based upon natural law.

You can say that there are examples where homosexual couples live up to those standards, but that is like saying that you can find alcoholic parents who are good parents. Yes, they exist. But what kind of an example is it setting?

By the existence of anatomy, homosexual relations are not natural. Man, who has always made an effort to “play at being God”, now uses the knowledge of mad science to mutilate and drug himself into a defiance of what the Almighty determines for us — naturally — at conception.

Abnormal and unnatural behavior can only expand towards a limitless parade of new and unforeseen avenues. Thus, the unborn child is no longer seen as fully human. Adopted children are sent into homosexual households, to be surrounded by an unnatural set of values and activities. Seemingly out of nowhere, sexual identity itself has become a bargainable political issue, and what the AMA used to call “mutilation” is now called “gender-affirming healthcare for minors.”

Humanity consists of three basic elements: body, mind and spirit. The human mind and human spirit are different, but very hard for us to differentiate. When religious authorities cast out demons, the secular explanations usually identify these events as a psychological, rather than a spiritual malady. 

Tell me, why should we accept their atheistic or agnostic world view? It is a flat-out denial that there is any spiritual element to human existence. Thus, we do not possess a soul, and therefore our actions are merely robotic, influenced by DNA, genetics or environmental factors. 

And since the 1970s, clinical psychology, under duress, ended the idea of homosexual and even heterosexual promiscuity as a psychosis, and therefore in need of treatment. That is the fundamental mistake that we labor under today.

New and even stranger elements lurk just below the surface, but as yet carry a (diminishing) social stigma: incest, bestiality, polygamy, polyandry, and even mechanical sexuality. Human-animal cloning is now under experimentation by these mad scientists, unimagined by Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World.

This wilderness has only one exit: an evangelization that returns us to God’s natural law. It might still be possible, even within a culture that appears to be hopelessly divided when it comes to religious and eternal questions. It bespeaks the need for courage, self-sacrifice and martyrdom, as events increasingly demonstrate with the latest outrage perpetrated in Minneapolis. 

The Left, supposedly so devoted to science, is ignoring what hormonal treatments are doing to people like the Nashville and Minneapolis shooters. What would be the expected treatment of Christians who enter gay or trans neighborhoods, exercising their right to freedom of speech, in an attempt to bring natural law and common sense to people who live in a permanent state of anger, weakness and victim support groups? Many states and cities make it illegal to discourage gender dysphoria in psychiatric treatment. And as already exists in Scandinavia, it may soon be illegal to speak against these disorders from the church pulpit.

The Church’s foundation is built upon the blood of martyrs. So said Tertullian, in the 2nd Century. It converted not only the pagan Roman Empire, but also, much later, the Norsemen. 

The unintentional martyrdoms have already begun, in Nashville and Minneapolis. It comes because the teachings of religious institutions of authentic Christianity are well known, and therefore angers those who have been victims, not of Christianity, but of the unnatural values of a soulless and hopeless culture.

Bob Bird is former chair of the Alaskan Independence Party and the host of a talk show on KSRM radio, Kenai.

Bob Bird: Alaska’s GOP must drop the dead weight — or ranked-choice voting and Democrats win

Bob Bird: The glaring inconsistencies of ‘pro-lifers’

Bob Bird: A renewal of anti-war conservatism

Four finalists for UAA chancellorship have site visits this month

9

The University of Alaska Anchorage is set to host four finalists in its search for a new chancellor between September 8 and 18. Each candidate will spend two days on the Anchorage campus meeting with students, faculty, staff, alumni, and community members.

The visits will include campus tours, meetings with university stakeholders, and open forums where the public can ask questions and share perspectives about the university’s future leadership. The new chancellor will replace Sean Parnell, who retired earlier this year.

The four finalists are:

  • Jennifer Capps, Ph.D. – Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs, Cal Poly Humboldt. Visit: Sept. 8–9
  • Diane Hirshberg, Ph.D. – Director, Institute of Social and Economic Research, UAA. Visit: Sept. 11–12
  • John R. Ballard, Ph.D. – President, National Intelligence University. Visit: Sept. 15–16
  • Aaron Dotson, Ph.D. – Vice Chancellor for Research, UAA. Visit: Sept. 17–18

Notably, Hirshberg and Dotson are already part of the UAA community. Capps and Ballard bring national perspectives from California and the intelligence community, respectively.

University leaders are inviting community members to attend the open forums, which provide a chance to ask questions, share perspectives, and help shape UAA’s leadership.

Detailed schedules, biographies, and registration information for the forums are available on the UAA Chancellor Search webpage at heyor.ca/DRtP3E

Cancel U: University community members tried to get chancellor to pull the plug on Trump rally

Class assignment: Gov. Parnell to take over as chancellor of University of Alaska Anchorage

Sean Parnell, Deena Bishop are finalists for University of Alaska Anchorage chancellor

Washington state defies Trump, lets kids get Covid shots without parents knowing

11

Washington State has issued a new standing order that makes Covid vaccines available to nearly everyone — including children — without requiring an individual prescription or even parental consent, setting the state apart from new federal guidance that has moved toward limiting routine Covid vaccination.

The order, signed Sept. 4 by Dr. Tao Sheng Kwan-Gett, MD, MPH, of the Washington State Department of Health, authorizes qualified health care providers to administer the latest versions of FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines to anyone aged six months and older, including pregnant individuals. By removing the prescription barrier, the state made shots available in pharmacies, clinics, and other health care settings with fewer obstacles.

Trump’s administration has been moving away from aggressive Covid vaccination campaigns, moving policy that emphasizes personal choice and the recognition that the pandemic emergency phase is over. Washington, however, is charting its own course by keeping the vaccines widely available and promoting access, a move critics see as undermining the federal approach.

The most contentious part of Washington’s system is how it interacts with a separate state law on minors and medical consent. While the standing order itself does not mention parental permission, Washington’s Mature Minor Doctrine allows children of any age to receive medical care — including vaccinations — without their parents’ approval if a health care provider decides the child is mature enough to make the decision. That could mean very young children are getting vaccinated against their parents’ wishes.

With no strict criteria written into law, and with no explicit direction for providers, the decision is left entirely to a nurse, doctor, or pharmacy assistant’s discretion. It’s also law in Washington state that minors do not need parental knowledge or consent to get an abortion, as state law protects the right of individuals under 18 to make their own reproductive healthcare decisions.

The standing order will remain in effect until revoked by the Department of Health and is subject to annual review.

Here are Alaska’s fall guidelines:

Alaska Health Department issues Fall vaccine guidance, as FDA updates Covid-19 shot advice

Linda Boyle: Medical establishment in revolt against CDC on Covid jab guidance

Linda Boyle: Medical establishment melts down after RFK Jr. limits Covid jab guidance

Left goes ballistic as Trump revives ‘Department of War, launches War.gov

President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order authorizing the Defense Department to use “Department of War” as an official secondary title. He has revived the historic name that was in use 75 years ago. It’s a move supporters say brings long-overdue honesty to what the department actually does, but that leftists found something new to criticize him about.

The order, Trump’s 200th since returning to office, authorizes Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and his team to use titles such as “Department of War,” “Secretary of War,” and “Deputy Secretary of War” in all communications, ceremonies, and non-statutory documents. Alongside the announcement, the administration launched War.gov, a new portal that mirrors the Pentagon’s existing website but embraces the revived name.

In a White House fact sheet, the administration made the case plainly: “‘Department of Defense’ emphasizes only defensive capabilities. ‘Department of War’ conveys strength, resolve, and America’s readiness to protect its interests by any means necessary.”

Trump, speaking before the signing, said the change was about restoring clarity. “Under the Department of War, the United States won two world wars,” he noted. “Since changing the name to ‘Defense,’ America has been bogged down in drawn-out conflicts that end in stalemate. Words matter.”

Hegseth, standing alongside the president, drove the point home. “This is not just a cosmetic shift,” he said. “It’s about purpose. The War Department wins wars. It does not exist to manage decline, it exists to deliver victory.”

Critics have long noted that the Pentagon’s missions go far beyond “defense” — from conducting overseas combat operations to projecting American power worldwide. The revived name acknowledges that reality in a way that is more transparent with the American people.

The “Department of War” dates back to Aug. 7, 1789, when Congress created the office under President George Washington. For more than 150 years it oversaw the Army and later worked alongside the Navy and Air Force until the 1947 National Security Act rebranded it as the Department of Defense.

Some of the most famous secretaries of war went on to even higher office, including James Monroe, Ulysses S. Grant, and William Howard Taft, who served in office when Alaska became a territory.

The announcement immediately sent the Left into paroxysms of outrage. Liberal commentators and Democratic lawmakers accused Trump of saber-rattling, nationalism, and “dangerous symbolism.” Online, progressive activists denounced the launch of War.gov as a “provocation.”

Conservatives, however, see the reaction as more evidence of Trump Derangement Syndrome, he reflexive opposition to anything the president does.

“Only the Left could be offended by calling something what it actually is,” one Alaska veteran told Must Read Alaska. “The Pentagon fights wars. Trump just has the honesty to say it out loud.”

Anchorage mayor complains of peace summit costs, ignores the great economic windfall to businesses

45

Anchorage Mayor Suzanne LaFrance is lamenting that the president’s recent trip to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson saddled the city with an extra $200,000 in policing expenses. The Anchorage Daily News dutifully picked up the mayor’s complaint, amplifying the cost angle while leaving out an important part of the equation: The economic benefit.

More than 800 journalists and thousands of diplomats poured into Anchorage for the summit between President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, filling hotels, restaurants, and rental cars. That sudden demand represents a major shot in the arm for Anchorage’s hospitality and retail economy.

The city’s 12% bed tax alone meant significant tax revenue pouring into city coffers, likely far more than the $200,000 in police overtime. Add to that alcohol taxes, restaurant sales, rideshare fares, taxi runs, and gift store purchases, and the net effect was overwhelmingly positive, although no entity, such as the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation, has revealed an actual analysis of that economic benefit.

But while no official economic-impact report has been published for Anchorage’s summit, comparable events in other cities show clear short-term boosts in the hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars. Hotel and bed-and-breakfast rooms were going for several hundred dollars a night.

For local hotels, restaurants, and transportation providers, the days surrounding the president’s visit were a bonanza. Long-term benefits are even harder to measure but just as real: Global media exposure, heightened international visibility, and an elevated profile for Anchorage as a venue for future events, investment, and tourism.

It’s also worth noting where the city chooses to put its money. Anchorage was willing to spend $200,000 on team-building exercises for the Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility earlier this year, yet it hasn’t invested in cleaning up the downtown homeless wasteland that businesses and visitors face every day. No effort was made to reduce the presence of vagrancy during the summit between Trump and Putin.

Now, City Hall is complaining about the cost of providing a safe environment for the president of the United States — a duty most Alaskans would consider a basic responsibility. Add to that, the city’s annual budget is now a record-setting $639 million. The $200,000 in police overtime represents approximately 0.0313% of that budget.

In other words, while the mayor and her allies in the media paint the summit as a financial burden, the reality is that Anchorage likely came out well ahead. The city gained international attention, collected a surge of tax revenue, and gave its business community a welcome lift at the tail end of summer.

As for the extra money for policing, that money will be recycled right back into the economy of the city.

“The municipality will request reimbursement from the federal government,” the mayor’s spokeswoman (freshly recruited from the Anchorage Daily News) told Newsweek in an email. “We don’t expect to have final numbers from all departments for a few weeks. However, it’s safe to say the municipality’s expenses related to the summit were in excess of $200,000.”

Once again, the mainstream media bit on the Democrat talking points to sideswipe Trump’s effort to forge a peace agreement, as City Hall chooses to focus on government costs while ignoring private-sector benefits, telling the public only half the story.

Curtains open on political theater in Alaska, as Trump and Putin take center stage

Trump pushes diplomacy in White House peace summit with Zelenskyy, European leaders

White House weighs inviting Zelenskyy to Trump-Putin summit in Alaska: Report

One arrested for defacing JBER welcome sign during Trump visit

What was in the letter that Melania Trump had hand-delivered to Putin in Alaska — by her husband?

Trump rally in Anchorage draws happy, energetic crowd, while peace talks begin just a few miles away

Trump and Putin land at JBER: Video

Superior Court upholds repeal of Alaska’s 80th percentile rule governing health insurance reimbursements; doctors may appeal

6

An Anchorage Superior Court judge last week upheld the State of Alaska’s decision to repeal the long-standing “80th percentile rule,” a regulation that for nearly two decades had governed how health insurers reimbursed out-of-network medical providers.

The ruling from Judge Yvonne Lamoureux came after a four-day bench trial in February, in which a coalition of Alaska medical associations, including the Alaska State Medical Association, the Alaska Podiatric Medical Association, the Alaska Physical Therapy Association, and the Alaska Chiropractic Society, challenged the Division of Insurance’s repeal of the rule. The groups argued the repeal was arbitrary, lacked transparency, and would harm patient access to care by driving down reimbursements for independent providers.

John Morris: Why Alaska healthcare community sued the state’s insurance division over 80th percentile rule

The judge disagreed, siding with the Division of Insurance, which has long argued that the 80th percentile rule drove up health care costs in Alaska by incentivizing providers to raise their charges in order to capture higher reimbursements.

The 80th percentile rule was adopted in 2004 and required insurance companies to reimburse out-of-network providers at or above the 80th percentile of charges billed in a given geographic area. Supporters said the rule protected patients from being underpaid by insurers and ensured that providers could continue offering care in a state with some of the nation’s highest medical costs.

Doctors vs. State of Alaska and Lower-48 insurers: Lawsuit filed over ’80th percentile rule’

The Division of Insurance and some large insurers, argued the regulation created a feedback loop of escalating charges, since providers knew insurers were bound by the percentile benchmark. After years of debate, the Division formally repealed the rule effective Jan. 1, 2024.

The coalition of doctors and medical associations has not ruled out an appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court. If pursued, the high court would be asked to determine whether the Division’s repeal was legally sound and consistent with Alaska’s administrative law requirements.

Allen Hippler: Repeal the ’80th Percentile Rule’

Until an appeal, the Superior Court decision is a victory for the Division of Insurance.

Read the court ruling here:

Suzanne Downing: Europe’s speech police seek to censor Americans too. What it means for Alaskans

14

By SUZANNE DOWNING

In August, US House Judiciary leaders went abroad to investigate firsthand how Europe regulates speech online. What they found should worry every American who values the First Amendment — especially Alaskans, who travel widely, whether for work in the resource industries, military service, or just to see family and friends.

This isn’t abstract policy talk. What Europe is doing across the Atlantic could soon dictate what you can post, read, or share on Facebook, Instagram, X, or any other major platform. Vague laws written and selectively enforced by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels and London are already pressuring American tech companies to censor political speech — not just for Europeans, but for us.

Last year, during a Judiciary Committee investigation, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg admitted something shocking: Biden administration officials leaned on Facebook to censor Americans, including jokes and satire about Covid-19. He called it “wrong,” promised not to repeat it, and rolled back some of Meta’s censorship policies, which impacted news and opinion leaders, including here at Must Read Alaska.

Thanks to Americans winning that fight, robust debate has returned to the digital town square and dissent is permitted once again.

But now, Europe is trying to drag us backward.

The European Union’s Digital Services Act and Britain’s Online Safety Act give regulators broad powers to punish platforms that don’t scrub undefined “disinformation” or “hate speech.”

In practice, that means censoring political debate. What’s worse, these governments want the rules applied globally, which means your posts in Anchorage, Fairbanks, or Wasilla could vanish because a bureaucrat in Brussels decides it offends “European values.”

Consider this: In the heat of the US 2024 election, the EU warned Elon Musk about hosting an interview with Donald Trump on X, claiming it could cause “spillovers” into Europe. This was the case of one European official openly threatening an American platform over American political speech in an American election. It was just an interview. That’s not just wrong — it’s dangerous.

And what if tech companies don’t comply? Europe threatens them with fines of up to 6–10% of their worldwide revenue. Let’s be clear: That money would come mostly from American consumers and businesses. It’s a backdoor European tax on Americans, dressed up as “safety regulation.”

Alaskans, who travel more than most Americans, may feel the chill of these laws firsthand. Whether you’re checking in with loved ones from overseas, posting a hunting photo, or weighing in on US politics while on a tour of Europe, you could suddenly find yourself muzzled by regulations you never voted for. The ripple effect doesn’t stop when you return home: If companies adjust their global content policies to appease Europe, the same restrictions will apply to your account right here in Alaska.

Europe’s own economy is stagnant. Its leaders, rather than fixing real problems like immigration and growth, have doubled down on censorship. They want to silence critics and export their broken policies to us. We cannot let that happen. This is an opportunity for our own delegation in Washington to weigh in, in order to protect our constitutional rights.

Free speech is the foundation of America. It’s why our ideas thrive and our democracy endures. The Trump Administration is right to put this fight at the top of the agenda, and Congress must keep up the pressure.

The First Amendment doesn’t stop at the water’s edge — and neither should our defense of it.

Suzanne Downing is founder and editor of Must Read Alaska.

Suzanne Downing: Arabella still pulls the strings as left-wing money machine controlling Alaska

Suzanne Downing: ‘We didn’t vote for Musk,’ the Left said. Turns out, he was never in charge