Saturday, July 26, 2025
Home Blog Page 13

Alexander Dolitsky: World War II altered the American diet, and we grew larger

By ALEXANDER DOLITSKY

Without a doubt, Lend-Lease food proved vital to the maintenance of adequate nutrition levels for Soviets and other Lend-Lease beneficiaries. In 1944, 2% of the United States’ food supply was exported to the Soviet Union, 4% to other 42 Lend-Lease recipients, 1% to commercial exports, and 13% to the 12 million in the United States military who participated in the war between 1941 and 1945.

This aid was made possible due to sacrifices made by the American people and an enormous increase in American agricultural and industrial production—up 280% by 1944 over the 1935–39 average.

About $11 billion in war materials and other supplies were shipped to the Soviet Union from the United States over four major routes between 1941 and 1945. In addition to military equipment, the USSR received non-military items like cigarettes, records, women’s compacts, fishing tackle, dolls, playground equipment, cosmetics, food, and even 13,328 sets of false teeth.

Soviet requests for food emphasized canned meat (tushonka), fats, dried peas and beans, potato chips, powdered soups and eggs, dehydrated fruits and vegetables, and other packaged food items. Dehydration, which made shipping food to the Soviet Union possible under the program, led to a rapid expansion of American dehydrating facilities, which eventually influenced the domestic market and the diet of American people in the post-war period until today.

Lend-Lease accounts show that, in 1945 alone, about 5,100,000 tons of foodstuffs left for the Soviet Union from the United States; that year, the Soviets’ own total agricultural output reached approximately 53,500,000 tons.

If the 12 million individual members of the Soviet Army received all the foodstuffs that arrived in the USSR through Lend-Lease deliveries from the United States, each man and woman would have been supplied with more than half a pound of concentrated food per day for the duration of the war.

Post-World War II changes in food production, supply and dietary guidelines were significantly influenced by wartime rationing, technological advancements and changing consumer preferences. The war led to rationing and shifts in food availability, while also spurring the development of new food technologies and influencing consumer preferences. These factors, combined with the rise of food marketing, dramatically altered the American diet.

Rationing to ensure equitable distribution of scarce resources significantly impacted food availability and consumption patterns. Rationing of items like sugar, coffee, meat, and butter altered what foods were readily available and how they were prepared. Rationing encouraged the use of less expensive cuts of meat and the creation of recipes that stretched the available meat supply, such as meatloaf and stuffed peppers. Frozen food, previously not widely adopted, gained traction during the war due to rationing and the need for longer-lasting food storage.

New technologies developed during the war in food preservation and packaging led to the rise of industrially processed foods. Convenience foods became more prevalent as the emphasis shifted towards ease of preparation and speed; however, often at the expense of nutritional value. Home appliances like refrigerators and freezers became more common, further impacting food storage and preparation methods.

Exposure to new and different cuisines during the war expanded American palates and led to the adoption of new flavors, dishes and changing consumer preferences. Subsequently, food companies invested heavily in advertising and marketing, influencing consumers’ food choices and creating demand for processed foods. The rise of chain restaurants and fast food further altered eating habits, emphasizing speed and convenience over nutritional value.

In summary, the post-war period saw a complex interplay of factors that dramatically changed the American diet and the way we approach food today. Rationing during the war, technological advancements in food production and supply, and evolving scientific understanding of nutrition all contributed to the shift towards a more processed and convenience-driven food culture. This, in turn, led to the development of dietary guidelines that emphasized nutrient adequacy and, eventually, the prevention of chronic diseases.

The negative outcome of the post-war food production and supply have been an undeniable obesity of the American population of all ages, ethnicities and social groups. Two dramatic examples can be found in architectural changes. Due to changes in the food production in post-war America, enhancements were required in the seats of two iconic American venues—the Lincoln and Ford Theatres in Washington D.C. This was a direct result of a rapid enlargement and obesity of the American population.

The Lincoln Theatre is a historic venue that opened in 1922 and was once a hub for entertainment. The Theatre has undergone several renovations throughout its history, with significant work done in the 1990s and more recently in the 2020s. These renovations aimed to restore the historic theater of the 1920s, enhance accessibility, and improve amenities for both patrons and performers. One of the key renovations and improvements included installing new, enhanced and cushioned seats suitable for today’s enlarged American audience.

Similar seat renovations took place in the Ford Theatre; the original chairs were replaced with larger, more modern seats in the late 1970s and early 1980s because the original replicas were deemed too small and uncomfortable by audiences. The original chairs in Ford’s Theatre, installed in 1865, were cane-bottomed, high-backed wooden chairs. These were replaced with replicas in 1968 during the restoration. The replica chairs were found to be uncomfortable, leading to their replacement with larger, more modern seats in the late 70s/early 80s. They are significantly larger 1900s-style chairs from another theater, installed in 2009-2010 to accommodate today’s Americans.

Alexander Dolitsky was born and raised in Kiev in the former Soviet Union. He received an M.A. in history from Kiev Pedagogical Institute, Ukraine in 1976; an M.A. in anthropology and archaeology from Brown University in 1983; and enrolled in the Ph.D. program in anthropology at Bryn Mawr College from 1983 to 1985, where he was also lecturer in the Russian Center. In the USSR, he was a social studies teacher for three years and an archaeologist for five years for the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences. In 1978, he settled in the United States. Dolitsky visited Alaska for the first time in 1981, while conducting field research for graduate school at Brown. He then settled first in Sitka in 1985 and then in Juneau in 1986. From 1985 to 1987, he was U.S. Forest Service archaeologist and social scientist. He was an Adjunct Assistant Professor of Russian Studies at the University of Alaska Southeast from 1985 to 1999; Social Studies Instructor at the Alyeska Central School, Alaska Department of Education and Yukon-Koyukuk School District from 1988 to 2006; and Director of the Alaska-Siberia Research Center from 1990 to 2022. From 2006 to 2010, Alexander Dolitsky served as a Delegate of the Russian Federation in the United States for the Russian Compatriots program. He has done 30 field studies in various areas of the former Soviet Union (including Siberia), Central Asia, South America, Eastern Europe and the United States (including Alaska). Dolitsky was a lecturer on the World Discoverer, Spirit of Oceanus, and Clipper Odyssey vessels in the Arctic and Sub-Arctic regions. He was a Project Manager for the WWII Alaska-Siberia Lend Lease Memorial, which was erected in Fairbanks in 2006. Dolitsky has published extensively in the fields of anthropology, history, archaeology and ethnography. His more recent publications include Fairy Tales and Myths of the Bering Strait Chukchi, Ancient Tales of KamchatkaTales and Legends of the Yupik Eskimos of SiberiaOld Russia in Modern America: Living Traditions of the Russian Old Believers in AlaskaAllies in Wartime: The Alaska-Siberia Airway During World War IISpirit of the Siberian Tiger: Folktales of the Russian Far EastLiving Wisdom of the Russian Far East: Tales and Legends from Chukotka and Alaska, and Pipeline to Russia: The Alaska-Siberia Air Route in World War II.

Kevin McCabe: Anchorage lost 7,000 students. Here’s where they went and why

By REP. KEVIN MCCABE

Alaska’s education system is broken, and families know it. Anchorage is losing roughly 1,000 students per year, dropping from 49,243 in 2010 to 42,353 in 2024.

This, as much as anything, is what is affecting their budget. Parents are fleeing a rigid, bureaucratic system in favor of options that reflect their values and their children’s needs. Mat-Su is growing because it delivers those options: Charter schools, correspondence programs, and hands-on technical education.

This is not just a demographic trend, it is a grassroots rebellion against a failing, one-size-fits-all education model.

As John Taylor Gatto explains in Weapons of Mass Instruction, the 19th-century Prussian school model was designed for obedience, not excellence. That structure still dominates Alaska’s public education system today, enforced by a single-authorizer charter model and protected by one of the most powerful political forces in our state: the National Education Association.

Samuel Blumenfeld exposed this in NEA: Trojan Horse in American Education, showing how the NEA operates not as a professional organization but as a political machine. In Alaska, the NEA has a stranglehold on public education policy, controlling school boards, lobbying legislators, funding campaigns, and opposing every meaningful reform to empower parents.

Nowhere is that more obvious than in Alaska’s single-authorizer system for charter schools. Right now, only school districts can approve charters. That means innovation depends on the approval of the same political bodies threatened by change. Schools like Fronteras Spanish Immersion have long waitlists and operate out of inadequate facilities while demand soars.

Meanwhile, a 2025 lawsuit, almost certainly influenced by NEA-backed interests, is challenging the ability of families to use correspondence allotments for private education expenses. This is a direct attack on parental rights and a deliberate effort to shut down educational alternatives.

Milton Friedman offered the right solution back in 1955 in The Role of Government in Education. The state should fund education and set standards, but it should not dictate where a child learns or how. Parents, not politicians or union bosses, should choose the school. That vision is alive in the Mat-Su Borough School District. With nearly 20,000 students, Mat-Su offers families charter schools, CTE programs, and public correspondence options. Mat-Su Central School alone serves more than 3,000 students and offers $3,000 allotments that families use for custom learning: from violin lessons to coding boot camps.

Mat-Su’s charters outperform the district average. Fronteras has 50% reading proficiency compared to 34% district-wide. In 2024, Mat-Su charter schools achieved a 92% graduation rate, far above the 78 percent state average. In 2024, 74 percent of Mat-Su voters supported a $58 million bond to expand charter school facilities. Parents are not just choosing Mat-Su, they are investing in it. Meanwhile, over 10,000 Alaskan students have moved into correspondence programs in the last 25 years. Another 5,080 have left the public system altogether to attend private schools, often paying upwards of $14,903 per year. These families are voting with their feet and their checkbooks.

Mat-Su’s success goes beyond choice. Mat-Su Career and Technical High School (CTHS) offers eight career pathways and over 40 certifications, including Microsoft, Cisco, and OSHA. Its graduation rate is 98.67%. Chronic absenteeism is just 8% , compared to 25% statewide. When education is relevant, students show up and succeed.

Nationwide, Friedman’s free-market vision is winning. Thirty-two states and Washington, D.C. now offer private choice through vouchers, ESAs, or tax-credit scholarships, serving more than one million students. From 2021 to 2025, universal voucher programs expanded from zero to thirteen states, spending $4 billion in the 2023–24 school year.

The federal Educational Choice for Children Act would add $5 billion in tax credits for scholarships. These reforms prove that competition works. In Alaska, opponents raise concerns about accountability, noting that 86 percent of correspondence students opt out of state testing. But those programs undergo curriculum reviews and financial audits every year. So, let’s not limit a great program because of a perceived lack of accountability. Let’s test the kids and find out how well they are doing…. Or maybe the NEA, the AASB, and ACSA do not want to know how well correspondence is working?

Critics claim school choice drains public resources. That is false. Charter schools and correspondence programs are tuition-free, public, and audited. The 2025 lawsuit against allotments ignores the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), which upheld parent-directed funding models. If financial equity is the concern, Alaska can require private schools that accept allotments to have transparent admissions practices. Arizona’s voucher program showed that 75% of recipients were already in private school, so yes, Alaska should ensure access for low-income and rural families. 

To move forward, Alaska must take four key steps:

  1. Establish a State-Level Authorizer Board
    Create an independent board by 2026 to approve at least ten new charters in underserved regions like Bethel and Nome.
  2. Protect Allotments
    Defend parent-directed correspondence school funding against NEA-backed lawsuits and political attacks.
  3. Expand the Mat-Su Model
    Fund a pilot program to replicate Mat-Su’s correspondence and CTE programs in rural communities using existing grant dollars.
  4. Enhance Equity
    Provide transportation stipends and scale allotments to support low-income families with school choice statewide.

These steps will break the NEA’s stranglehold, return power to parents, and deliver a market-driven education system that works. Gatto, Blumenfeld, and Friedman warned us what happens when education is centralized, and unions control the system. Mat-Su shows us what happens when parents take the wheel.

Alaska’s children do not belong to the state, and they are not property of the union. They belong to families, and it is time we trusted those families to choose what’s best for their kids’ education.

Rep. Kevin McCabe serves in the Alaska Legislature on behalf of Big Lake.

Interior Dept. targets Deep Staters with revived Trump-era essay questions for new hires

Job applicants to the US Department of the Interior will soon face a revamped hiring process that includes essay questions, part of an effort to align federal personnel more closely with presidential priorities and weed out the deep staters.

An internal memo circulated last week by the department’s human capital office outlines the integration of the questions as part of a broader merit-based hiring plan, rather than the diversity-mandated hiring strategy of the Biden Administration. Applicants must write four 200-word essays addressing their work ethic, skills and experience, commitment to the Constitution, and how they would advance President Trump’s executive orders and policy priorities. The last item has earned the scorn of anti-Trumpers.

The essay component originates from a federal hiring overhaul launched in 2020 under Trump 1, to modernize civil service recruitment. Led by the Office of Personnel Management, the initiative emphasized practical skills over traditional educational credentials and sought to streamline the hiring process through shorter resumes and competency-based evaluations. The OPM has directed agencies to stop collecting demographic data on race, sex, and religion in the workforce.

While some civil service reform advocates have praised the plan, deep staters are wringing their hands about their chances to infiltrate government agencies.

Judge from Nome draws reprimand from judicial conduct commission

Alaska Superior Court Judge Romano DiBenedetto of Nome, appointed by former Gov. Bill Walker in 2017, has been recommended for a public reprimand by the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct, following findings that he breached judicial conduct standards both inside and outside the courtroom.

In the first incident in which he was charged, Judge DiBenedetto presided over a motion hearing in Unalakleet on Jan. 8, 2024, after regular work hours. The Commission found he arrived nearly one hour late, reportedly because he had been watching a televised sports event. The College Football Playoff National Championship was that afternoon, with the Michigan Wolverines and Washington Huskies.

He later claimed he was “getting lost.” But the delay was deemed a breach of Canons 2A and 3A of the Alaska Court System’s policies.

The second incident involved the way, in the presence of court staff, DiBenedetto had a habit of discussing and reenacting courtroom testimony, sometimes mimicking voices or comments of individuals belonging to ethnic groups other than his own. Typically this would mean mimicking Native Alaskans’ way of speaking in rural parts of the region. This conduct was found to violate Canon 2A and Alaska’s Healthy Workplace Policy by creating an appearance of bias and undermining confidence in the judiciary.

After issuing formal investigation notices on April 9 and another notice on May 22, the Commission conducted special meetings on April 29 and May 28, with DiBenedetto and his counsel present at the April meeting. A unanimous decision was made to move directly to a public hearing, where the Commission accepted agreed findings on June 27 and formally recommended a reprimand on July 3. DiBenedetto put up no fight.

The Alaska Supreme Court will make the final determination as to whether to accept the Commission’s recommendation, decide how the reprimand will be delivered, and determine any further action. DeBenedetto has been on paid leave since March.

Read the findings at this link:

EPA, Pebble Mine developer in settlement talks over Biden’s unprecedented pre-emptive veto

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. confirmed last week that it is in active settlement negotiations with the US Environmental Protection Agency, aiming to overturn the federal preemptive veto that has blocked development of the Pebble copper and gold project in Southwest Alaska.

The July 3 filing in US District Court follows a 90-day litigation pause requested by the federal government in February, and a subsequent 30-day extension in May to allow new EPA leadership to review the case. The agency has now concluded its internal review and is engaged in talks with Pebble Limited Partnership, Northern Dynasty’s US subsidiary.

“Agency officials remain open to reconsideration, and defendants and PLP are negotiating to explore a potential settlement,” the EPA’s court filing states. “Those discussions have addressed a potential further submission from PLP that would inform any agency reconsideration.”

Northern Dynasty characterized the development as a significant breakthrough in its long effort to challenge the EPA’s 2023 preemptive veto under Section 404(c) of the Clean Water Act, which barred development of the mine before permitting could be completed.

Ron Thiessen, Northern Dynasty President and CEO, framed the potential reversal as not just a regulatory milestone but a strategic move for the U.S. economy and national defense.

The EPA and Pebble jointly requested an additional 14-day extension of the case’s current abeyance, with a status update due to the court by July 17.

The parties expect to reach agreement within that time on what new information Pebble may submit to support the agency’s reconsideration.

Though the news was released over the July 4 holiday, investor response was swift once markets reopened. Northern Dynasty’s stock jumped nearly 18% in pre-market trading on July 7 and surged to a peak of $2.96 by July 10.

The company received an additional boost from President Donald Trump’s July 8 announcement of a 50% tariff on copper imports — a national security measure aimed at reducing dependence on foreign metals, especially from China.

The action followed a February executive order to review the US copper trade under national security provisions.

Containing an estimated 6.4 billion pounds of copper, 300 million pounds of molybdenum, 7.4 million ounces of gold, 37 million ounces of silver, and 200,000 kilograms of rhenium, the Pebble deposit is one of North America’s most significant untapped sources of critical minerals. Its supporters argue the mine could play a vital role in U.S. energy independence and industrial resilience.

If a settlement is reached and the EPA withdraws its veto, the Pebble project could re-enter the permitting process and that may reignite one of the nation’s most fiercely contested development debates.

Anchorage trying to get little kids to pioneer playing in one of the least safe places in downtown

In what some see as a baffling move, the Anchorage Parks and Recreation Department is promoting a weekly preschool biking event in Town Square Park, a downtown space long associated with drug use, crime, vagrancy, and public safety concerns.

The “Biker Buddies” program is aimed at children ages 3 to 5, and is being held every Tuesday in July from 10 am to 1 pm. Parks and Rec. officials are urging parents to “bring your 3–5-year-old downtown” to participate in what they describe as a fun and confidence-building experience, complete with strider bikes and free helmets courtesy of the Anchorage Health Department.

But Town Square Park, located at 544 W 5th Ave, is not known for tricycle races or family picnics. It’s known for crime, trash, human waste, and open drug use. Families avoid it, not roll into it with toddlers on training wheels.

Last year, city crews responding to complaints about the park found discarded needles, human waste, and violent confrontations on a near-daily basis. Even during broad daylight, park-goers report witnessing stabbings, drug deals, overdoses, and mentally unstable individuals shouting at passersby.

Despite that, Anchorage Parks and Recreation appears to be trying to rebrand the park’s reputation, using Biker Buddies as the vehicle for change. In promotional materials, the department promises a “SPOKE-tacular time” for kids and emphasizes skill-building in a “fun-filled weekly event.”

But the question remains: Why Town Square?

When someone raised the point on Facebook that there are safer places to take children, Parks and Rec replied: “Hey there, we understand your concerns. One of the reasons we host events like this is because the more positive activity a space gets, the safer it becomes. Luckily, this event includes staff members and an APD presence to help families feel safe while enjoying the park.”

In other words, they’re sending the kids in first to pioneer activity in a place that is so unsafe they have to bring in police.

City officials have not directly addressed the safety concerns, nor whether any enhanced security will be provided during the events. But they have removed a lot of trees from the park, as a way to discourage homesteading vagrants.

Parents who are curious about Biker Buddies — and brave enough to expose their children to Town Square Park — can learn more at: www.muni.org/Departments/parks/Pages/BunkerBiking.aspx.

Anchorage workers removed 744,000 pounds of vagrant encampment debris from Davis Park — the weight of a fully loaded Boeing 747-400

The Anchorage Assembly will hold a special meeting Friday, July 11, to take public commentary on a new ordinance that would criminalize unauthorized camping on public property.

This comes just weeks after city crews completed an extraordinary cleanup effort at Davis Park that removed the equivalent weight of a fully loaded Boeing 747.

According to officials, the city hauled out a staggering 744,000 pounds of debris from a long-standing encampment at Davis Park in East Anchorage. The cleanup required 1,914 man-hours of municipal labor, a time and resource investment that has galvanized support among some Assembly members to bring back criminal enforcement tools to address illegal encampments.

While the total cost of the 1,914 labor hours is unknown, a rough calculation using an average city labor cost of $40–$50 per hour (including benefits) puts the clean-up cost at approximately $76,000 to $96,000 — for just one camp.

The proposed ordinance, sponsored by Assembly Members Keith McCormick, Scott Myers, and Jared Goecker, would make it a class B misdemeanor to knowingly camp on public property without permission. It specifically targets conduct, not homeless “status,” in line with the recent US Supreme Court ruling in City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which allows cities to criminalize public camping so long as they target actions rather than conditions.

The Assembly will hold its special session designed for public comment on the ordinance on Friday, July 11, from 1-4 pm in the Loussac Library Assembly Chambers, located at 3600 Denali Street, Room 108. Public testimony will be taken on the ordinance, listed as Item 4.A. on the agenda.

It is anticipated that the Party for Socialism and Liberation will have a strong protest presence.

Full agenda packet available here.

Churches can speak freely. The IRS has confirmed it

By JIM MINNERY | ALASKA FAMILY COUNCIL

As part of a consent judgment filed in a US District Court in Texas on Monday, the US Internal Revenue Service has agreed to release churches from a decades-long prohibition against engagement in “political speech,” referred to as the “Johnson Amendment.”

The judgment, which was accepted by the court, states, “For many houses of worship, the exercise of their religious beliefs includes teaching or instructing their congregations regarding all aspects of life, including guidance concerning the impact of faith on the choices inherent in electoral politics.

For over 70 years, pastors and churches across America were led to believe that speaking about elections, political issues, or candidates from the pulpit or in their ministries could cost their church its tax-exempt status. 

That myth—rooted in the 1954 Johnson Amendment—silenced too many faithful leaders. It created fear. It stifled truth. And it separated the Church from its God-given responsibility to speak clearly in a confused world. 

But this week, the truth finally broke through.

In the filing, the IRS officially acknowledged what we’ve known all along:

Churches can speak into political issues and endorse candidates to their own congregations.

That’s right. According to the IRS itself, houses of worship are free to speak to their people about elections and candidates—boldly, biblically, and without fear. 

Granted, there has and always will be a broad spectrum in terms of how each church chooses to engage in the cultural and political issues of the day but now…there is at least clarity on what can be done.

CLICK HERE for a Q & A Factsheet for Pastors and Church Leaders regarding the IRS Ruling

The judgment also notes that, “When a house of worship in good faith speaks to its congregation, through its customary channels of communication on matters of faith in connection with religious services, concerning electoral politics viewed through the lens of religious faith, it neither “participate[s]” nor “intervene[s]” in a “political campaign,” within the ordinary meaning of those words. … Bona fide communications internal to a house of worship, between the house of worship and its congregation, in connection with religious services, do neither of those things, any more than does a family discussion concerning candidates. Thus, communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted.”

It is widely understood that through this action, the IRS is conceding that it will no longer seek to enforce Johnson Amendment restrictions on churches, including involvement in political campaigns, endorsement of political candidates, and other engagement in political speech, as long as those communications are “from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith.

The irony? This has long been the IRS’s unspoken policy—but the deception was allowed to stand. Many churches believed the myth of “separation of church and state” meant silence in the pulpit. But that was never true. And now the law agrees. We’ve long said the Church is not the problem—it’s the solution. And now, more than ever, the Church must lead with clarity, courage, and truth.

No more fear. No more confusion. For those pastors and churches wanting to engage Biblically in being salt and light in the public policy arena,  Alaska Family Council stands ready to help them speak clearly and courageously. Because in a culture that is confused, clarity is compassion—and silence really shouldn’t be an option.

Jim Minnery is president of Alaska Family Council.

Lisa Murkowski wrote a memoir; Amazon reviewers wrote the brutal roast

Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s new memoir Far From Home has hit Amazon’s virtual shelves two weeks ago, but judging from early reviews, it’s less literary triumph and more fodder for political poundings.

The book, billed as a reflection on her career and life outside of Alaska, is averaging a lukewarm three out of five stars out of 46 reviews, with reader responses ranging from glowing praise to brutal takedowns. Murkowski, it seems, is as polarizing as figure as they come.

For every admirer hailing Murkowski as a principled moderate standing firm in chaotic times, there are two others slamming the book as a self-serving vanity project from a senator who long ago lost touch with her state.

One reviewer calls it “a memoir no one asked for,” while another praises it as an “authentic view of our confusing state of the union.”

Even among Alaskans, reactions are split — and the reviews reveal as much about the senator’s uneasy standing in today’s political climate as they do about the content of the book itself. It is not knowable that any of the reviewers have actually read the book, but it’s clear that they have opinions about the author.

Here are a few of the reader reviews, starting with the most brutal:

1.0 out of 5 stars A Memoir No One Asked For, From a Senator Who Forgot What “Home” Even Means

Reading Far From Home feels less like diving into the life of a stateswoman and more like being stranded in a tundra of mediocrity, political cowardice, and recycled platitudes. If Lisa Murkowski’s goal was to produce a book as forgettable as her Senate career, she’s succeeded with flying colors.

Murkowski opens her book with tales of Alaska — majestic landscapes, hardy people, and her “deep connection” to the land. One would think this might be a love letter to her state. Instead, it reads more like the passive-aggressive Yelp review of a failed guest at a wilderness Airbnb. She speaks of independence, but governs like a windsock in a snowstorm — always shifting, never standing.

The writing is wooden, uninspired, and oozes with the polished sterility of a D.C. PR intern trying to punch up a farewell letter no one will read. You’d expect insight into the inner workings of Congress, perhaps reflections on integrity or leadership. What you get instead is a lukewarm defense of being permanently noncommittal — a political Switzerland with none of the chocolate or precision.

Her attempts at “courageous centrism” are as hollow as her prose. Murkowski brands herself a maverick, but her book shows she’s more like the Senate’s beige wallpaper: technically present, occasionally noticed, but never essential. She pats herself on the back for being the last moderate Republican, all while playing both sides so expertly that you forget what her actual principles are — if any ever existed.

Even in recounting moments of national importance, her tone remains as bland and detached as her voting record. Roe v. Wade? Climate change? Jan. 6? Murkowski spins each moment into a PR-safe lullaby, carefully avoiding anything that might accidentally resemble conviction.

As for the title, Far From Home, it’s tragically accurate. Murkowski has been politically adrift for years — unmoored from her constituents, her party, and evidently, any literary talent. It’s less a memoir and more a 250-page justification for being a career placeholder.

In short: Far From Home is a tedious, self-congratulatory dirge from a politician who mistook indecision for leadership and a Word doc for a memoir. If you’re looking for political insight, moral courage, or literary skill — keep looking. Lisa Murkowski may have been born in Alaska, but based on this book, she left her soul somewhere inside the Beltway and never bothered to go back.

Avoid at all costs — unless you need a coaster for your lukewarm coffee.

Another 1-star review:

1.0 out of 5 stars Lisa Murkowski: Alaska’s Most Politely Disappointing Senator

If you’ve ever wondered what political cowardice looks like in a fleece vest and pearls, look no further than Senator Lisa Murkowski — Alaska’s long-reigning champion of “talk tough, vote soft.” This book offers a front-row seat to the slow-motion tightrope act of a politician trying to balance between pretending to resist Trump while still making sure she doesn’t upset dear leader.

This isn’t just a political autobiography — it’s a case study in how to keep a straight face while selling out your state. The book traces Murkowski’s latest pivot: positioning herself as a “voice of reason” while cashing in on book deals, media profiles, and whatever lobbying gig is surely waiting just offstage.

Spoiler alert: Alaska deserves better than a senator who markets herself as an independent maverick, but folds faster than a cheap camping chair the moment real pressure shows up.

Recommended if you like political theater, slow betrayals, and the word “concerned” used as a cover for spinelessness.

1.0 out of 5 stars All Talk

Senator Murkowski in her recent interview on All Things Considered says “But when people stop believing in the integrity of their institutions. That’s when I think there is fear about the fundamentals of our democracy.

It’s when you stop speaking up that those of us who are in a position to listen start to think, ‘Well, maybe your silence means you think everything is OK.’

And if you don’t think it’s OK. It is your obligation to speak up.”

But according to 5calls, she received thousands of calls to vote no on the Budget Reconciliation Bill, just from that one app alone. Yet she voted yes.

She tells us to get involved, tells us we need more moderates, and then gets bullied by Republicans to support Trump as he only helps the wealthy, not her constituents.

Why would you read an entire book by her, when she says one thing but does another?

Here’s one of the five-star reviews:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Must Read

This is a well written and authentic view of our confusing state of the union. Lisa is one of the few republicans who have the courage to stand against our current administration, knowing how destructive it is, and how it has become the driving force for the destruction of our democracy!
Thank You Lisa Murkowski

And then there was a 5-star review from Marilyn Romano, an Alaskan with political ties galore:

5.0 out of 5 stars Great leader for the 49th State!

Lisa is authentic, with a deep-rooted love of Alaska. This book reflects her values, her drive, and her passion for doing what’s right for the people of this great state. Read this book. You won’t be disappointed.

5.0 out of 5 stars Worthwhile, inspiring read

Just bought a second copy to share. In these stressful political times, this is great advice to encourage ordinary people to work for change. As an Alaskan, it brought back some laugh-out-loud memories of some of our crazier campaigns, too!

4.0 out of 5 stars A Difficult Balancing Act

I generally avoid writing reviews of books written by politicians. Usually, they are thinly veiled attempts to justify their own votes while frequently aiming for higher office.
The starkly divided reviews on Lisa Murkowski’s “Far From Home” illustrate my point. Some readers love it, and some readers hate it.
This review is from someone who doesn’t know Murkowski any better than the other 100 senators now serving. I was drawn to the book by an interview I heard in which she described her efforts at a write-in campaign when her Trump-backed opponent won the Republican primary in Alaska.
It is incredibly difficult to win a write-in election, especially one that is state-wide. The fact that Murkowski was able to do that is a major accomplishment and drew me to the book.
It is apparent that Murkowski loves Alaska. I’ve only visited as a tourist on a couple of occasions but can see how anyone would fall in love with this beautiful state.
Repeatedly during the book, she tells readers that the hard decisions she has made in her political career have been based on what is in the best interests of the people of Alaska. She seems to genuinely care about these residents most of whom are not affluent and frequently lack the basics of a lifestyle we take for granted in the lower 48.
I finished the book about the same time that the Senate voted 51-50 to pass the President’s Big Beautiful Bill. Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote, but Murkowski was instrumental in holding out for special concessions for her state.
My question for Murkowski is how do you balance what is good for your state with what is potentially disastrous for the future fiscal stability of your country? Perhaps her next book will address that question.

But then there are the others…

2.0 out of 5 stars How can anyone be so confused…

Horrible book. Murkowski is obviously dazed and confused. That’s 3 days I’ll never get back.

1.0 out of 5 stars Nepo Murkowski

Lisa speaks of her nepotism via her dad, former Alaskan governor- the power he wielded her- she has now used this power against her constituents she promised to serve. Ms Murkowski admits in interviews -she wrote this book thinking Trump wouldn’t be re-elected. If she is so scared of the bully at the top- she needs to step aside so younger generation can do what she is unable to do.

1.0 out of 5 stars Far from Republican more like it.

As an Alaskan resident, I would not waste a dime on this book. Murkowski’s flip flopping and predominantly siding with democrats makes her a RINO, not a moderate. We Alaskans do not trust her and can’t wait to eliminate ranked choice voting so incumbents like her do not get elected again and again so easily.