Goodbye, McLame! J.D. Hayworth To Jump Into The Republican Primary Race Against Arizona Senator John McCain

With all due respect to Chris Simcox, Arizona's "Forever" Senator John McCain now has a real opponent. It will become official on February 15th, 2010 when former Congressman J.D. Hayworth formally enters the race against McCain, the winner to be decided in Arizona's August 24th primary.

Hayworth served as a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2007 from the 5th District of Arizona. Until recently, he was a radio personality for KFYI, offering provocative political commentary. He is married with three kids.

Hayworth's official campaign website is just coming online right now. His personal website is still HERE. In an article posted February 3rd on RedState, Hayworth provides specific reasons why he's running:

I have the utmost respect and admiration for what John McCain has given to our country over the years. And this election will be about serious policy differences, not personalities. Let me begin by detailing where I think John McCain has gone wrong. For starters, John:

* Voted against the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 (which I helped write), echoing liberal Democratic arguments that they were tax cuts for the rich;
* Voted for an $850 billion bailout for banks and car companies, which was loaded with special interest earmarks totaling $150 billion;
* Proposed spending $300 billion to buy up every bad mortgage in America, which National Review called a “full bailout for lenders” (McCain said he got the idea from Hillary Clinton!);
* Supports a cap and trade scheme that the Wall Street Journal called “an expensive, invasive government bureaucracy” - indeed, McCain once proclaimed, “I don’t know how any conservative cannot support cap and trade;”
* Wrote the campaign finance law just struck down by the Supreme Court that denied free speech rights to groups like the National Rifle Association while carving out an exception for media corporations like the New York Times;
* Opposes drilling in ANWR;
* Opposes the use of the enhanced interrogation techniques that we know prevented at least 4 major terrorist attacks; and
* Helped write an amnesty plan that would let illegal aliens qualify for Social Security and Medicare, and which the Heritage Foundation estimates would cost taxpayers “at least $2.6 trillion.”

Hayworth also answered questions about his campaign at the Arizona Republic. Additional media stories can be found in the Wall Street Journal

According to the New York Times, McCain has already reacted. “Senator McCain takes every race seriously,” said Brian Rogers, a spokesman for McCain's re-election campaign, “and is confident that the voters of Arizona will again return him to office as they have done in the past, and he is working hard to earn their continued support.” At the same time, McCain is scrambling to re-invent himself once again. McCain now sharply criticizes the bailout bill he voted for, pivoted from his earlier position that the Guantanamo Bay detention facility should be closed, offered only a muted response to the Supreme Court’s decision undoing campaign finance laws and backed down from statements that gays in the military would be O.K. by him if the military brass were on board.

One question: Did Hayworth wait too long to jump in? In November 2009, a Rasmussen poll showed a virtual dead heat between McCain (45 percent) and Hayworth (43 percent). But a January 2010 Rasmussen poll, taken after Sarah Palin announced her intent to campaign for McCain, showed McCain opening up a 53-31 lead. Sometimes you have to strike while the iron is hot. Arizonans must hope Hayworth didn't wait until after the iron cooled down. Hayworth did pick up a powerful endorsement from Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, though.

John McCain will be a tough nut to crack. The help of all conservatives is necessary. You can contribute online via his campaign website, or contribute via snail mail, send check or money order payable to JD 2010 to:

JD 2010
P.O. Box 28604
Scottsdale, Arizona 85255

A Poll You May Have Missed: Public Policy Polling Shows Alaska Congressman Don Young Leading Democratic Challenger Harry Crawford 49-34 Percent

Don't feel bad - I missed it too, and so did the Alaska media. But Swing State Project revealed on February 1st that Public Policy Polling conducted a poll of Alaskans in late January, and found that Alaska's incumbent forever Congressman Don Young is leading Democratic challenger Harry Crawford, 49 percent to 34 percent.

The poll surveyed 710 Alaska voters on January 27-28, inquiring about attitudes towards Don Young, Lisa Murkowski, and Barack Obama. This is actually part of the same poll which asked Alaskans about their gubernatorial preferences and their attitude towards Sarah Palin, but these results were released separately. In the case of the first two, the poll asked how respondents felt about their job performances, and then asked respondents who they would vote for. In the case of Obama, the poll merely asked respondents to rate his job performance. Read the raw poll results with all crosstabs HERE. Pertinent highlights below:

Do you approve or disapprove of Congressman Don Young’s job performance?
-- Approve: 43 percent
-- Disapprove: 41 percent
-- Not Sure: 15 percent

If the candidates for Congress this fall were Democrat Harry Crawford and Republican Don Young, who would you vote for?
-- Harry Crawford: 34 percent
-- Don Young: 49 percent
-- Undecided: 17 percent

Additional notes: The poll also stratified responses by political orientation, gender, age group, and race (White vs. Non-White). Don Young is positive among both Republicans and Independents, only negative among Democrats. Independent voters are necessary to put a candidate over the top in Alaska. The poll also shows that Young enjoys greater approval among non-Whites (47 percent) than Whites (42 percent), although both groups would be equally likely to vote for Young. The significance of this, combined with the facts that Young was married to an Alaska Native and that Bush Alaska contains a higher percentage of Natives, is that Don Young owns Bush Alaska. Harry Crawford cannot expect to make serious headway in Bush Alaska, so if he's to defeat Don Young, he'll have to do it in the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska.

Senator Lisa Murkowski was matched up against a non-specified "generic Democrat" for this poll:

Do you approve or disapprove of Senator Lisa Murkowski’s job performance?
-- Approve: 52 percent
-- Disapprove: 36 percent
-- Not Sure: 12 percent

Generally speaking this fall will you vote for Republican Lisa Murkowski or her Democratic opponent?
-- Lisa Murkowski: 52 percent
-- Generic Dem: 25 percent
-- Undecided: 23 percent

Additional notes: As expected, Lisa Murkowski is strongest among males and older people. But Murkowski is more electable among Whites (53 percent would vote for her) than among non-Whites (46 percent would vote for her), although the approval rate among both groups is almost identical. This shows that Murkowski's defense of no-bid contracting for Native corporations may not necessarily help garner her more of the Native vote.

By the way, Lisa Murkowski does have an official opponent. Frank Vondersaar is once again providing the Democratic opposition. Vondersaar's campaign website is HERE; he's a perennial candidate who generally spends his campaign time bitching about having been involuntarily separated from the military after 15 years and complaining about "fascism".

And finally, the poll asked respondents about their attitude towards Barack Obama:

Do you approve or disapprove of Barack Obama’s job performance?
-- Approve: 37 percent
-- Disapprove: 56 percent
-- Not Sure: 8 percent

Additional notes: Obama enjoys considerable more support among non-Whites and females than he does among Whites and males. No big surprise, huh?

YouTube Video: Dr. David Duke Explains How Holocaust Survivor Dr. Hajo Meyer Became Tagged As An "Anti-Semite"

Dr. Hajo Meyer is a Holocaust survivor who has come to see disturbing parallels between the way German Nazis behaved toward Jews during World War II and Israeli behavior towards Palestinians at the present time. While he acknowledges that Israel's behavior is nowhere near as destructive, having lived through the Holocaust itself, he senses the same motives. He recently published a book entitled "The End Of Judaism: An Ethical Tradition Betrayed".

Dr. Meyer further explained his observations in a January 27th Huffington Post column. The following excerpt cuts to the heart of the issue:

I am pained by the parallels I observe between my experiences in Germany prior to 1939 and those suffered by Palestinians today. I cannot help but hear echoes of the Nazi mythos of "blood and soil" in the rhetoric of settler fundamentalism which claims a sacred right to all the lands of biblical Judea and Samaria. The various forms of collective punishment visited upon the Palestinian people -- coerced ghettoization behind a "security wall"; the bulldozing of homes and destruction of fields; the bombing of schools, mosques, and government buildings; an economic blockade that deprives people of the water, food, medicine, education and the basic necessities for dignified survival -- force me to recall the deprivations and humiliations that I experienced in my youth. This century-long process of oppression means unimaginable suffering for Palestinians.

Dr. Meyer has become associated with the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN), a means for many -- including young Jews in the United States -- to challenge the precepts of Zionism and support the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel. Their goal is NOT to challenge the existence of Israel, but merely to challenge the dispossession and exclusivity of a Jewish state. They understand the urgency of the classical Jewish concept of teshuvah, return from the wrong road.

As a result, Dr, Meyer, despite being a Holocaust survivor, has been labeled an "anti-Semite". When the Scottish Palestinian Solidarity Campaign and IJAN joined to organize a UK tour with Dr. Hajo Meyer, the UK Government-sponsored Holocaust Memorial Day Trust disavowed it and refused to have anything to do with it. But as Dr. Meyer himself says, "once an anti-Semite was a person who hated Jews, but nowadays it is a person hated by Jews.” Ex-Israel Minister Shulamit Aloni once confessed to journalist Amy Goodman that calling someone anti-Semite is a trick they always use to stifle criticism.

One of the leading Gentile experts on Jewish supremacism, Dr. David Duke, has taken note of Dr. Meyer's travails. He delivers his commentary on the situation in the video embedded below. Dr. Duke also refers to an article entitled "Auschwitz survivor: Israel acts like Nazis", published January 24th in the Herald Scotland:



Other videos by Dr. Duke can be viewed HERE. Dr. Duke further discusses this video on this Stormfront thread.

A local scribe, Alaska Voices columnist Geoff Kennedy, has been subjected to similar criticism for attempting to provide a balanced perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Kennedy, who is a self-identified liberal, has the temerity to suggest that Israel is not the sole source of morality in the Middle East. He dares to propose that Palestinians are part of the human race and...perish the thought...might even have "rights". And for this he is frequently subject to abuse from neocon commenters.

Nobody suggests that Israel just stand their with their hands behind their backs when Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists launch rockets into Israeli territory. But as long as two peoples continue to fight over this same piece of ground, conflict will continue. Israeli security is absolutely dependent upon Palestinian liberty - one cannot exist without the other. Palestinian aspirations will only be satisfied by a contiguous Palestinian state occupying the bulk of what is called the West Bank, with certain concessions like acknowledging that Jerusalem should be the undivided capital of Israel, but providing for universal religious access to the Temple Mount.

A good source of recurring balanced information about the Middle East is the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA), edited by retired State Department professionals thoroughly steeped in understanding of the conflict.

Alaska State Senator Bettye Davis Sponsors SB109 To Abolish The High School Exit Exam, But Former Students Defend The Exam

Democrats tend to be more obsessed with equality than Republicans. The problem is that some of them seek to dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator in order to attained that cherished "equality".


One such Democrat is Alaska State Senator Bettye Davis (D-East Anchorage). A former Anchorage School Board member, she's been a critic of Alaska's High School Graduation Qualifying Exam (HSGQE), commonly referred to as the "exit exam", complaining that it's "too hard" for too many. The exit exam was conceived in order to restore the value and prestige of a high school diploma, attributes which were diluted by affirmative action, political correctness, and social promotion within our nation's public schools. So just as law school graduates must pass a bar exam in order to get a license to practice law, so our high school students must pass an exit exam to certify that they are indeed high school graduates.

But Senator Davis is more concerned about "self-esteem" and other such psychobabblery than she is about guaranteeing the value of a diploma. So she's taken off the mask and is sponsoring a bill, SB109, that would abolish the exit exam effective July 1st, 2011. Here are the highlights of her reasoning in the sponsor statement:

(1). Lack of need. Senator Davis argues that the state does not need the HSGQE, as the state and all school districts already require many assessment tests to determine student progress and competency. While it's true that school district do administer assessments along the way to determine progress, these are merely progress exams to reduce the chance of a student slipping through the cracks and falling hopelessly behind; they don't hold students accountable. They are not certification exams. In contrast, the HSGQE fulfills the need for a certification exam and holds students accountable.

(2). Too many failures. Senator Davis reports that in 2007, over 1,100 students statewide failed to pass the HSGQE after five opportunities, while 8,524 passed. On the other hand, graduation rates have risen since the exit exam requirement took effect in 2004, from 62.9 percent to 67.5 percent in 2009, according to the Department of Education. Much of the reason for failure was initial growing pains with the testing process; the Department of Education and Early Development made adjustments to the tests to simplify them. It should also be noted that the exit exam is not an "all or nothing" proposition; students can first take it as early as the spring semester of the student's first sophomore year, as determined by a given district. This gives ample time to re-test later in their junior or senior year in the event of initial failure.

Sarah Palin Assails Barack Obama's Policies And Proclaims A Second Revolution Before 1,100 Activists At National Tea Party Convention In Nashville

Sarah Palin wound up the three-day National Tea Party Conference in Nashville, Tennessee by declaring that "America is ready for another revolution" and repeatedly assailed President Barack Obama's policies on Saturday February 6th, 2010 before a group of 1,100 tea party activists who coughed up at least $349 a whack (600 of them paid $549 each for the entire conference) to listen to her keynote address. Local media story with Alaskan reaction in the Anchorage Daily News. Other stories from the Nashville Tennessean, ABC News, the Weekly Standard, Fox News, and WorldNetDaily.

Plenty of red meat for the activists had already been served up by former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo, who ripped John McCain and proclaimed that Barack Obama was elected because of "people who could not even spell the word ’vote’ or say it in English’", and WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah, who renewed his perennial call for Barack Obama to show proof of natural U.S. citizenship. But Palin served up even more when she repeatedly criticized Obama, saying that his big spending agenda has made the country less secure. She characterized Obama's deficit spending as "immoral" and "generational theft. Palin also chided Obama for Democratic losses in New Jersey and Virginia governor's races last fall and in a Massachusetts Senate race last month, saying that he's 0-and-3. But while Palin welcomed tea party activists regardless of their formal political affiliation, she specifically encouraged "tea party"-aligned candidates to compete in GOP primaries, saying, "Contested primaries aren't civil war; they're democracy at work and that's beautiful."

C-Span has made a video of the entire speech, to include the Q&A at the end, available:



Palin didn't indicate whether her political future would extend beyond cable news punditry and paid speeches to an actual presidential candidacy. All she offered was a smile when a moderator asking her questions used the phrase "President Palin." This ambiguity has given rise to questions as to whether she eventually intends to be a candidate or merely wants to be a celebrity. Various polls indicate Sarah Palin is taken just as seriously as a candidate by Republicans as Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.

There was one note of discord, though. The Tennessee Tea Party Coalition, which formed independently of the National Tea Party, criticized the National Tea Party for charging so much money to attend the national conference. They characterized the national group as "a bunch of snakes", and said it is fishy, at best, to have such a large amount of money involved for a movement that is of this nature. The Tennessee group packs a punch as it claims a membership of 18,000 people scattered among 34 local Tea Party organizations. There was also a brief flare-up between Joseph Farah and Andrew Breitbart over the "birther" issue; Breitbart thinks it's a loser, while Farah wants to keep it front and center.

In response to this criticism, it should be noted that the intent of the conference organizers was not to throw the door open to every Tom, Dick, and Harriet on the street. They envisioned that the various tea party organizations would select the best of their numbers to attend the convention, and to raise money locally if necessary to help defray the expenses of attending. Sarah Palin has already said she will plow her $100,000 fee back into the movement.

E-Mails Show Todd Palin Was "Shadow Governor" In Sarah Palin's Administration, But MSNBC's Motives Also Under Scrutiny

Will the real Governor of Alaska please stand up?

The Anchorage Daily News has picked up on the story from MSNBC about excerpts of a series of e-mails received by MSNBC which seem to indicate that Todd Palin was more than just a "First Dude", instead indicating he could be considered to have been a fully-blown "Shadow Governor" in Sarah Palin's administration. This comes hard on the heels of another controversial story about two of the Palins' remote Alaskan cabins not being included on property tax assessments, although the land beneath was taxed (the issue in dispute is whether or not the Palins had an obligation to inform the borough of the existence of the cabins, so the borough could UPDATE its assessments). But MSNBC's motives in pursuing and releasing this information, to include the timing of the release, are being called into question as well.

The e-mails have been organized into a collection by Crivella West and can be accessed at the following link:

http://palinemail.crivellawest.net/

According to MSNBC, the 1,200 separate e-mails covering 3,000 pages released this week "draw a picture of a Palin administration where the governor's husband got involved in a judicial appointment, monitored contract negotiations with public employee unions, received background checks on a corporate CEO, added his approval or disapproval to state board appointments and passed financial information marked "confidential" from his oil company employer to a state attorney". The subject lines of those e-mails provide a snapshot of how the Palins divvied up their responsibilities when she became governor in December 2006, less than two years before Republican Sen. John McCain pulled her onto the national political stage by nominating her as his vice presidential candidate.

In addition, 243 other e-mails were withheld by the state under a claim that executive privilege extends to Todd Palin as an unpaid adviser to the government. The court-upheld goal of the policy to allow government officials to make well-informed decisions without being impeded by making public every possible course of action discussed. Serial ethics complainer Andrée McLeod has filed a lawsuit against the state on this issue. In it, she argues that if one private citizen in the state of Alaska can be privy to all these e-mails about the workings of state government, then the state has waived the privilege. But Palin's chief of staff, Michael Nizich, rejected that argument in a denial letter to McLeod's attorney. Nizich said that Todd Palin was not a third-party outsider, but an insider, "an invited advisor and participant in the actual decision-making protected by the privilege." Thus we see a dispute in the interpretation of the First Dude's role; while McLeod is a strict constructionist, Sarah Palin tended to take a broader view.

The Palin camp has responded to this story. Palin attorney Tom Van Flein said in an e-mail Friday to NBC News that Todd Palin's role as an "active advisor" to his wife should come as no surprise "to most Alaskans, and to the millions of people who read "Going Rogue", Palin's autobiography. "Like many married couples, including political 'power couples,' it is common for a spouse to play the role of key advisor to the other spouse," he wrote. "The Palins were no different. Todd Palin had official and unofficial duties, but one thing was clear: he was a key advisor to Governor Palin and involved in her efforts to improve the State of Alaska." Van Flein's full statement is available HERE.

Thomas More Law Center Files Federal Suit To Overturn The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act Based Upon Unconstitutionality

The Thomas More Law Center, a public interest law firm which defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life, announced on February 2nd, 2010 that it has filed a federal lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., challenging the constitutionality of the recently-enacted federal Hate Crimes Act, officially entitled the “Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act”. The Act criminalizes so-called “bias” crimes motivated by a person’s “actual or perceived” “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” and thus elevates those engaged in certain deviant sexual behaviors to a special, protected class of persons under federal law.

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, on behalf of Pastor Levon Yuille, Pastor Rene Ouellette, Pastor James Combs, and Gary Glenn, the president of the American Family Association of Michigan (AFA-Michigan). Read the full story HERE and the 27-page lawsuit HERE.

Other media reports on this development published by WorldNetDaily and CNSNews.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, and a former county prosecutor, explained, “There is no legitimate law enforcement need for this federal law. Of the 1.38 million violent crimes reported in the U.S. by the FBI in 2008, only 243 were considered as motivated by the victim’s sexual orientation. Moreover, Eric Holder himself testified at a Senate hearing that the states are doing a fine job in this area.” Thompson believes the ultimate purpose of this law is to criminalize the Bible and use the threat of federal prosecutions and long jail sentences to silence Christians from expressing their Biblically-based religious belief that homosexual conduct is a sin. He also contends it elevates those persons who engage in deviant sexual behaviors, including pedophiles, to a special protected class of persons as a matter of federal law and policy.

Why does the Thomas More Law Center consider the Hate Crimes Act unconstitutional? The lawsuit alleges that this new provision of the law violates the plaintiffs’ rights to freedom of speech, expressive association, and free exercise of religion protected by the First Amendment, and it violates the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment. The lawsuit also alleges that Congress lacked authority to enact the legislation under the Tenth Amendment and the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.

The lawsuit expresses concern that the Hate Crimes Act “provides law enforcement with authorization and justification to conduct federal investigative and other federal law enforcement actions against Plaintiffs and others deemed to be opponents of homosexual activism, the homosexual lifestyle, and the homosexual agenda,” thereby expanding “the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other federal law enforcement and intelligence gathering agencies.”

Consequently, the new hate crimes law “subjects Plaintiffs to increased government scrutiny, questioning, investigation, surveillance, and intimidation on account of their strong, public opposition to homosexual activism, the homosexual lifestyle, and the homosexual agenda, thereby causing a tangible and concrete deterrent, inhibitory, and chilling effect on Plaintiffs’ activities and their rights to freedom of speech, expressive association, and the free exercise of religion” in violation of the United States Constitution.

The Law Center could also argue that any need for "hate crimes legislation" is already amply covered by individual state laws. The Anti-Defamation League reveals that Wyoming is the only state without any laws or avenues of legal redress for hate crimes. Ironically, the ADL was one of the most vocal champions of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Law.

Alaska Among 34 States Seeking To Ban Mandatory Health Insurance As Prescribed Through "Obamacare"

An Associated Press story published February 1st, 2010 in the Salt Lake Tribune details legislative attempts in 34 states to stop federal health care legislation that would effectively force all Americans to buy health insurance, even though the proposed Federal legislation, tagged as "Obamacare" because of Barack Obama's enthusiastic support for it, appears to have stalled and may end up being derailed. Specifically, the mandate is incorporated into the separate bills passed by the U.S. House and Senate. It would impose a penalty on people who don't have health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. Subsidies would be provided to low-income and middle-income households. The intent of the mandate is to expand the pool of people who are insured and paying premiums and thus offset the increased costs of insuring those with preexisting conditions or other risks.

In general, the various state proposals would assert a state-based right for people to pay medical bills from their own pocketbooks and prohibit penalties against those who refuse to carry health insurance. A complete list of all states pursuing this legislation is available at the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) website. ALEC's Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act has served as model legislation for these efforts.

Alaska is one of the 34 states attempting to stop the Federal mandate. The bill. designated HJR35, proposes amendments to the Alaska State Constitution prohibiting passage of laws that interfere with direct payments for health care services and the right to purchase health care insurance from a privately owned company, and that compel a person to participate in a health care system. The primary sponsor is Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Fairbanks); co-sponsors include Rep. Wes Keller (R-Wasilla), Rep. Peggy Wilson (R-Wrangell), Rep. Carl Gatto (R-Palmer), and Rep. Jay Ramras (R-Fairbanks). Read the full text of HJR35 HERE.

Ironically, there's also SB61, a bill sponsored by Senator Hollis French (D-Anchorage) that, if passed, would force all Alaskans to buy health insurance. However, this bill has received no traction in previous legislative sessions.

Supporters of the state measures portray them as a way of defending individual rights and state sovereignty, asserting that the federal government has no authority to tell states and their citizens to buy health insurance. But it's questionable that such the measures could shield state residents from a federal health insurance requirement. "They are merely symbolic gestures," said Michael Dorf, a constitutional law professor at Cornell University. "If this Congress were to pass an individual mandate, and if it is constitutional - which I believe it is - the express rule under the supremacy clause (of the U.S. Constitution) is that the federal law prevails." But the Tenth Amendment Center suggests a Federal health care mandate may be, in and of itself, unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, if the Federal government implements "Obamacare" with a mandate in the face of this widespread grass-roots opposition, it will illustrate the divide that exists between the American people and their Federal representatives.

Anchorage Amputee Travis Gravelle Competes In Adaptive Snocross At The Winter X Games Fourteen In Aspen, Colorado, Finishes Sixth

On February 1st, 2010, the Anchorage Daily News published an LTE from Kathy Hartman, who complained about the lack of media coverage of a local athlete, Travis Gravelle, who has just finished competing in adaptive snocross at the Winter X Games Fourteen held in Aspen, Colorado from January 28-31. Gravelle was one of six athletes chosen to compete in this category; he finished sixth out of six. But he competed - and finished. ESPN described the action as follows:

As the Adaptive SnoCross racers were taking their parade lap, Doug Henry tipped his sled over. Being a paraplegic, Henry could do nothing to upright himself. Amputee Travis Gravelle rushed over to help Henry up. Just a few short minutes later, during the final, Gravelle tried to take Henry on the inside and Henry slammed the door shut. Gravelle went down and his shot at a medal was finished.

It's just one little story demonstrating that despite the camaraderie and respect among these inspiring athletes, they were here to win! Henry went on to pass Jeff Tweet for the bronze medal and apply some pressure to eventual silver medalist, Jim Wazny. Early favorite Mike Schultz took the win, but anyone who has experienced the rigors of SnoCross would classify all of the Adaptive racers as winners.

What is adaptive snocross? It's snowmobile racing for disabled athletes. Each athlete is allowed to modify his snowmobile to compensate for his particular disability. This permits athletes with different disabilities to compete directly against each other. For example, according to this ESPN story, Mike Schultz designed and installed a foot box on his machine so his foot can move back and forth.

And it's this additional research that reveals one reason why Kathy Hartman may have felt particularly motivated to write to ADN. Travis Gravelle is a single amputee. According to Isoracing and Supertrax Magazine, after casing a 110' moto jump in 1989, Travis Gravelle suffered a serious injury to his leg which resulted in 14 surgeries, years of physical therapy and an eventual amputation below the knee in 2001 against the recommendation of his doctors. Gravelle insisted on amputation to allow him to eventually return to extreme sports competition and also to shoot hardcore ride video in the Alaskan backcountry. Boss Racing then decided to participate in the WXG14 inaugural Adapted Snocross feature at Winter X Games Fourteen by sponsoring Gravelle, joining 2008 silver medalist Brett Turcotte as part of the BOSS program. Read Gravelle's ESPN profile HERE.

The Challenge Alaska website provides more information about what Alaskans are doing to open up more recreational and competitive sports opportunities for people with disabilities.