Alaska Justice: Schaeffer Cox Accepts Plea Deal For Misdemeanor Reckless Endangerment, Gets Suspended Sentence

Justice in Alaska can be swift, sure, and proportional, when all parties agree to it. Fairbanks militia leader Schaeffer Cox (pictured at left), originally charged with second-degree felony assault after a brief tussle with his wife during a trip to Anchorage, pleaded guilty on Friday March 5th, 2010 to a reduced charge of reckless endangerment as part of a plea agreement. In addition, Cox was placed on probation for two years and received a one-month suspended sentence, and will also have to attend classes in alternatives to violence. Full story from the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner.

Fairbanks District Attorney Michael Gray said that Cox’s wife wanted the case dismissed or pleaded down to misdemeanor disorderly conduct to help the couple save their marriage. With the case primarily resting on her testimony, it was important to take that into account when deciding how to resolve the case, he said. “While the decision to go forward or not go forward with any case is in the discretion of my office and not the victim, we always try to take the victim’s desires into account when fashioning any resolution,” Gray said.

It turns out that Cox's wife was actually responsible for posting Cox's $3,500 bail as well. Schaeffer Cox appreciates the support he has received over the past week. He said he does not believe conviction will change public opinion about him, and he plans to hold another meeting of the Second Amendment Task Force on Friday March 12th.

Analysis: This turned out to be a win-win situation all the way around. Cox's wife is to be commended for putting the marriage first and accepting her secondary responsibility for provoking the assault in the first place by threatening, in a momentary fit of pique, to leave her husband AND take the kid. No real father can tolerate being cut off from his kid.

Schaeffer Cox is to be commended for taking responsibility for over-reacting to his wife's threat and voluntarily turning himself in once he found out about the warrant against him. He did not attempt to evade or obstruct justice.

D.A. Michael Gray is to be commended for refusing to wipe the slate completely clean and instead proposing a solution that would impose after-the-fact accountability upon Schaeffer Cox without curtailing his right to bear arms or otherwise ruining his life. A felony domestic violence conviction can curtail your right to bear arms. While Cox is clearly a productive, law-abiding citizen, he is a bit impulsive, and a message must be sent that it is unacceptable to physically assault one's wife simply because she threatens to leave. Anger management is the key.

And finally, the entire process was brief, lasting only two weeks from the initial offense (February 25th) to final adjudication (March 5th), resulting in miminal consumption of time and resources. No expensive, drawn-out process ensued. Government functioned as it was intended; as a referee facilitating a solution agreeable to all rather than as a tyrant imposing a solution permanently marginalizing one party.

TransCanada And Denali Squabble Over Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Proposals During Calgary Meeting Of Arctic Gas Symposium

This story has not shown up in any Alaska media yet, but it is definitely pertinent to our state, so here goes. On March 2nd, 2010, the Calgary Herald reported about a squabble taking place between the AGIA consortium, consisting of TransCanada and Exxon, vs. the Denali consortium, consisting of ConocoPhillips and BP, over the proposed Alaska natural gas pipeline, now projected to cost as much as $41 billion. The dispute surfaced at the 10th Annual Arctic Gas Symposium in Calgary sponsored by the Canadian Institute.

The dispute centers over who is best suited to construct the pipeline. Bob Bleaney, Denali's Canadian manager, maintains that being outside the AGIA terms is not necessarily a disadvantage. "We think that (being outside the act) actually is a benefit for our project, because we're not tied to those particular conditions and we think we have a better opportunity to bring forward a successful project," Bleaney told the conference. He compared the state sanction of TransCanada's proposal to granting a driver's licence.

Immediately, Tony Palmer, TransCanada's vice-president responsible for Alaskan development, fired back, saying that TransCanada has been working to develop the project for more than 30 years and insisted that no pipeline will be built without the support of local and state governments, along with the main shippers. Working under the inducement-act process is the best way to move the project forward. "I would suggest it's (inducement act support) a little more than that (a driver's licence)," Palmer retorted. "No project goes forward in the pipeline business without three things in hand...you need an economic project, secondly, you need customers and, thirdly, you need to have regulatory approvals to build your pipeline. No commercial party can deliver this project alone."

Palmer also explained that more than three decades of development work give TransCanada a competitive advantage in building and operating the line over its rivals. It already owns much of the right-of-way and in 1977 the Canadian and U.S. governments signed a transit treaty that formed the basis of the Northern Pipeline Act and granted TransCanada subsidiary Foothills Pipe Lines the right to operate the line.

On January 29th, TransCanada launched its own open season to solicit potential customers, which will begin June 29th. When it closes 90 days later, Palmer suggested the question of who will build the line will be answered. Denali will launch its own open season later this year, most likely in July. For those who don't fully understand what an "open season" is, a January 13th Alaska Dispatch article provides a tutorial.

In short, the open season is a 90-day period governed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), buffered on the front end with another 90 days of public comments and notices. A company wanting to build a pipeline -- called "the sponsor" -- lays out its plans, such as how much it will charge to move gas. In response, shippers make bids reserving space in the line by promising a long-term financial commitment to the project. Shippers can be anyone from producers with gas to sell at market to utilities needing supplies. A company serious about launching construction within a couple of years is going to want solid, binding bids from an anchor customer and several others. The lack of such bids could place a construction project on hold, or derail it altogether.

And bidders have both Denali and TransCanada to choose from. Will either one, or both, get enough bids to proceed to the next phase? TransCanada would seem to have the edge because of official state support.

YouTube Video: Dr. David Duke Speaks Out Candidly About His Own Life, Rebuts ADL And SPLC Misinformation In His "Heart To Heart" Series

Updated December 31st with new links to the videos.

Tired of the one-sided perspective about Dr. David Duke presented in the mainstream media? Don't have time to read his 736 page book, "My Awakening" (the audio version is available for free HERE, broken down by chapter)?

The videos below are for you. Instead of addressing the customary issues normally important to European-Americans, Dr. Duke discusses his own life, and explains why he became a White racialist advocate.

Heart to Heart, Part 1:




Heart to Heart, Part 2:



Dr. Duke is to the White community what Janet Murghia is to Latinos, Jesse Jackson is to Blacks, and perhaps Diane Benson is to Alaska Natives. This does not imply these people speak for their entire respective communities, but they have all achieved a certain degree of prominence and influence. To deny that status to Dr. Duke would be arbitrary. Read the ADL propaganda on Dr. Duke and the SPLC propaganda as well, and compare it with what you've just heard on the videos, and you'll see the difference.

By the way, Dr. David Duke's PhD is genuine. He was first awarded an honorary PhD by the MAUP University system in the Ukraine. MAUP is transliterated as "Mizhrehional'na Akademiya upravlinnya personalom", from where it gets the English acronym "MAUP". In English, it's called the Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. Established in 1989, the MAUP is the largest non-state higher education institution in Ukraine, with branches, campuses, and institutes scattered throughout the whole country and a current student population of 40,000.

In 2005, MAUP upgraded Dr. Duke's honorary PhD to a full Academic PhD in History after successful completion of exams and all doctoral academic requirements and a spirited Doctoral Defense in an academic conference hall adjacent to the office of the MAUP President Prof. Georgy Tchokin. Dr. Duke's dissertation was quite similar to his book, "Jewish Supremacism". During his doctoral defense, Dr. Duke showed how Jewish supremacism and extremism was growing even more radical. He said that the extremists have so taken over Israel that, “Soon their only choices for a leader will be a mass murderer such as Ariel Sharon of Sabre and Shatila, or a maniac who wants to ethnically cleanse all of Palestine, Benjamin Netanyahu". All the members of the Academic council agreed on the academic excellence of the dissertation, and after his successful defense, they unanimously voted to approve it and grant him the Doctor of Philosophy degree.

Alaska STAR $500,000 Lucky Times Lotto Pushed Back Once Again Until March 31st; $150,000 Worth Of Tickets Remain To Be Sold

Update June 11th: Drawing to be held June 15th, payout reduced to $350,000. Updated post HERE.

Update May 3rd: Spoke with ticket sales clerk, who said lotto drawing now pushed forward to May 31st. The operator will continue to push the lotto drawing forward each month until all tickets are sold, or the drop-dead suspense of December 31st, 2010 is reached.

Note: All posts on this particular lotto drawing available HERE, with the most recent post displayed first.

Apparently, the recession has really caught up to Alaska this year, according to Alaska Lucky Times Lotto organizer Abe Spicola, who cited it as a reason why the anticipated February 28th drawing at Rumrunners in Anchorage was cancelled. KTUU Channel 2 reports on March 2nd, 2010 that Spicola has pushed back the drawing until March 31st, so ticket sales will resume shortly. KTUU news video embedded below:



Spicola said that vendors still have $150,000 worth of tickets to sell, so it could even be pushed back a third time. "When we first started this off, the lotto off, our ticket sales were through the roof basically. This year, I really, truly believe Alaska finally caught up with the recession," said Spicola, who operates Lucky Times Pull Tabs. So basically, he thought that since tickets for the 2009 Lotto sold like hotcakes, they would sell just as fast this year. This didn't happen, and he blames the recession.

But Spicola also blames a "sound-alike" smaller lotto run by Tudor Road Bingo for confusing ticket buyers, saying that many believe it's the same jackpot. But Tudor Road Bingo operator Jack Powers debunks that notion, saying he knows a little something about marketing a lottery on his own and wants nothing to do with the other lottery. There is bad blood between the two operators.

The proposed nonprofit beneficiary of the Lotto, Standing Together Against Rape (STAR), is not giving up on Spicola. "Please be patient with us, we are working to sell enough tickets to pay that draw and it'll happen we are just asking that people be patient with us," said Ginger George-Smith with STAR.

Pushing the date back once was understandable - miscalculations can happen. But pushing it back a second time makes Spicola look weak. Part of the problem is abysmal advertising and publicity. He never published a complete list of outlets where tickets can be bought. He also could use better locations to sell tickets; if he had kiosks at the Dimond Center and the 5th Ave Mall, they would already have met their sales goals.

Of course, he would probably have to supply bulletproof vests to get anyone to work in a Dimond Mall kiosk.

I don't think Abe Spicola is a scam artist. He's built up too much of a reputation in this town to throw it all away - and involve a nonprofit charity as well. This guy just simply lacks a bit of business sense. If he pushes this back a third time, though, his credibility in this community could be irreparably damaged.

Fairbanks Militia Organizer Schaeffer Cox Arrested On Charge Of Felony Assault With A Weapon, Released On $3,500 Bail

Note: All posts about Schaeffer Cox on this blog can be called up HERE, with the most recent post appearing first.

Update March 6th: Schaeffer Cox accepts plea deal for misdemeanor reckless endangerment; updated post HERE.

The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reports that Schaeffer Cox, who is the leader of the Second Amendment Task Force which numbers approximately 7,000, and who also helped form a local citizens militia called "The Alaska Peacemakers Militia" presently numbering about 3,500, was arrested on March 1st, 2010 and charged with felony assault with a weapon. The type of weapon was identified as Schaeffer Cox's hands.

Update: A link to the charging documents has now been posted by the News-Miner.

On February 25th, 2010, while driving to Anchorage, Schaeffer Cox and his wife started arguing. Schaeffer Cox eventually punched her in the arm, to which she replied that if he did it again, she'd leave him and take their son. Schaeffer then allegedly reached over, grabbed her throat and pinned her up against the door. As he continued to squeeze her neck, she felt like she was going to pass out. She fought him off, and then he just sat back in his seat. Upon reaching Anchorage, the couple split up and stayed at different locations.

Cox's wife then called the police and filed a complaint. The APD officer observed that there was minor bruising throughout the neck, a fingernail abrasion on the left side of the neck, and redness and swelling on both sides of the neck. The "dangerous instrument" used was Schaeffer Cox's hands. A warrant for Cox was issued; upon learning of its existence, Cox, a law-abiding man who unsuccessfully challenged Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Fairbanks) for the District 7 House seat in 2008, voluntarily turned himself in to authorities, after which he was booked and then released on $3,500 bail.

Schaeffer Cox has now been entered into the Alaska Court System database HERE. He has no prior entries. The governing statute, AS11.41.210(a)(1), defines "weapon" as a dangerous instrument, and a dangerous instrument can be many things, including the hands. The statute was written thusly to account for the fact that a trained martial arts expert can use his hands as lethal weapons, so lawmakers wanted to cover that possibility.

No court date has yet been set; Cox did not respond to any media enquiries on March 1st. Cox's involvement with the Second Amendment Task Force was previously documented in greater detail HERE. Contrary to the negative propaganda on militias put out by the Southern Poverty Law Center, Cox has sought to minimize "extremist" involvement in his organizations. Here's a video from a December 2009 appearance in Montana:



Already, the anti-militia sob sisters are piling on to the comments section of the News-Miner story, although they are effectively offset by some of Cox's supporters.

Former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo Says Sarah Palin "Not Presidential"; Dittman Poll Supports His Contention

On February 28th, 2010, NRC Handelsblad, a leading Dutch media outlet, published an interview with former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo (R) in which he offers a blunt assessment of Sarah Palin's Presidential prospects and lashes out bitterly at Senator John McCain.

During the interview, Tancredo talked about the Tea Party movement, McCain, and Palin. It was during the first part that Tancredo bluntly states that Sarah Palin is not presidential. "I really don’t have this feeling about her as being presidential," Tancredo said. "I don’t know what it is exactly. I don’t know if the issues really are that difficult for her or not.” He questions if she has what it takes, and whether she really wants it. “As governor of the state of Alaska, she doesn’t have all that kind of experience. She can get better. But I don’t know if she is really looking to do it.

Tancredo also said that Palin's decision to campaign for John McCain soured him on her. He was much fonder of her before she chose to get involved in McCain's campaign. He claims there was no need for her to get involved. But there doesn't appear to be any malice in his tone towards Palin; the disagreement is primarily political.

Not so in the case of John McCain; Tancredo's resentment towards him is palpable and personal. Tancredo said, "“I don’t like him...He is not a very pleasant person. He is nasty, mean; the skin of an onion would look deep compared to his. He has a short fuse, he is almost peculiarly unstable.” The following encounter between the two was cited as an example of McCain's volatility and instability:

One day, he went over to the Senate and bumped into McCain in the elevator. “I had never met him. So I shake his hand to thank him for doing the fundraiser.” The senator then asked if he could count on Tancredo’s support for McCain-Feingold (a bipartisan campaign reform act McCain had drafted with Democratic senator Russell Feingold). Tancredo opposed this proposed regulation of political campaign financing, and he told McCain. “So I go: ‘I am voting no, I don’t like it. I actually think it’s terrible’.”

“It was like a bomb went off in his head. He exploded! He was screaming at me! It was, ‘When I come across the fucking street, you are…’ And, ‘You don’t know what the fuck you are talking about!’ And I said, ‘What?!’ I was just so taken aback. But then I went after him: ‘Hey, nobody told me you are coming to help me for a quid pro quo for a shit bill!’ It just got worse. It was really bad, I remember us getting out of the elevator and people stepped back way up because they couldn’t handle the screaming.”

A recent Dittman Research Poll of Alaskans seems to support Tancredo's assessment of Palin. Dave Dittman, one of Alaska's two premier pollsters, asked 402 Alaskans the following question:

Does Sarah Palin have a political future?
-- Yes: 53 percent
-- No: 43 percent

Of those who answered Yes, two-thirds opined that she should NOT run for President, but merely advocate issues and help other candidates. Only one-third think she should run for President. The second set of results can be a bit confusing to interpret. The 36 percent of those who do not want Palin to run for President are 36 percent of the 53 percent (which would be around two-thirds), not of 100 percent.

So if we reinterpret the poll, we can project the following:

-- 43 percent (the "No" voters) do not Palin to run for President or be involved in politics
-- 36 percent (two-thirds of the "Yes" voters) do not want Palin to run for President, but want her to remain involved in politics
-- 18 percent (one-third of the "Yes" voters) want Palin to run for President

A Growing Number Of States Moving To Ban Employer Credit Checks On Job Applicants; Alaska Not Yet One Of Them

Because of the growing practice of employers arbitrarily denying jobs to applicants merely because they have low credit scores, a number of states are considering legislation which would ban the use of credit checks by employers as a litmus test of employability. This move is long overdue, but unfortunately Alaska is NOT yet one of those states. Media stories published by the Associated Press and USA Today.

Two states, Hawaii and Washington, already ban credit checks on most job applicants. Sixteen others, including Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Vermont, Wisconsin, are in various stages of following suit.

Supposedly, only 13 percent of companies perform credit checks on all potential hires, but the practice is growing. Sixty percent of employers recently surveyed by the Society for Human Resources Management (complete survey results not yet available online, but referenced HERE) said they run credit checks on at least some job applicants, compared with 42 percent in 2006. Although federal law requires employers to get written permission from applicants to run a credit check on them, many job applicants understandably do not feel they are in a position to say no.

Spotlighted in the AP story is Wisconsin's effort, led by State Rep. Kim Hixson. Rep. Hixson drafted a bill in his state after hearing from a constituent, Terry Becker, an auto mechanic who struggled to find work. Becker said it all started with medical bills that piled up when his now 10-year-old son began having seizures as a toddler. In the first year alone, Becker ran up $25,000 in medical debt. Over 4 1/2 months, he was turned down for at least eight positions for which he had authorized the employer to conduct a credit check. One potential employer told Becker, "If your credit is bad, then you'll steal from me."

Hixson calls what happened to Becker discrimination based on credit history and said his bill would ban it. "If somebody is trying to get a job as a truck driver or a trainer in a gym, what does your credit history have to do with your ability to do that job?" Hixson said. He said he knows of no research that shows a person with a bad credit history is going to perform poorly. There's also no research that shows that someone who chooses not to use credit and who has a low credit score as a result will make a poor employee.

Most of the proposed bills are not blanket bans, however. They would prevent employers from using credit reports when hiring for most positions, but allow exceptions in cases where such information could be relevant to the job — for example, if the person is applying to work in a bank or an accounts-payable office. Mike Aitken of the Society for Human Resources Management claims a blanket ban could remove a tool employers can use to help them make good hiring decisions. Aitken pointed to a 2008 survey by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners that found the two most common red flags for employees who commit workplace fraud are living beyond their means and having difficulty meeting financial obligations.

The problem with the aforementioned survey is that credit score does not merely reflect one's ability to consistently meet financial obligations. One or two failures to pay on time or one bankruptcy can knock down one's credit score and make it unrepresentative of the person's persistent financial capabilities. Even voluntarily cancelling a credit card can drop one's credit score. Furthermore, what about those who choose not to use credit? They will be likely to have a low credit score, but since they don't use credit, the credit score would be an invalid measurement of how they handle financial obligations.

But most employers testifying at a recent legislative hearing in Maryland claimed that they are not interested so much in applicants' specific credit scores, but are more concerned about things like debt collections and legal judgments rather than poor credit because of medical bills or school loans. They also said companies give job applicants a chance to explain their credit situation.

Nevertheless, too many employers have shown that they cannot be trusted with this power, particularly large corporations who have a tendency to hire and fire for political reasons. Corporations in America have become proxy enforcers for political correctness. So I support these legislative efforts to restrict the ability of employers to use credit checks as litmus tests of employability, and urge Alaska lawmakers to consider similar legislation for our state.