UPDATE: Anchorage Press reporter Amanda Coyne was there, and described the incident in a Flashlight item today. (Click here for the full story). She says Ruedrich went out to break up a group of Palin sign-wavers, telling them they were breaking the rules.
Ruedrich left, and Large came over.
Here’s how Amanda described what happened next:
When Large told the Palin supporters at the picnic that he was asking them, on behalf of the Republican Party, to disband, they drew closer. Then Palin made her way to the front of the group and put her hand on Large's arm.
“Don't touch me!



Important warning about e-mails purporting to be from the adn.com staff.

8 August 11, 2006 - 8:58am | ilovelucy
Palin's Problem
The Republican Party is in melt-down. Ruedrich & Large aligned themselves with the loser(s) and they're in panic mode as they see their power and influence evaporate. But Palin's no different - she's every bit the politician. She saw an opportunity, not an ethics problem, when Ruedrich arrogantly broke the law. She lost a job but gained a following. She's got people fooled, even the misguided gay man who commented to this story, into believing she's a moderate. Go to http://eagleforumalaska.blogspot.com/
and read her replies to questions about a woman's right to choose, gay marriage and labor unions. She's extremely right wing. But not honest - when asked the question about abortion on a talk show, she (mis)quoted a 19th century feminist - she took a statement about a woman's right to custody and tried to appease both sides. When pressed about whether or not she'd sign a bill outlawing abortion, she sidestepped and said the legislature wouldn't pass such a bill without a vote of the people. And if the people supported it, well....
She's awfully clever, but not honest. And not moderate.
flag this »
August 12, 2006 - 4:16pm | cconstant
Misguided Gay Man?
Nobody thinks Sarah is a liberal, but lay off the misguided gay man stuff. People are supporting Sarah, not because she is conservative or liberal, or whatever, but simply because she provides a clean slate.
flag this »
August 12, 2006 - 4:33pm | akpoliticalanimal
clean slate doesn't mean anything
you'd vote for someone just because they don't have a background? because they won't take a position on important issues? because they want to appeal to all sides? you'll be sorely disappointed if that candidate becomes your governor. experience and taking positions brings baggage, but at least it shows someone can get something done.
flag this »
August 12, 2006 - 9:56am | Sal4Tour
good point
I totally agree.
Excellent, excellent points Ilovelucy. With a little look into other media outlets and the answers she gives there- it's pretty clear the consistency is gone.
Let's see how many "ardent" responses show up to this. I hope there's no sign poking involved.
flag this »
August 12, 2006 - 8:29am | akpoliticalanimal
Hey Moderates
She is as right-winged as a person gets. If you haven't figured that out yet--you're not listening to her. I heard the same radio show that ilovelucy refers to on aprn. she would NOT answer the abortion issue. She will try to be all things to all people on that issue.
flag this »
7 August 10, 2006 - 1:59pm | akpoliticalanimal
HELLO No One Cares
Are you all listening to yourselves? No one in the real world cares about who pushed whom. Whether signs were allowed at a Republican picnic or whether Bill (aptly named) Large sweats. They care about health care, education and if we're ever ever going to get a gasline!
Sarah sounds like a junior high girl in her email message writing to her girl friend about a fight with another girl.
This whole event is entirely juvenile.
I think that's what's wrong with the Republican Party in Alaska. They're all focused on fighting and power and unethical behavior--not on whether the poor people in Hooper Bay have a home or if our schools have books. I'm ashamed to be a Republican today.
flag this »
August 14, 2006 - 9:18am | bkb044
Ashamed?
I'm curious, are you more ashamed to be a Republican now than you were when Lindauer won the primary in 1998?
flag this »
August 14, 2006 - 12:01pm | akpoliticalanimal
Still Ashamed
I was ashamed then as well and voted for Tony Knowles.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 7:41pm | julia_thorne
Hey - We do care!
This is the corrupt side of the Republican party, and it needs to be exposed for what it is.
If someone pretends to be a good guy (or gal!) in politics, but goes pushing little old ladies around at picnics, we need to know!! This should not be encouraged in any way, shape or form.
Oh - good response quixoticneophyte to that post about municipality regulations. Whoever wrote that made no sense. Oops! Did I just agree with a conservative again?
Well then, hooray for Tony Knowles!
flag this »
6 August 10, 2006 - 12:51pm | mpeters
I was there
I was at the Alaska Republican picnic on Tuesday...I helped organize the event. I was part of the Republican Committee which planned the picnic. I attended three out of four picnic committee meetings and nothing was mentioned to me about a policy against folks standing outside with political signs.
I was standing on the sidewalk outside with several Palin supporters when Alaska Republican Party (ARP) Attorney Bill Large approached me and with a raised voice said that Sarah Palin supporters were not allowed to stand outside the building. He was very upset, shaking badly, and dripping with sweat. I did not smell alcohol on his breath. I asked him why he wanted us to leave and he said it was illegal for us to be there. He later said it was a violation of ARP policy to be standing outside the building with yard signs.
I have attended ARP picnics in the past, and there have always been dozens of supporters of various campaigns standing outside the building with yard signs. I pointed this out to Attorney Large.
Then a local Attorney asked Mr. Large if he could produce something in writing that showed that the Palin supporters were in violation of the ARP policy. Mr. Large took the folder he was carrying with him and violently tore it in half and proceeded to write out the "policy" of the ARP on the spot.
Attorney Large became even more heated and vocal when we told him we had a First Amendment right to assemble and that if we were doing something wrong or illegal, he should call the police.
A few minutes later, Attorney Large yelled at Sarah Palin when she tried to introduce herself to him. Large then proceeded to call the Palin supporters Communists and made a reference to Nazi Germany before storming off.
Sarah Palin had so much support at the picnic, it made the other two Republican gubernatorial candidates (Binkley and Murkowski) look badly understaffed and disorganized.
There were over 100 Sarah Palin supporters at the picnic wearing red Palin for Governor T-shirts.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 5:50pm | gloriashriver
Municipal ordinance not ARP policy
With all of this talk about ARP policy and rules I must set the record straight. Everything I have read to date is incorrect. The reason people can not congregate at the front door of the ARP summer picnic is governed by Municipal Ordinance and not ARP policy. ARP does not have a policy disallowing sign-waving. Mr Large should not have reacted the way he did, however, there have been more fabrications in this trumpted up incident than you can shake a stick at. The truth is, the contract to lease the space from the Municipality of Anchorage Parks and Recreational facilities did not include the parking lot, sidewalks and front entry common area as such we were required to keep these areas clear at all times. In years past the ARP has always been forbiden from putting banners, signs and political paraphernalia in areas not speifically leased by ARP. All candidates were allowed to place signs, banners balloons or any other political paraphernalia in the Northwest greatroom. Campaigning on Government property whether it be state, federal or local is against the law unless the specific property is leased for a specified time.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 7:19pm | quixoticneophyte
That makes no sense...
Regardless of what the contract says between the ARP and the municipality, that contract has no effect on the rights of individuals.
Individuals have the right to congregate on public property.
Individuals have the right to wave signs on public property (look at the roadsides on Election Day).
Individuals have the right to greet people on public property.
Besides, saying that you have a contract to the building, but not the parking lot, is just bizarre. Does anyone specifically lease a parking lot? Does anyone specifically lease an entrance way? What do you expect people to do - walk to the picnic and then teleport themselves into the building?!?
Campaigning has always occured at these events before. Ruedrich led a politically motivated attack. Large made a fool of himself. And Palin supporters stood up for their First Amendment rights.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 4:50pm | quixoticneophyte
Thanks for your verification!
Thanks for that thorough account! Unfortunately, their behavior doesn't surprise me.
The part with Large writing the "policy" on the spot is absolutely hilarious! That story will be told over and over again...
Thanks for all your work, Matt!
flag this »
5 August 10, 2006 - 11:49am | billy_muldoon
Was there any liquor involved?
That's what Billy can't help wondering. This whole things smacks of an excess of, shall we say, high spirits?
Any of the witnesses see or smell anything on any of the parites that would shed any light on this question?
Billy Muldoon
Seldom seen, often heard
flag this »
4 August 9, 2006 - 10:16pm | akmike477
Palin against the machine...
I was at the GOP picnic and I witnessed the tail end of what happened and I can tell you what is in the e-mail is true. Mr. Large did push Ms. Perdew. He was not outnumbered 10 to 1. There were about 5 of us out front and we were not causing a problem. He came at us very aggressively and after shoving a retired peace officer he called us all communists. I don’t know how Mr. Large, who is allegedly an attorney, can call citizens who were exercising their constitutional rights in public place, communists. I also find it interesting that Lisa Murkowski had supporters doing the exact same thing last year at the picnic and not a word was said. If it weren’t for Sarah I would leave the Republican Party all together. This incident just shows how desperate Mr. Ruedrich and his friend Mr. Murkowski are.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 12:56pm | carolben
Who supports who?
Akmike, lauriejo and smithmo, you're lining up the wrong people here. Ruedrich and Large aren't supporting Frank; they're backing Binkley, and they make no secret of it. I don't much like the head of the party favoring one candidate above the others, myself.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 1:19pm | lauriejo_6
COME AGAIN
I watch televised news, listen to local talk radio, except rydell[hater], and read adn on line. I have never heard ruedrich publicly support Binkley.
flag this »
3 August 9, 2006 - 7:19pm | lauriejo_6
Palin has to win!!
Someone has to clean house in the republican party. As if being immoral, inept, and indebt to big oil wasn't bad enough, ruedrich is trying to be a bully. Sarah Palin would be just the person to put these gasbags in thier place. Palin is the only candidate who has any chance of beating Knowles in the general election and these morons running the party here in alaska are to stupid to realize it. I wonder if ruedrich thinks if frank can't win, then hell let the dems take it. Seems like something a paranoid megalomaniac might come up with!
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 6:35am | smithmo
Palin has to lose
Sure, Ruedrich, Large, and their hero Murkowski are bullies. But they're all Republicans, and so is Sarah Palin. Sarah is so inexperienced she will be utterly incapable of addressing the serious oil and gas issues facing our state. She won't be able to find her way out of the challenges facing our state's economy.
And we know that when Republicans can't wrap their heads around economic problems, they resort to social issues, which are none of the government's business. As an Evangelical Christian, Sarah Palin is anti-choice, pro-guns, anti-sex education, and anti-gay. Get the Republicans out of office, and get the government out of our business.
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 7:08pm | jlhobson
I'd think presiding over
I'd think presiding over (and having a fantastic record), as executive, the fastest growing community in the state is pretty good experience, not to mention that she led the Alaska Conference of Mayors, working with leaders across the state. And people seem to forget that she did work as head of the Oil and Gas Commission until party politics became involved.
Binkley doesn't even have a bachelor's degree. I have nothing against the man, and have no reason to, but let's be honest. Education is just as important as experience, and I'll take a former executive for governor before I'd support a retired legislator.
On a more personal note, as a gay person, I take umbrage to the remark calling her anti-gay. No, the Republican Party is not usually progressive toward gay issues, but she's the best of the three and I feel open-minded. You have Murkowski stewing that gay employees might get spousal benefits and Binkley going around talking about homosexuality being a choice (it isn't, but it shouldn't matter even if it were).
So, have whatever opinion you will, but there are social moderates/liberals (and gay people) who support her. Besides, I'm less concerned about her social views than I am about her being honest, ethical, and doing what is in the best long-term economic interest of the state.
flag this »
2 August 9, 2006 - 4:54pm | quixoticneophyte
There is no such no-campaigning policy
This is the establishment up to its usual tricks.
There is no policy that prohibits campaigning. It's a political picnic, and at political picnics, we do... political things! (duh)
Although I did not witness this event, these picnics have always had supporters for all Republican campaigns actively campaigning. It's what the picnic is about. If Ruedrich and company claim they have a "policy," please tell them that a policy is not their personal agenda written out on a piece of paper and used to harrass others.
flag this »
August 9, 2006 - 7:15pm | julia_thorne
Ruedrich and Large seem pretty rude too!
Creating a "campaigning-free zone" at a political picnic?!? Puh-lease!
They're simply trying to shut people up, and when that doesn't work, like that JohnLocke and Large, they begin to insult those they disagree with.
Kyle, I don't know how the Republican establishment will behave if (when?) Sarah wins the primary. All I know, is that having someone else win the Republican primary would be a lot worse!
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 5:05am | monkeyking
I know this is impossible
I know this is impossible due to the filing deadline, but wouldn 't it be hilarious if Murkowski pulled a "Lieberman" and ran as an Independent upon losing the primary?
When will some of this fun come to Fairbanks????
flag this »
August 10, 2006 - 4:20pm | alaska49
It is not impossible
The filing deadline for an independent bid for Governor is Tuesday, Aug. 22 at 5:00 pm. Requirements for filing are in Alaska Statutes 15.25.150, or see info Alaska elections website calendar at http://ltgov.state.ak.us/elections/eleccal06.php. The filing requires signatures equal to 1% of those voting at the 2004 general election, or 3084 signatures.
In theory, Gov. Murkowski could gather that many signatures and file to run an independent campaign, but he would have to gather the signatures before the primary election is over.
flag this »
August 12, 2006 - 8:15am | monkeyking
Wow!
Wow! I didn't know this. Thanks for the information. I suppose the Murkowski camp should be getting busy gathering signatures. I think they have a booth at the Tanana Valley Fair...I wonder if there is something to sign there (not that I would sign one personally). When does the State Fair begin?
flag this »
1 August 9, 2006 - 4:41pm | jlhobson
I don't know Mr. Large and I
I don't know Mr. Large and I didn't attend the picnic last night (I was invited by the campaign but made phonecalls instead), so I'd normally be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I do, however, trust Palin. She has no need to cause a ruckus over anything: she's the candidate to beat, based on every poll! And as a moderate, disgruntled, and utterly disgusted Republican, I don't put it past state GOP officials to act in this manner.
It was a REPUBLICAN picnic. Is it somehow incorrect to show support for a REPUBLICAN candidate at a partisan event? Not to say anything of Reagan's 11th Commandment. But more than that, shouldn't the traditional party of individual liberties not want to encroach upon voters' constitutionally enshrined right to peaceful assembly an free speech, in a public park?
If Palin somehow loses the primary, I'm going to have to vote for Halcro, because I can't stomach the GOP establishment any longer.
The time is near, fellas: honesty has returned to Republican politics in this state. I suggest you guys find a new job (and I don't mean one that enables you to do partisan work on the clock).
flag this »
August 13, 2006 - 12:14pm | jerry_l_soper
Republican Candidates
I'll vote for Palin, but I agree, I can't support Murkowski or any of his stooges. If she doesn't win the primary I will NOT vote Republican.
(My grandmother was so Republican that as I was growing up she taught me that Roosevelt dimes weren't legal tender.)
I'll have to vote Democratic. (Granny would understand.)
flag this »