{youtubejw width="345" height="270"}BlXKZFQkUXQ{/youtubejw}

This video, shot by the Anchorage Daily News on Friday, highlights interviews with Gov. Sarah Palin and Franklin Graham, and it's interesting, not because of Graham -- son of Rev. Billy Graham -- but because of Palin's thoughtful remarks on the never-ending struggle facing many villages.

Palin approached a topic that most Alaska politicians shy away from -- the need to seek employment and opportunities outside village Alaska. (For Outside readers, there are more than 200 villages in Alaska, most unconnected to roads and the power grid.)

Palin may have been criticized for not reacting swiftly enough to cries for help from villages hurting this winter from high food and fuel prices, but she clearly is thinking about the long-term future of rural Alaska.

Read the tragic struggle of one young man who once dreamed of leaving his village: To Live and Die in Wales, Alaska

The harsh reality is that rural Alaskans have limited opportunities, be it employment, education or even dating. In the early 21st century, rural residents are still dealing with many of the same perplexing questions as they have for decades:

How do they hold on to tradition, to hunting, to fishing? If people leave the village for new opportunities, how can the community sustain itself? What is the purpose of the village today? Why are so many people suffering from suicide and alcoholism?

Watch this video and listen closely to Palin's remarks. It seems she's thinking about these larger issues, and perhaps this might prompt a state conversation sorely needed, especially in these uncertain economic times.

Hopefully Palin will not be treated like the last politician to speak from the heart about the future of rural Alaska.

Former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens was called a racist by some Alaskans when he suggested that, in some cases, there might be value to consolidating small villages. This was around 2003, and Stevens was fighting for federal funding to help villages like Shishmaref and Kivalina relocate their eroding island communities. He was realizing the funds might not always be there for the Bush and was trying to find a sustainable solution.

Some Alaskans felt Stevens was being insensitive to Alaska Natives, who have endured tragic losses to their culture and history from being forced into the modern world. It was a low-blow to a man who has done more for rural Alaska than just about any other politician in Alaska history.

The truth was that Stevens was being pragmatic. If a few villages joined together to form one new community, they might have a better chance of surviving because they would need only one school, one airstrip, one post office, one power plant, etc.

Hopefully Sarah Palin will not endure the same undeserved criticism as Stevens. The stakes are too high. The time has come for Alaskans -- urban and rural -- to have a sensitive but honest conversation about the future of rural Alaska.