Politics: Palin is no secessionist
You know how Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was once a member of the Alaska Independence Party, which advocates giving voters the right to vote on whether or not to secede from the United States of America? It was in all the blogs.
Well, as it turns out, not so much. The Republican-leaning blog Hot Air reports that Palin has been a registered Republican since 1982 and has never been a member of AIP. As mayor of Wasilla, she made an appearance at the AIP convention when it was held in the town.
My two cents: As a former member of the Libertarian Party, I’d hate to be remembered for that mistake. So, I’d be willing to overlook something like that. But turns out to be yet another false rumor about this woman.Â
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Republican-leaning? Understatement of the century–Hot Air is probably the last thing I’d use when citing anything.
I haven’t paid much attention to the AIP thing, but still, why would she help legitimize them by appearing at their events?
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Many Republicans, including Bush/Cheney, believe that it’s immoral for government leaders to talk to our “enemies,” like Iran. Seems to me that Sarah Palin speaking to the AIP is pretty much in the same league. If she spoke to a convention of the Nazi Party, I think folks would justifiably throw a fit. Talking to the AIP is therefore fair game in the political discourse, since the Republican Party set the tone in the first place.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Zing.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Lincoln founded the Republican party to fight secessionists. This doesn’t look good, even if she just spoke at their conferences.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
So which perceived Obama negative does this cancel out: Ayers or Wright?
I’ve gotta say, I’m enjoying this. What goes around comes around indeed! Who says we ought to start forwarding emails to everyone we know saying she’s a secessionist, even though we know it’s not true?
Oh darn, I forgot: we’re not Republicans.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Wow, Billy’s posts are like throwing chum in the water. Watch all the lefties swarm all over it.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:32 pm
In other words: “I don’t really have a defense for this one, so you guys have fun.”
Thanks, Bravo!
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:45 pm
You can’t win a rational argument with irrational people who refuse to even consider anything outside their personal definition of the truth. That’s also why liberals have a hard time understanding that military action, while not preferred, is sometimes necessary in our world.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:50 pm
We completely understand when it’s necessary, i.e. Afghanistan. We also understand when it’s a ploy to line the coffers of big oil, Halliburton, etc. (Iraq). Wow, don’t you hate that people can’t be hoodwinked and bullied anymore?
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Point proven, thanks Linda!
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Hmm, on my blog I said that she was “cozy” with them; the video shows that she did at least address them.
So, in short, she was closer to them that BHO was ever to Louis Farrakahn (sp)
Will SP be expected to “denounce” or “reject” or “denounce and reject” them?
(hint: no)
Ps: this liberal spent more time in the military than Dick Cheney ever did. I say that war is “necessary” when *I* am ready to risk my life to fight in the war; I do have to give kudos to Palin and McCain on that issue as the latter served in war (honorably) and both have kids either there or on their way (as does Biden).
September 2nd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
LOL, conservatives pretending to care about being rational. Say hi to the evangelicals in your party for me, will ya?
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Folks, it seems to me that giving Alaskans the right to vote on whether or not they want to remain part of the United States is not exactly an evil or atrocity on the same level as genocide, terrorism or slavery.
A dumb idea, yes. Unpatriotic, and contrary to everything we supposedly fought the Revolution and the Civil War over, certainly. But c’mon, I wouldn’t exactly compare it to Nazism!
The AIP, as far as I know, didn’t advocate declaring war on the U.S., or promote bombings or kidnappings, or harm any innocent people. So if Palin happened to speak to one of their gatherings, or act friendly to people who belonged to the group, what’s the big deal?
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Zing!
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:42 pm
It’s probably not, if you are a Dem. But she and McCain aren’t. Remember the American flag lapel pin ordeal? Dems apparently are held to a different standard.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
I will admit, Linda, that the whole “flag lapel pin ordeal” was ridiculous and blown out of proportion.
I may be conservative, or even a right-wing nut in the estimation of some, but I always try to be civil, rational and polite in making my case. I don’t care whether the “other side” slings mud first or not, or has a “media bias” in their favor or against them, or are held to a “different standard,” all of us can do better than that.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Ollie, I am not sure what the Dick Cheney comment says about you since Cheney never served, but… Serving in this country’s military isn’t about convenience or unanimity in the decision making process. Without question, I would deploy wherever ordered whether it was a Democrat or Republican (or any other party for that matter) Commander-in-Chief.
While I have my own beliefs, among the most important of those is my faith in my country and in the outcome of the democratic process. That is why I strongly disagree with the idea that “war is “necessary†when *I* am ready to risk my life to fight in the war”. I took the oath, that was when I made my decision.
September 2nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Ok, let me clarify. When the military, I would obey legal orders, of course. And yes, my “from the ground” perspective as a junior officer wouldn’t limit what I knew about the bigger picture.
What I was talking about as what I think right now, as a civilian citizen. For example: should we invade Iraq? If I can’t say “I’d be willing to give my life for this”, then, to me, it is an unnecessary war.
And no, I don’t believe in “faith”; I want evidence.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:01 pm
The Founding Fathers, including at least our first three presidents, were sessesionists.
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Yeah, I thought about pointing out which party supported the secession and was in support of slavery for the south… But the reality is using a party platform from the 1860s is a ridiculous grounds for an argument.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Bookworm, for what it’s worth, I’ve never had a bad thing to say about you. And I say bad things about conservatives all the time.
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Just to set the record straight — a member of the Palin family was a member of the AIP, but it wasn’t Sarah; it was her husband Todd. According to Kate Klonick in TPM Muckraker:
“This afternoon, the director of Division of Elections in Alaska, Gail Fenumiai, told TPMmuckraker that Todd Palin registered in October 1995 to the Alaska Independence Party, a radical group that advocates for Alaskan secession from the United States.
Besides a short period of a few months in 2000 when he changed his registration to undeclared, Todd Palin remained a registered member of AIP until July 2002 when he registered again as an undeclared voter.”
September 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Damn men! How dare they have minds of their own!
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:05 am
The AIP was founded by Joe Vogler, who has relatives in Washington, IL, mainly because he was mad when the federal government took his mining claims and rights away from him without compensation when Alaska became a state. The same happened to thousands of Native Alaskans and others like Joe Vogler that moved there before it became a state. Armed troopers stopped him with guns drawn to prevent him from making a living on land he paid for and developed for ten years. The feds nationalized more than 90% of Alaskan land, kicked hundred of families out of their homes, took over mining claims and handed them to politically connected companies, and just like they did with the American Indians, they bullied people to do what they wanted.
The AIP’s candidate for Governor of Alaska in 1990 won with 38.8% of the vote. By all means keep on bashing almost 40% of Alaskans with rants against a political party you didn’t even attempt to understand. Saying AIP members are committing treason is like telling the American Indians they were committing treason while they were fighting for their lands. All the AIP wants is a LEGAL vote on statehood, since the original vote broke several US treaties and UN agreements the US of A had signed. They should have been given the choice of becoming a state, staying a terrority (like Puerto Rico – I guess they are all traitors in Puerto Rico) or becoming a sovereign nation. They weren’t given those choices and they allowed federal employees and the military stationed in Alaska a vote which was also contrary to US signed treaties and UN agreements. They outnumbered the Native Alaskans 2-1 for that vote.
The AIP is still popular in Alaska. Comments here show us why. Alaska could leave the US, drill in ANWR, sell it to Asia, and become a very rich country like Dubai quickly. They’d be paying $1/gallon in gas, have almost all of their government services paid for from oil proceeds, and have really low taxes if any at all. And our gas prices would go up.
I had the chance to interview Joe Vogler before he was murdered. We need more people like him and less people calling 40% of Alaskans traitors when they don’t know what they are talking about.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:55 am
That 1990 AIP win in the Governor’s race is also very illustrative of the power of the “protest” vote, the need for alternative candidates, and is another example of how “third” parties often do more to change things in the US than the Rs and Ds do. Most candidates, R or D, in Alaska reach out to large AIP voter base. Linking Palin negatively to the AIP just shows desperation and no knowledge of the historical or factual relevance.
Do some in the AIP want to seceed? Absolutely. Many of the real Native Alaskans (Todd Palin being one) who never sold their land to the Russians in the first place, for Russia to be able to sell it to the US probably do want to become their own country. Dubai, but instead of a hot desert, a cold tundra. Others want to be a territory, like several the US has, so they would have more control over themselves. With Senators like Ted Stevens and Reps like Young, you can’t really blame them one bit either for wanting to limit D.C.’s control over them.
Trashing Todd Palin for being a member of the AIP is just not smart at all. Would you trash a member of the Sioux for joining a political party that wanted to fight corrupt DC politicians for more control over the land the white man finally allowed them to have after slaughtering them? THAT IS NOT RATIONAL and it is actually extremely offensive to trash Todd Palin’s heritage for some gotcha political smirk.
GHW Bush was President in 1990 when the AIP won the Governor’s office, he was in the hands of oil companies as we all know, and Alaska has a lot of oil and a pipeline. Alaskans woke up to the games the Republicans and Democrats were playing with handing out drilling rights and tax codes and favors and Alaskans sent them a message both in Alaska and D.C. that got real results. The Feds had to back off. And although not directly, that 1990 win was responsible for creating the Permanent Fund that saved some of the proceeds from Alaskan oil from going into the hands of the oil companies that owned both the Rs and Ds. Last year every Alaskan got a $1200 check I believe.
Alaskans are once again getting pissed at the lower 48 and D.C. for controlling Alaskan natural resources, including ANWR and the oil. That’s a big reason why Sarah Palin won. The crooked Republicans in Alaska and both parties in D.C. (Stevens under indictment, his son, Don Young being investigated, Obama and Biden voting FOR Bush’s Energy Bill, while Palin opposed it, etc.) have too much control over Alaska and they are suffering for it. Alaskans sent DC a message also by electing Sarah Palin. John McCain got it, partly anyway. The lower 48 NEEDS Alaska. Badly. Everyone shrugging off Alaska as irrelevant has no clue how bad they need Alaska. And say whatever you are going to say, but Sarah Palin is NOT in the back pockets of big oil. She likes pissing them off every chance she gets.
OK lecture over, I’ll let the Rod Blagojevich voting apologists continue to insult Native Americans and Alaskans for knowing a bit about the history of the US and the fact that in the past, apologists for the Rs and Ds allowed slavery, the slaughter of Native Americans, the oppression of women, segregation, and numerous human rights travesties because of some blind loyalty to a party or brand. Alaskans know how to use the power of the vote responsibly with their fellow citizens rights in mind, while Illinoisans give us George Ryan and Rod Blagojevich for 12 years. Yup, the lower 48 sure does need a dose of Alaskan reality.
September 3rd, 2008 at 7:22 am
Thanks, postsimian, for the compliment.
It does appear to me that the Alaska Independence Party is designed more as a protest party to call attention to ways in which Alaskans feel they are being shafted by the federal government, to point out how wealthy Alaska would be if it were an independent country, and to point out how much the other 49 states benefit from Alaska, than as a really serious secession movement.
Say what you will about them, or about the wisdom or stupidity of actual Alaskan secession, these people aren’t exactly the Confederates firing on Fort Sumter, and they aren’t going to the barricades to defend enslaving Eskimos (Inuit) or crossing the Bering Strait and invading Siberia.
Plus they are not forcing secession on the people, they are simply asking that a referendum be held on the question. So they sound relatively harmless to me.
On a side note, I have read in several places (can’t cite exactly) that Louisiana would also be as wealthy as Dubai or Kuwait if it were an independent country and kept all its oil revenues. I imagine the same is true of other oil states like Texas (which would be big enough to be a superpower all on its own). Supposedly Texas does retain, somewhere in its constitution, the right to either secede or divide itself into up to five new states.
September 3rd, 2008 at 8:11 am
Lincoln founded the Republican Party?
September 3rd, 2008 at 8:59 am
She didn’t support expanding the library in Wasilla, Alaska, but she did raise sales taxes to fund a sports complex.
September 3rd, 2008 at 9:32 am
Anon, I believe Lincoln started out as a whig, then became a Republican. I’m positive he was not the founder.
September 3rd, 2008 at 11:18 am
PS – I know that and you know that, but I don’t think Linda does.
September 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Since the topic of flirting with “third” parties was broached and we have established that being a member of the AIP is NOT anti-patriotic or anti-American maybe Billy should do a post on Barack Obama seeking and getting the 1996 endorsement by the New Party, their beliefs about America, and just how patriotic a Marxist political party is compared to the AIP.
curious, did the Wasilla library need to be expanded? Just because a library exists, does not mean it automatically needs to be expanded contrary to progressive liberal assumptions. Shame about the sales tax for a sports complex. If taxes used for community sports facilities is an issue for you, perhaps you should check into who paid the bills for the Soldier Field renovation ($700 million), US Cellular – Comiskey ($200 million and how many years did the Welfare Sox not pay rent?), and who will pay the bill for a 2016 Olympics. Chicago also now has the highest sales tax in the US if sales taxes really are an issue for you. Those all come courtesy of Illinois and Chicago Democrats with an assist from the Illinois Republicans of course. Barack Obama has not opposed any of those things that take poor people’s money and give it to some of the richest people in the country associated with professional sports entertainment.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Palin apparently did attend the 1994 convention – and not just as a courtesy:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/another-aip-off.html
I don’t have a problem with the AIP – what you have said makes great sense. I’m a firm believer in grass-roots movements. And yes, it appears that like Native Americans in the lower 48, Native Alaskans got screwed hard too.
The problem I have is hypocrisy. For 8 years now, we’ve been hearing from Bush & Co that dissent against the President is equivalent to treason. Things I have said and done and protested could brand me as a traitor by Bush’s definition, easy.
But now, the Republican party goes and selects a VP candidate whom they probably did call a traitor when she bucked Big Oil and fought for Native Alaskan rights. But since now they’ve picked her and “vetted” her – it’s all supposed to be okay?
Republicans went ballistic over Jeremiah Wright, even though it’s been proven that Obama did not attend the sermon where he said all that inflammatory stuff. Didn’t matter to the Republican pundits that Obama had only met Ayers one time, at a cocktail party, before they took off and branded him as radical as some guy was in his 20s, over 40 years ago. Dude, who didn’t do stupid or wacko stuff in their 20s? Everyone did at some level.
That’s my problem. When Obama does it – it’s valid news and they can talk up his “radicalness” all they want. And yet when Democrats make the same call on a Republican – all the conservatives come out howling about how it’s unfair. That’s what I call whining, to quote Mr. Graham.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I don’t recall reaching any consensus on the AIP. The points you mentioned aren’t an us-versus-them issue, it’s a states rights versus federal government issue, and the AIP is indeed playing the role of the Confederate South. The comparisons are as close as you can get: both were largely about economics, both want to form their own country and both were fighting over a resource (slaves/oil). There’s not a human rights issue this time, instead it’s an environmental issue. The main difference, as has already been pointed out, is that there’s no military involvement.
Furthermore, it is a blatant distortion to label the New Party as “Marxist.” Populist, yes, but not overtly anti-capitalist.
As for the library, we don’t know whether they “need” it. The question here is A) can the community support the upkeep and B) this raises the debate of whether tools of learning, such as libraries are, by their nature, worth expanding for their own sake? A library with outdated books and information or technology isn’t as useful as one that has been updated.
Taxes used for community benefit isn’t an issue for me. I’d prefer it be used for a museum or a library, or other local services, so I’m not going to argue based on that. As for the 2016 Olympics, so what? I’m in favor of doing great things because they’re great things, not because we’ll save a buck here or make money there. My metrics of weighing the value of something is different than yours, so you’re not going to convince me with these arguments unless you can offer evidence something is overwhelmingly wasteful (certain things are).
The attempt to lay the blame for any of these perceived ills on Barack Obama is non sequitur.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:19 pm
“Furthermore, it is a blatant distortion to label the New Party as “Marxist.†Populist, yes, but not overtly anti-capitalist.”
Then the New Party was blatantly distorting themselves, because they described themselves as being Marxist.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:21 pm
oh, another thought about my last comment.
Republicans went to town over Jeremiah Wright – and that was a religious issue. It was all about Obama’s faith – which has no place in a campaign, like family. Correct? Separation of Church and State (although so many conservatives are blurring this line to the point of invisibility lately – I saw video this morning, on the Today Show, where Palin was professing support for the invasion of Iraq in church, saying that the war in Iraq was commanded by God, part of God’s plan, or something like that).
Whereas Palin’s involvement, or her husband’s involvement, with the AIP is totally political. Has nothing to do with her daughter, her children, or her church. It’s totally fair game.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:37 pm
They describe themselves as election reformers, not Marxists. Not that I see Marxist philosophy as a bad thing (the implementation thus far has been a disaster), but show us where they describe themselves as Marxists. Hell, it’s on their old site, too at newparty.org, which hasn’t even been updated since they were around, as far as I can tell.
cgiselle – Got a link for that video? Fundie crazies calling Iraq a holy war is something that needs to be played over and over and over again.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
That’s not entirely fair to say, as they also described themselves as agreeing with the offshoots of Marxism – Trotsky, Mao, Che, etc, but they are still around Chicago if you want to ask them. Either way its not a blatant distortion, but also not entirely or generally true that the New Party was solely Marxist, but socialism certainly was their goal.
September 3rd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Being an anarcho-socialist myself, I’d call that a lofty goal.
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Yes, electoral reform in the form of fusion candidates was the means to their ends (nationalizing industries and the companies, private property, and employees affiliated with them) and they highlighted the more mainstream ideas of fusion the most. The New Party shared people and resources in Chicago with this group which gives a picture of why they wanted to promote fusion candidates.
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
Get rid of “corporations” and their protections and put the liability on the investors/owners and they will very quickly expand ownership to employees to reduce their personal, individual liability. Then respect all individual rights. Little need for government ownership and control (the socialist part) if we respect individual rights and unions get their heads out of their butts. People will start “collectively” working together when they have to, not when they are forced to.
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:34 pm
here’s the link – Palin speaking at an Assembly of God (Pentecostal) church about her son’s deployment being a mission from God:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26524974#26523711
It’s at about 2:35 in the video, if you don’t want to watch the whole thing.
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:35 pm
here’s the link to the Palin video
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26524974#26523711
saying her son’s deployment is a mission from God. At a Pentecostal church.
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
here’s the link to Palin telling folks at a Pentecostal church that her son’s deployment to Iraq is a mission from God:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26524974#26523711
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:40 pm
The ol’ birds of a feather approach? Correlation does not imply causation, but I think it’s fair to say they have things in common.
I’m completely in favor or nationalizing a number of industries, including energy and health care, which I consider mandatory expenses no matter where you live. They work elsewhere. Isn’t that also what you were saying Alaska secessionists want to do? Nationalize their natural resources and have the ability to set prices domestically? I say why limit it to Alaska?
The idea of getting rid of corporations sounds good, but there are benefits to our current model and capitalism at large which I’d like to keep. Yet we ought to enforce both the protections for consumers and higher ethical standards that businesses damn well know they should be following anyway. The restrictions and regulation of anything you could point at and call a small business–which isn’t a subsidiary of a larger corporation–would be held to different standards and, yes, taxed less. I don’t see why we can’t have it both ways with a nuanced, gray-area, tiered approach. On the other hand, government spending ought to have more effective public oversight. I have a practical vision for that too. Either way, we ought to have a system that serves humanity, but primarily our own culture, before it serves the interests of the privileged few.
What must be prevented to maintain this is the subversion of our government to a moral authority, courtesy of fundie nutbags who want to make their twisted version of Jesus president, or authoritarian ideologues who fail to understand the human condition and suffer from a case of moral narcissism.
…maybe I should just blog it.
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
trying for the fifth time,
for video link on Palin’s Iraq mission from god comments, go to msnbc (dot) nbc (dot) com, and look for “Palin to take stage at convention” report by David Gregory.
it’s at about 2:35 in the video
September 3rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
not letting me post links Billy.
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:18 pm
cgiselle12,
Gov. Palin was talking about God’s plan for her son’s life, which included deployment to Iraq. She asked the congregation to pray for his safety. It is completely inaccurate to characterize her statements as being a call to some “holy war.”
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:21 pm
here’s a video where palin openly advocates and supports the Alaska Indepence Party:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI&eurl=http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/09/01/sarah-palin-secessionist/
September 3rd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
here’s a video where palin openly advocates and supports the Alaska Independence Party:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI&eurl=http://www.oliverwillis.com/2008/09/01/sarah-palin-secessionist/
September 3rd, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Holy cow. People are making a big deal out of this AIP thing?
Let me paraphrase:
Welcome to Fairbanks! I support out state constitution as do you. Our state has values and hard working people. Have a good convention. God bless you.
THIS is controversial?
I can’t wait until the press gets hold of her Girl Scout Cookie order history and they find out that she has a history of ordering extra boxes Tagalongs (TM) that the First Dude and her kids never see.
/ sarcasm
I suggest some alternative reading:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122044753790594947.html?mod=hpp_us_inside_today
September 4th, 2008 at 9:42 am
People made a big deal of the Ayers, Rezko and Wright things too. Maybe we should spread emails saying she’s a Muslim.
October 7th, 2008 at 12:24 am
“Get rid of “corporations†and their protections and put the liability on the investors/owners and they will very quickly expand ownership to employees to reduce their personal, individual liability. Then respect all individual rights. Little need for government ownership and control (the socialist part) if we respect individual rights and unions get their heads out of their butts.”
That’ll certainly shake out a lot of deadwood. however, you’ll then hear even more b1@tching und vinig about those knotty “trial lawyers”, proposals to limit class-actions etc the usual.