Country First

lavender

Cautiously Optimistic
Joined
Apr 6, 2001
Posts
25,108
How does this square with someone who is affiliated (I still think she was a member until 1994) with the Alaskan Independence Party. Her husband was a member until 2002.

The mantra of the Alaskan Independence Party is "Alaska First." Sarah Palin's slogan for the 2006 gubernatorial race was "Alaska First."

In 2007, Sarah Palin recorded a message that was played at the Alaskan Independence Party Convention.

Even when she was asked about the VP and she indicated she didn't know exactly what the VP did - she said she would have to look to see if it was a role that could help Alaska.

And in her first two stump speeches (I believe - will admit I'm wrong if fact checked), she indicated her interest in doing stuff for Alaska/Alaskans.

Now, I haven't gone into telling you all the negative rhetoric of the Alaskan Independence Party - because it doesn't come from her mouth and I'm not going to attribute those sentiments directly to her.

But, how can you pick a person affiliated with such a party under a slogan "Country First." It's like the Orwellianism of the Bush age lives on in John McCain.

Well, some of you may say, if you can just confirm that her husband was a member in 2002 - that's not Sarah Palin. I might at least think that argument was colorable, if Todd Palin wasn't involved so closely in Sarah Palin's governance.

In the troopergate scandal, Todd Palin is right in the middle - even having direct conversations with the commissioner at issue. Further, all the e-mails that are being held back under a claim of executive privilege - Todd Palin - the "first dude" was copied on them.

What is Todd Palin doing copied on e-mails with the Governor of Alaska?

This whole thing is odd on so many levels. If it wouldn't be political suicide, McCain would ditch Palin tomorrow.

And for those who think this is the angry left, this is what you get when you wait until the day before your convention to pick a complete unknown. It is the media/press's responsibility to do exactly what they are doing - tell the American people who this woman is.

They simply have to do it quickly because there's only 60 days until the election.

Further, McCain is channeling Bush again and again. Campbell Brown interviewed a McCain campaign spokesman last night and asked legitimate questions "Name on decision Sarah Palin has made as Commander in Chief of the Alaskan National Guard." The operative couldn't answer and tried to dodge the question, but Campbell Brown kept asking. In RETRIBUTION to the free press, McCain pulled his interview with Larry King tonight and said that Brown's interview was "out of line."

You see - that's how the Republicans deal with the press - when the press actually does their job, Republicans try to punish the media and say - we won't let you have access.

This is just further evidence that the Republican party simply doesn't get it. They don't get what this country is about - they don't get what the free press means. They don't get what debate about facts is.

What has come out about Palin in the press/media is facts, what they are uncovering. There has never been insinuation by the media - except to say that they don't get why Palin is qualified and even most of them are hesitant to say that.

This Palin thing is bad and getting worse. I think the real problem is this Alaskan Independence Party thing. How in the world is mainstream America supposed to accept that she was part of a radical section of the right in Alaska who really doesn't believe in the strength and sanctity of American institutions.
 
The only think I have heard about the Alaskan Independence party was a brief comment on MSNBC that some documents had been provided showing Palin had been a Registered Republican since 1984 or so.

That is all I have heard. Her just being a registered republican doesn't prevent her from doing things with the AIP or speaking at their convention but it does put a bit of a damper on how she was affiliated with them.

I will also admit my ignorance that I don't even know anything about the AIP and had only heard of them in passing previously.
 
This campaign is teaching me stuff. I didn't even know Alaska had a secessionist movement. The Obama/Lincoln parallels continue!

What about the part where the loon who is head of the AIP urged members to infiltrate the established parties as a means of gaining power?

This is another sign that Palin is a really fringe character, outside all the hockey mom shtick. To the extent she has a coherent political philosophy, she appears extremist all the way. A big spender, a promoter of the Iraq war as a holy crusade, a believer in using public office to punish enemies--is there anything to like here?
 
The only think I have heard about the Alaskan Independence party was a brief comment on MSNBC that some documents had been provided showing Palin had been a Registered Republican since 1984 or so.

That is all I have heard. Her just being a registered republican doesn't prevent her from doing things with the AIP or speaking at their convention but it does put a bit of a damper on how she was affiliated with them.

I will also admit my ignorance that I don't even know anything about the AIP and had only heard of them in passing previously.

I'm not sure about that MSNBC thing. I'm still looking into it. Her husband was a member until 2002. The members of the AIP state definitively that Sarah and Todd Palin attended their convention in 1994.

At the 2007 AIP convention, the head (I guess) said that Palin was a member, but left to take a non-partisan role as mayor of Wasilla and then decided to join the Republican ticket to seek higher office. The man said that Palin was still sympathetic to the cause.

Of course, this is what the AIP member said - not Palin.
 
I'm not sure about that MSNBC thing. I'm still looking into it. Her husband was a member until 2002. The members of the AIP state definitively that Sarah and Todd Palin attended their convention in 1994.

At the 2007 AIP convention, the head (I guess) said that Palin was a member, but left to take a non-partisan role as mayor of Wasilla and then decided to join the Republican ticket to seek higher office. The man said that Palin was still sympathetic to the cause.

Of course, this is what the AIP member said - not Palin.

The MSNBC thing was a brief Comment during the convention coverage by either Joe Scarborough or Chris Matthews they were both on at the same time and I was listening to it out of one ear so not sure who said it.
 
Just in....Sarah Palin has been known to wear pink toenail polish. Rumors originating from the color lavender hint that this might be a sign of a "pink" or communist past. More news on this breaking story will be provided as the media go on a feeding frenzy reminiscent of a pack of sharks.
 
How does this square with someone who is affiliated (I still think she was a member until 1994) with the Alaskan Independence Party. Her husband was a member until 2002.

You ran into problems right in your first sentence.

From that noted right wing propaganda organ Mother Jones:

Read about it here

"n the past few days, during Sarah Palin's rough introduction to the American public, it has been reported (first by ABC News) that Palin, the governor of Alaska tapped by John McCain to be his running mate, was once a member of the Alaska Independence Party (AIP). This minor third party advocates for the secession of Alaska from the United States. It is affiliated with the Constitution Party, which supports the reign of Biblical common law. If Palin has indeed been an AIP true-believer, it would be rather curious: she would be a vice presidential candidate who favored reducing the size of the United States.

But it is getting harder to make that case. The McCain-Palin campaign on Tuesday released voter registration to show she was never registered to vote in Alaska as a member of the party. And a key source for the stories about Palin and the AIP backed off his account in an interview with Mother Jones. Palin's husband has been a long-time AIP member, but ascertaining her true association with the party has been difficult.

In recent press reports, Lynette Clark, the AIP's chairman, has been quoted as saying Palin was at an AIP convention in 1994 and was an official party member at the time. Other sources within the party tell Mother Jones that the only way to become a member of the AIP is to register to vote with the AIP. Yet the state of Alaska released records confirming what the McCain-Palin campaign had maintained: Palin never registered as an AIP member. "
 
If Alaska seceded from the Union they could start drilling the permafrost and become the new Iran of the western world.

Mercedes for everyone!
 
This thread lacks YouTubes, YouPorns, images, sound bytes, links, image attachments or even fundamental American Flags waving within.


Country First, huh?
 
What would be preferable? I mean, she was looking to get into politics. It stands to reason that she would want to be open to different thoughts and ideas.
 
Just in....Sarah Palin has been known to wear pink toenail polish. Rumors originating from the color lavender hint that this might be a sign of a "pink" or communist past. More news on this breaking story will be provided as the media go on a feeding frenzy reminiscent of a pack of sharks.

OMG!!!....Please post ten or more different threads to discuss this issue ;)
 
Despite all the hoopla, no one ever voted for (or against) anyone because of their vice-presidential choice...at least not in most of our life times. Maybe LBJ brought along some votes to JFK, but that's probably the last time a v.p. choice mattered.

1964: LBJ-HHH? He was a lock against Goldwater, if only for the shock of the assassination (regardless of Goldwater's fanaticism).

1968: Nixon-Agnew? Spiro who?

1976: Carter-Mondale?

1980: Reagan-Bush? Settled an internal party division.

1988: Bush-Quayle? I mean, Bush won anyway. Come on.

1992: Clinton-Gore? Al Gore didn't deliver any states to the Electoral College. Provided a little balance on the outsider/insider thing.

2000: Bush-Cheney? Only the most dedicated Washington-watchers ever heard of Dick, and he had to run back to Wyoming to establish residency since the Pres and Veep can't come from the same state.

2008: More of the same.
 
The earth is 6000 years old, evolution is a crock of shit!
 
So said a young Jefferson Davis.

Palin = wacko.

Yeah, exactly. I am really glad that Civil War with Alaska has blown over.

If Obama and his minister's statements is a non-point (which it is, Obama should not be faulted for the church he goes to) then so should Palin's -nonexistent- membership in the AIP.

This is a non-issue. Just like Obama's Madrasa, or his pastor, or the other 50403089509854023485038950689028 things people have brought up about him that are complete shit.

If we are going to go back to the candidate's past or to their alleged (or entirely invented) aquaintences, and those things are to be considered important, it must be so for all candidate's, regardless of how what their party says jives with their past actions or affiliations.
 
For me, Palin is just the sideshow. The overarching question is, why the fuck wasn't she vetted? What kind of no-brain political maneuver was this?

I think it speaks volumes to McCain's lack of intelligence and judgment. He is, by far, the scarier one.
 
Hope and change? Obama's affilation with Reverend Wright for 20 years???:rolleyes:


I would do some research on Palin before you start bringing up Wright again. Seriously. I would imagine if the right brings up Wright again, the throwback (not that Palin is the nominee) might actually cost you Floridda.

Do your own research to see why I'm saying this....
 
Despite all the hoopla, no one ever voted for (or against) anyone because of their vice-presidential choice...at least not in most of our life times. Maybe LBJ brought along some votes to JFK, but that's probably the last time a v.p. choice mattered.

1964: LBJ-HHH? He was a lock against Goldwater, if only for the shock of the assassination (regardless of Goldwater's fanaticism).

1968: Nixon-Agnew? Spiro who?

1976: Carter-Mondale?

1980: Reagan-Bush? Settled an internal party division.

1988: Bush-Quayle? I mean, Bush won anyway. Come on.

1992: Clinton-Gore? Al Gore didn't deliver any states to the Electoral College. Provided a little balance on the outsider/insider thing.

2000: Bush-Cheney? Only the most dedicated Washington-watchers ever heard of Dick, and he had to run back to Wyoming to establish residency since the Pres and Veep can't come from the same state.

2008: More of the same.

Kotori - what noticeable year is missing? *cough* Eagleton *cough*
 
For me, Palin is just the sideshow. The overarching question is, why the fuck wasn't she vetted? What kind of no-brain political maneuver was this?

I think it speaks volumes to McCain's lack of intelligence and judgment. He is, by far, the scarier one.

That is the ultimate point. McCain has shown us one commanding decision in this campaign - and that decision was "off the cuff" "from the hip" it wasn't thought out, it wasn't researched, it wasn't the process of rational thought.

Sounds like Bush Jr's foreign policy.
 
There's a little bit of wacko in everyone, wouldn't you agree?

Pallin is a hail-mary pass... and I just don't think there's any way that anyone's going to catch it. She may woo-em at the convention, but I don't think she's going to play well at all in a bigger, less-partisan theater.

But, maybe it's just me.
 
I would do some research on Palin before you start bringing up Wright again. Seriously. I would imagine if the right brings up Wright again, the throwback (not that Palin is the nominee) might actually cost you Floridda.

Do your own research to see why I'm saying this....

Exactly. That's a very good point. It is best that we kind of leave this game out of the election, it isn't going to get us anywhere but screwed, in one fashion or another.
 
I would do some research on Palin before you start bringing up Wright again. Seriously. I would imagine if the right brings up Wright again, the throwback (not that Palin is the nominee) might actually cost you Floridda.

Do your own research to see why I'm saying this....

I am voting for President, not Vice President and I am certainly not voting based on the V.P.'s family. Beyond Obama's pie in the sky programs, he cannot be trusted, he will turn on anything or anyone to get elected and once he is elected who knows what he will do?
 
I am voting for President, not Vice President and I am certainly not voting based on the V.P.'s family. Beyond Obama's pie in the sky programs, he cannot be trusted, he will turn on anything or anyone to get elected and once he is elected who knows what he will do?

With a 72 y/o running, how can you NOT consider the succession planning?
 
Back
Top