pageok
pageok
pageok
Was Sarah Palin Ever A Member of the Alaska Independence Party?:
According to Hilzoy, it looks like the answer is "no."
loki13 (mail):
[Deleted by OK. lok13, if you have problems with my blogging, please send me an e-mail or call. Thanks.]
9.2.2008 9:36pm
Steve2:
Alaska Independence Party? Is that like the Independence Party of Minnesota (Ross Perot &Jesse Ventura), or the Hawaiian Independence movement (we want to be our own country again)?
9.2.2008 9:37pm
theobromophile (www):
Steve2,

Vaguely secessionist party, with some miscellaneous libertarian leanings thrown in there. Harmless stuff anyway.

Some people are cranky that Palin addressed the Party while governor. Heaven only knows what would happen if they saw the Viking pictures....
9.2.2008 9:40pm
Dilan Esper (mail) (www):
Looks like her husband was a member of it, though.

Look, personally, I don't think this one's a big issue. (My main issue with Palin is her qualifications, and my second issue is her ideology.) I think there's more than a little of the "are you, or have you ever been" going on here.

But that said, it really is true that conservatives are reaping what they sow here. It's also perfectly clear that Barack and Michelle Obama love America and are devoted to serving it, and yet movement conservatives smelled a winning political issue and have been trashing them for months with this sort of guilt by association claim. Everyone needs to lay off everyone else's associations and debate the issues.
9.2.2008 9:40pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
But she made a video address to their convention, didn't she?

Also, Todd Palin was registered AIP from 1995 until 2002.

LINK


Founder Of Group Palin Courted Professed "Hatred For The American Government"; Cursed "Damn Flag"
By Greg Sargent - September 2, 2008, 6:10PM

The founder of the Alaska Independence Party -- a group that has been courted over the years by Sarah Palin, and one her husband was a member of for roughly seven years -- once professed his "hatred for the American government" and cursed the American flag as a "damn flag."

The AIP founder, Joe Vogler, made the comments in 1991, in an interview that's now housed at the Oral History Program in the Rasmuson Library at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government," Vogler said in the interview, in which he talked extensively about his desire for Alaskan secession, the key goal of the AIP.

"And I won't be buried under their damn flag," Vogler continued in the interview, which also touched on his disappointment with the American judicial system. "I'll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home."

At another point, Volger advocated renouncing allegiance to the United States. In the course of denouncing Federal regulation over land, he said:

"And then you get mad. And you say, the hell with them. And you renounce allegiance, and you pledge your efforts, your effects, your honor, your life to Alaska."
9.2.2008 9:42pm
byomtov (mail):
No, she wasn't registered as a memeber, though it seems her husband was. (We don't know about her pastor's views of "American institutions.")

Still, it is entirely possible to be sympathetic to a fringe party without registering as a member. After all, if you want to vote in a meaningful primary, or run for office, it's a good idea to maintain a major party registration. I'm willing to bet lots of people who consider themselves libertarians are registered as Republicans, and lots who think of themselves as greens are formally Democrats.
9.2.2008 9:42pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"Vaguely secessionist party, with some miscellaneous libertarian leanings thrown in there. Harmless stuff anyway."


Really? Did you see those quotes above?


"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government,"
9.2.2008 9:43pm
Dilan Esper (mail) (www):
Maybe we can replace one of the presidential debates with a town hall meeting between Joe Vogler and Jeremaiah Wright. I'd pay to watch that.
9.2.2008 9:45pm
Mark F. (mail):
And a libertarian is supposed to be against this party because of what?
9.2.2008 9:47pm
Dave N (mail):
Dilan Esper,

So would I.
9.2.2008 9:47pm
David M. Nieporent (www):
Mahan, the guy who founded the party was kind of a kook. He was also dead before Palin (either one) had any connection to the party. It would be like criticizing Obama because of what Jeremiah Wright's predecessor said.
9.2.2008 9:51pm
David M. Nieporent (www):
The funny thing about Vogler's passionate Alaskan chauvinism is that he wasn't even from Alaska; he was born in Kansas.
9.2.2008 9:52pm
Dilan Esper (mail) (www):
He's dead? Damn!

Seriously, if he's dead, I agree with David Nieporent's point. It also, of course, applies to conservatives who bash on Hispanic politicians with connections to MEChA and the National Council of La Raza based on statements that were put out 40 years ago by the founders of those groups.
9.2.2008 9:53pm
Cleanthes (mail) (www):
The real question, "Is she now, or has she ever been a member of the Communist Party?"
9.2.2008 9:53pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
It appears that AIP still identifies with Volger:

http://www.akip.org/introduction.html



"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."



This quote is right on the front page of their website!
9.2.2008 9:58pm
Cold Warrior:

And a libertarian is supposed to be against this party because of what?


As a libertarian, I'm not at all bothered by a secessionist movement.

From what I understand (and like most of us, I was unaware that there was any secessionist faction in Alaska until, umm, yesterday), I would have some problems with this particular secessionist party. While they want to privatize the huge federal landholdings in Alaska (not a problem in and of itself), it seems like they want only those who happen to be in Alaska today to reap the benefits of the fire sale. Why? After all, didn't the collective people of the United States buy the damn place 150 years ago? Why does Sarah Palin get a cut but not me just because her family settled there in 1965?
9.2.2008 9:59pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
Correction, that quote was on the "Introduction" page.
9.2.2008 10:01pm
theobromophile (www):
Mahan,

I'm very glad you pointed out that every single person, in every single political party in the entire world, agrees with every single statement made on behalf of that party. There are no such things as moderates, pro-choice Republicans, pro-life Democrats, pro-environment libertarians, or the like. Thank you for debunking the myth that people think for themselves.
9.2.2008 10:02pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"I'm very glad you pointed out that every single person, in every single political party in the entire world, agrees with every single statement made on behalf of that party. There are no such things as moderates, pro-choice Republicans, pro-life Democrats, pro-environment libertarians, or the like. Thank you for debunking the myth that people think for themselves."


Is that the stance you took with respect to Obama and Rev. Wright?
9.2.2008 10:04pm
Christopher Cooke (mail):
I don't think Alaska should secede. Instead, we should ask the Russians if they would swap it for Georgia (the conquered nation, not the southern state). I don't think we should insist on Ossetia, though, as the place seems rather bleak and dreary.
9.2.2008 10:09pm
Matthew K:
If we can get worked up about just when Michelle Obama became proud of our country, then it is certainly fair game whether Palin's husband has advocated breaking away from the same. That Palin appears to have been sympathetic is problematic on top of that.
9.2.2008 10:12pm
cubanbob (mail):
[Delted by OK on civilty grounds]
9.2.2008 10:12pm
Dan M.:
Perhaps it would be wise to look at the actual platform of the Alaskan Independence Party.

http://www.akip.org/platform.html

It seems clear to me that their constant mention of the United States Constitution would indicate that they in fact do not hate America.

But I certainly don't think hating the federal government is equivalent to hating America.

And I wish we'd pledge allegiance to the Constitution and to the republic which it established rather than to the flag.
9.2.2008 10:15pm
astrangerwithcandy (mail):
<[Deleted by OK on civility grounds]
9.2.2008 10:16pm
loki13 (mail):
OK-

It was a joke aimed at the number of times I had been posting on the Palin topic recently. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

As for the Independence Party . . . does it matter? She has clear ties to it. It's just a means to an end.

Does any rational person think Obama supports early 70s terrorist groups? Doesn't matter- he knows Bill Ayers.

Does any rational person think Joe Biden is too inexperienced for his post? Well, he doesn't have *executive* experience.

Heck, does John McCain or Obama support everything their associates support? Doesn't matter, they know Hagee/Wright.

Don't people hate negative campaign ads? Doesn't matter, they're effective.

Anyone with half a brain knows both McCain and Obama are fundamentally decent people; I am sure the same is true of Biden and Palin. We should vote based on their visions of the future and their policies of the country . . .

Doesn't matter; we'll just hear more of this silliness.
9.2.2008 10:21pm
The Ace (mail):
Mahan Atma,

How many positions from Reverend Wright's church have you ever posted on this site?
9.2.2008 10:21pm
The Ace (mail):
Does any rational person think Obama supports early 70s terrorist groups?

Er, if he doesn't, why doesn't he distance himself from those people?
9.2.2008 10:22pm
Christopher Cooke (mail):
Ace has a point. I would be especially disturbed if a video were to surface of Obama welcoming a meeting of the Weathermen Underground in his home town, or if he married a member of that group, or some other similar act indicating an endorsement of their odious views.
9.2.2008 10:26pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
As far as Rev Wright goes, Obama has repeatedly denounced him and his views.

Are you guys going to demand that Palin and/or her husband denounce the party's secessionist views and the statements of the party's founder?

If not, why not?
9.2.2008 10:28pm
The Ace (mail):
As far as Rev Wright goes, Obama has repeatedly denounced him and his views

Thank you for proving how un-serious you are.

You can't produce quotes from 2 different dates proving your assertion.
9.2.2008 10:30pm
Steve2:
Dan M, I agree with you re: to what allegiance should be pledged. I've long thought the current pledge has 9 words worth saying ("I pledge allegiance to liberty and justice for all") and 22 extraneous ones to cut (all the rest).

As to the nature of the Alaska Independence Party, it appears not to resemble the Independence Party of Minnesota very much, considering that one doesn't now and never did advocate for Minnesotan independence.
9.2.2008 10:30pm
loki13 (mail):
The Ace is correct. I have yet to hear Obama explicitly distance himself from cannibalistic pedophiles, a fortiorari, he supports them. In fact, I don't think Obama has ever explicitly distanced himself from Ron Paul, which makes him a Ron Paul supporter as well. Wow, think of the number of things Obama supports! I hear he hasn't distanced himself, explicitly, from the Black Plague.

Tell me, Senator Obama, why haven't you distanced yourself from wife beaters?
9.2.2008 10:31pm
The Ace (mail):
Guess where on the political spectrum this person falls?


"If health insurance for all, an end to the Iraq War, an end to torture and illegal wiretapping, and a sane energy policy can be obtained at the price of destroying one teenage girl, her family, and the surrendering our self-respect I see that as a cheap trade."


Also, now the Democrats have put out Palin's social security number.

Why are they so terrified of her?
9.2.2008 10:32pm
OrinKerr:
Mahan Atma,

I not only want them to denounce those views, I want them to do so directly, without first embracing the AIP and saying that they could no more denounce it than denounce federalism.
9.2.2008 10:32pm
The Ace (mail):
I have yet to hear Obama explicitly distance himself from cannibalistic pedophiles,

Non Sequitur.

Obama hasn't been seen hanging out with known terrorists and lying about his association with them.

Which is of course why you posted such a silly, nonsensical reply.
9.2.2008 10:34pm
byomtov (mail):
Er, if he doesn't, why doesn't he distance himself from those people?

I think the question was addressed to rational people, Ace. You're under no obligation to answer.
9.2.2008 10:36pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
OrinKerr,

Fair enough -- but don't bet on it. I don't think you're going to see the Palins denouncing the AIP any time soon.

McCain picked Palin precisely because he needed to shore up his far-right-wing base. Just as many of the posters here demonstrate, these voters are quite sympathetic to the AIP.

Having Palin denounce them now would negate the reason for picking her.
9.2.2008 10:38pm
Hoosier:
This is getting nuts. How many people are going to invade this blog and post things that must be deleted on "civility grounds"? When do we get our blog back?

This has been a rather well-functioning community of civilized, reasonably intelligent people. If you are here simply to grind an axe in this election cycle, could you go find some Vikings? I'm sure they, too, have axes to play with.
9.2.2008 10:38pm
The Ace (mail):
As far as Rev Wright goes, Obama has repeatedly denounced him and his views

This, is hardly a denunciation:

The man I met more than 20 years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor.

He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine, who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth -- by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.
Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear.

The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Rev. Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children.


Feel free to carry on in your delusions.
9.2.2008 10:40pm
MarkField (mail):

He's dead? Damn!


Yeah, but just think how much more interesting the debate would be once we get him miked up.
9.2.2008 10:40pm
The Ace (mail):

I think the question was addressed to rational people, Ace. You're under no obligation to answer.

Why do you think you, another leftist and Obama voter, can't answer?

Want to take a stab at that?
9.2.2008 10:41pm
Dan M.:
So, uh, did anyone read the platform of the AIP? I'll just give a few important ones:

"1 To effect full compliance with the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Alaska.
2 To support and defend States' Rights, Individual Rights, Property Rights, and the Equal Footing Doctrine as guaranteed by the constitutions of the United States of America and the state of Alaska.
3 To advocate the convening of a State Constitutional Convention at the constitutionally designated 10 year interval.
4 To reinforce the unalienable rights endowed by our Creator to Alaska law, by eliminating the use of the word "privilege" in the Alaska statutes.
.....
13 To support the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
14 To support the complete abolition of the concept of sovereign or governmental immunity, so as to restore accountability for public servants.
15 To support the rights of parents to privately or home school their children.
16 To support the privatization of government services.
17 To oppose the borrowing of money by government for any purposes other than for capital improvements.
18 To strengthen the traditional family and support individual accountability without government interference or regulation.
19 To support the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, according to their conscience."

So, uh, support for rights as opposed to privileges, support for the United States Constitution, support for the right to keep and bear arms, and support for jury nullification. They just HATE America and everything it stands for.
9.2.2008 10:42pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
Obama Denounces Wright


In Winston-Salem, Obama sharply attacks Reverend Jeremiah Wright and the substance of his remarks yesterday, a far sharper disavowal than he gave in Philadelphia last month.

The core of his message: That Wright was not only offensive, but the polar opposite of Obama's own views and politics.

"I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That's in my DNA, trying to promote mutual understanding to insist that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That's who I am, that's what I believe, and that's what this campaign has been about," Obama said.

"I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday," he said.

Obama also distanced himself from the man in a way he has been reluctant to in the past.

"The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago," he said. "His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church."

"They certainly don't portray accurately my values and beliefs," he said.

"If Reverend Wright thinks that's political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn't know me very well and based on his remarks yesterday, I may not know him as well as I thought either."

"I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church," he said. "But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS; when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century; when he equates the U.S. wartime efforts with terrorism -- then there are no exuses. They offend me. They rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced, and that's what I'm doing very clearly and unequivocally here today."

"It is antithetical to my campaign. It is antithetical to what I'm about. It is not what I think America stands for," he said.


That's a pretty unequivocal denouncement.

Now I realize you all would rather not talk about the Palins and the AIP, but is anyone else here actually going to hold them to the same standard as the Obamas, and demand that they denounce the AIP's secessionist views and the anti-American language of its founder?
9.2.2008 10:46pm
loki13 (mail):
Dan M.,

Missed a few-

7. To seek the complete repatriation of the public lands, held by the federal government, to the state and people of Alaska in conformance with Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, of the federal constitution.
(that would be stealing Federal land)

8. To prohibit all bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings purporting to have the effect of law, except that which shall be approved by the elected legislature.
(nullification of Federal Court decisions)

20. To support "Jobs for Alaskans...First!"
(a little protectionism, also unconstitutional)

From their "goals" page:

The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:

1) Remain a Territory.
2) Become a separate and Independent Nation.
3) Accept Commonwealth status.
4) Become a State.

The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, which was for Alaskans to achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences.

Anything else you want to learn? I hate me the ellipses . . . :P
9.2.2008 10:50pm
Smokey:
Mahan Atma has always been somewhat of a parody, but I'm a little surprised at that he'd go this far into parodyland:
But she made a video address to their convention, didn't she?
Some folks just don't get it: people running for office address lots of groups. They're asking for votes, see? All politicians do it, every last one of them. Robert Byrd addressed the KKK and never repudiated his association with them, but Mahan Atma is just fine with that, it's all for his Liberal cause.

There's nothing wrong with asking people for their vote. Candidates ask just about everyone to vote for them. Obama most assuredly asks the 'Rev' Wright's congregation for votes.

Too bad some folks just don't 'get' democracy.
9.2.2008 10:51pm
Hoosier:
"He's dead? Damn!


Yeah, but just think how much more interesting the debate would be once we get him miked up."

I don't know about that. Did you catch Mondale at the Democratic convention four years ago?
9.2.2008 10:53pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"So, uh, support for rights as opposed to privileges, support for the United States Constitution, support for the right to keep and bear arms, and support for jury nullification. They just HATE America and everything it stands for."


Sure, if you selectively quote from their website, editing out all the stuff showing that yes, they actually hate America.

How do you explain the prominence of this quote on the "Introduction" page:

"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."


And how do you explain that they prominently tout Vogel as the founder, despite the many quotes provided above, in which he explicitly denounces America?
9.2.2008 10:53pm
theobromophile (www):
Hoosier: hey, I love that Viking picture! Other than that, yes, I agree - the Volokh Conspiracy used to be such a nice, respectable place.

MarkField: know any good mediums? Once we've joined the tinfoil hat group, can we also mike up Vince Foster? Let's take "circus" to a new level. :)

DanM: those are facts. What's up with that?
9.2.2008 10:54pm
The Ace (mail):
That's a pretty unequivocal denouncement

Er, you said Obama has "repeatedly denounced" reverend Wright.

Care to post another?

And since you can't do that, care to tell us why it took him 20 years to do that?
9.2.2008 10:55pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"Robert Byrd addressed the KKK and never repudiated his association with them, but Mahan Atma is just fine with that, it's all for his Liberal cause."


How sad that you are reduced to attributing to me positions that I have never even remotely taken.

It's a sure sign that you've lost the argument.
9.2.2008 10:56pm
PC:
Annnnd the AIP is the Alaskan wing of the Constitution Party. I'm grabbing some popcorn. This is going to be fun when people start looking into that group.
9.2.2008 10:56pm
Cold Warrior:
Hoosier, you're right.

I like this blog, and I have learned a lot from many of the regular reader-commenters. I hope I've occasionally added a bit of insight myself, at least from time-to-time.

This election season has, however, brought out the same old party faithful that ruin most of the internet. Someone is curious about the extent to which Sarah Palin subscribes to the platform of the Alaskan Independence Party? Strike back by suggesting that Obama consorts with known terrorists! Someone questions the meaning of Obama's curious association with Rev. Wright? Strike back with something about Cindy McCain's drug use!

It's tedious. It adds nothing. I wish I could filter out certain zero-value-added commenters, and read only comments from those who have something interesting to say. And that includes many people I don't agree with on most issues.
9.2.2008 10:59pm
The Ace (mail):
To support "Jobs for Alaskans...First!"
(a little protectionism, also unconstitutional


Hilarious.
9.2.2008 10:59pm
TyWebb:
Ah, the echo chamber this place becomes in an election year unfavorable to the Conspirators. Will it regain its focus when the Court reconvenes and gives Eugene et al. something to talk about intelligently and sans snark? Or will it keep the shark firmly in the rear view? Tune in next October.
9.2.2008 11:03pm
The Ace (mail):
Strike back by suggesting that Obama consorts with known terrorists!

He does.
It is a fact that is undeniable.
9.2.2008 11:05pm
loki13 (mail):
The Ace-

Why is that hilarious? The protectionism part? The constitutionality part? Since they didn't elaborate, I'd have to guess. If they were reserving for native-born (assuming state action), they'd have a serious issue. If not, what is an Alaskan? If they put on a residency requirement, there'd be a constitutional issue as well (see welfare requirements, CA- if you're familiar with that case).
9.2.2008 11:06pm
loki13 (mail):
I should add that since part of their platform is to ignore federal court rulings, they wouldn't have to worry 'bout no Supremacy clause, so, I guess, that would be funny.
9.2.2008 11:08pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"Er, you said Obama has "repeatedly denounced" reverend Wright.

Care to post another?"


I said Obama has repeatedly denounced him and his views, which he has done:


"Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy," Obama said. "I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue."



So show me where the Palins have denounced the AIP and its views, even once.
9.2.2008 11:08pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
Can any of you Palin supporters answer this:

Why can't she talk to the media herself? Why is John McCain keeping her locked away and shielded from questions?

Isn't it a basic requirement of the job she aspires to, that of a high-level office-holder, to be able to talk to reporters and answer their questions? What are they afraid of?

None of the other nominees are afraid to interact with the media. So why is Palin?
9.2.2008 11:15pm
loki13 (mail):
Atma,


It doesn't matter. You can find 5,000,000 examples, perfectly sourced, and they'll still say that he didn't distance himself "enough". Why? So they can keep bringing it up. It's a means to an end.

Facts no longer matter. Smokey has been corrected endless times on his Jimmy Carter quote, and all that's managed to do is get him to change it from "black boy" to "colored boy".

This applies to both sides. No body cares what policies people have. Just what information they can use as a weapon against the other. Instead of an honest defense, we just get "But Clinton," or "But Bush . . ." and then another attack.

Nothing is true, everything is permitted. In the end, all that matters is what the narratives are that get out to that vanishingly small number of undecideds in the battleground states, and the creation of new voters. These unending skirmishes on the web are only valuable inasmuch as they *might* help shape the narrative that gets played on the news, or on SNL, or the Daily Show, and influences that undecided voter who is worried about their groceries and their gas and the war to pull the lever one way or another.
9.2.2008 11:20pm
Hoosier:
" Or will it keep the shark firmly in the rear view? "

I'm lost. What "shark"?

"Can any of you Palin supporters answer this:

Why can't she talk to the media herself? Why is John McCain keeping her locked away and shielded from questions? "

Actually, I have a pretty decent guess. And I'm not even a "Palin supporter." But I have no doubt that you are not really looking for informed opinion on this one. I suspect there's no chance of getting you to say "AH, yes. That makes sense."

So why bother?

This is all getting old. ANd it's still early September.
9.2.2008 11:22pm
Toby:
Uhm....

I can find plenty of interactions with the MSM on the net, written. spkent, taped, videotaped.

HWat is Mahan looking for?
9.2.2008 11:23pm
Hoosier:
loki:
" In the end, all that matters is what the narratives are that get out to that vanishingly small number of undecideds in the battleground states, and the creation of new voters."

And what confounds me is WHY people think that VC is the way to affect the narrative. I mean no offense to our kind hosts and our Fearless Leader.

But truly, WTF do people think they achieving by shilling for a candidate on VC?
9.2.2008 11:24pm
Hoosier:
"HWat is Mahan looking for?"

Inner peace. Like all the rest of us.
9.2.2008 11:25pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"I can find plenty of interactions with the MSM on the net, written. spkent, taped, videotaped."


Not since she's was picked as the VP nominee. She made only two public appearances, and gave the same speech twice.

Surely, you must admit that she should have to address the media as a VP pick, now that people actually know what job she's pursuing, right?
9.2.2008 11:27pm
JK:
This web site used to have such great discourse too, now it's the same Free Republic vs. Kos bullshit as the rest of the political blogosphere. I guess there's not much that can be done about it besides hoping they go away after the election.
9.2.2008 11:30pm
David Warner:
Good question. Likely waiting for her convention speech.

You know, this speaking power to truth offensive is not a desperation move. Obama is solidly in the lead. It is a preventative measure in case Palin manages to say something interesting in her speech, with the goal to convince as many people as possible to tune her out first.
9.2.2008 11:33pm
Smokey:
For all the 1L's out there, here's an example of your garden variety strawman argument:

loki13:
The Ace is correct. I have yet to hear Obama explicitly distance himself from cannibalistic pedophiles, a fortiorari [sic], he supports them.
Actually, Mahan Atma had originally stepped in it by claiming:
As far as Rev Wright goes, Obama has repeatedly denounced him and his views.
To which The Ace naturally responded:
You can't produce quotes from 2 different dates proving your assertion.
Two points:

loki13 set up her strawman and then knocked it right down, fearless strawman killer that she is. The Ace made a specific point, to which loki13 responded via her fabricated strawman. Maybe she'll celebrate her brave victory over the fearsome strawman she created and defeated with some Red Herring and chablis tonight.

And Mahan Atma is still futilely searching for something to refute The Ace with [hint: that pathetic, wishy-washy Obama quote fails. Obama referred to exactly one day ["yesterday"], even though the internet is filled with similar Wright rants over the past twenty years.

Is Odumbo the new Rip Van Winkle? Did he sleep through twenty [20] years of Wright's hate-America sermons? Or is he being politically expedient [eg: lying]?

And that Obama quote is being passed off as denouncing someone? It was more like a minor kissy-face wrist slap between two fellow America-haters joined at the hip.

Nice try thanx for playing kids we have some lovely parting gifts for you on your way out...

K? Thx bye
9.2.2008 11:37pm
PC:
It is a preventative measure in case Palin manages to say something interesting in her speech, with the goal to convince as many people as possible to tune her out first.


I think a fair amount of the rumors being reported as news has to do with no one knowing much about Palin, her background or her views. In a 24/7 news environment everyone is trying to get the scoop first so a lot of news outlets are going with timeliness over accuracy.
9.2.2008 11:38pm
MarkField (mail):

MarkField: know any good mediums? Once we've joined the tinfoil hat group, can we also mike up Vince Foster? Let's take "circus" to a new level. :)


And I have just the intro: "Next [comes] an act of enormous enormance. No former performers performed this performance."


I don't know about that. Did you catch Mondale at the Democratic convention four years ago?


No, but I saw him in 1984. That should count.
9.2.2008 11:41pm
TyWebb:

I'm lost. What "shark"?

This one. Welcome to the internet.
9.2.2008 11:44pm
Mahan Atma (mail):
"And Mahan Atma is still futilely searching for something to refute The Ace with"

Actually, I already provided two different quotes from two different dates.

You all can't provide a single instance of the Palins denouncing AIP and/or Vogel. Nor are you demanding one (with the exception of Orin Kerr).

I realize you'd rather only talk about Obama/Wright, and not Palin/Vogel, but that just points up the hypocrisy of your position.
9.2.2008 11:45pm
Spitzer:
I am surprised by the reaction by the MSM and the left bloggers to Palin's candidacy. I expected attacks of course, but I am taken aback by the personal nature and sheer viciousness of the actual reaction. Maybe the more interesting question is not whether Palin's husband is or is not a member of a political party that questions Alaska's vote for nationhood, or Palin's daughter's pregnancy, or Palin's husband's old DUI. Instead, the more interesting avenue to explore is the reaction itself - why did the media, the democrats, and the left bloggers react with such violence? Perhaps the MSM feels betrayed because Palin has not paid sufficient obeisance by showing up to Meet the Press? Perhaps the democrats are afraid of a republican woman, a candidate who may present a direct threat to one of the Dems's foundational factions (much the way that the dems react to black republicans)? Perhaps the left bloggers are so sociopathically attached to BHO's candidacy that any threat to his inevitable accession must be destroyed at any cost? I don't know the answers, and won't pretend I do - but I do fin the reaction as interesting as it is disgusting.
9.2.2008 11:46pm
Smokey:
Mahan Atma:
I realize you'd much rather only talk about Obama/Wright...
This is so delicious! The comparison has now devolved instead into Palin vs Obama. No Biden on the horizon. He's apparently gone missing [AKA: "hiding out"].

Who benefits here? Obama? Or Sarah Palin?

We all know the answer to that question. Which is why my friend Mahan Atma is desperately flogging a dead horse like the AIP [see the 9.2.2008 9:42pm post], and hoping against hope that the Rev Wright's rants to Obama over 20 years are forgotten.

Sorry, Mahan. We're not gonna let anyone forget.
9.2.2008 11:57pm
loki13 (mail):
Smokey,

Most 1Ls are trying very hard to something more basic than knocking down (or building) a strawman; they're learning to spot the issue. For example, they might read your long missive and be distracted by the number of logical errors you committed; they might not note that you incorrectly point out which post I was responding to:

It was NOT the response to Mahan-

As far as Rev Wright goes, Obama has repeatedly denounced him and his views

Thank you for proving how un-serious you are.

You can't produce quotes from 2 different dates proving your assertion.


Rather, it was this (a response to me)-

Does any rational person think Obama supports early 70s terrorist groups?

Er, if he doesn't, why doesn't he distance himself from those people?


This is evidenced by my use of the word "distance" in my quote, instead of "denounce". This skill of spotting the issue (in this case, shifting the ground of the debate) is much more useful than any strawman skills, as it allows them to quickly realize that your entire argument is based on a either willful ignorance or deliberately misquoting others. So ends the classroom dialogue, Mr. Smokey.
9.2.2008 11:57pm
Hoosier:
Spitzer:

Yep.

Long ago, Todd Palin (not a candidate) received a DUI. Long ago, Obama used drugs. I don't remember whether, long ago, I used drugs. (Perhaps that should tell me something?)

As my legions of followers already know, I plan on voting for McCain. But I wouldn't care if Michelle Obama turned out to have a DUI in her past. Or if Biden smoked some spleef while in college.

And you know what? I DON'T WANNA KNOW.

(Now back to our partisan hackery.)
9.3.2008 12:02am
OrinKerr:
Nice comment, Hoosier.
9.3.2008 12:34am
Suzy (mail):
It was reported that Sarah Palin attended the 1994 AIP convention as a supporter. Is this false? I'd like to have the straight story, because so much is floating around there now that it's hard to know what is true and what is bunk.
9.3.2008 12:40am
theobromophile (www):
I suspect that we all have copious numbers of skeletons in our closets. The question is not what we did or did not do at age 20, but what we have done recently and will do in the future. Some of the most tightly-wound adults are the ones who were the craziest in their youth - and they learned a lot from that.

Now, as for the complaints that Palin has not been before the press recently: I heard that she was spending a few days in hibernation, writing her speech, and doing a crash course on What to Expect When You're Electing. She also has a family, and, perhaps, prefers to pay attention to them rather than to pat herself on the back and parade about.

I suspect that if she spent a great deal of time in front of the cameras, she would be derided as an attention-seeking former beauty queen who is neither preparing to lead the country, nor spending time with her family.
9.3.2008 12:43am
Jeffery W Wilson (www):
Mahan Atma:


None of the other nominees are afraid to interact with the media. So why is Palin?

Uh, because she's busy preparing to address the nation? Just guessing....
9.3.2008 1:13am
Angus:
Part of what has driven the media frenzy is the McCain campaign's long silence. Rather than give much information on the candidate they just let people research her background willy-nilly. What did they expect but chaos when tens of thousands of bloggers start poking around, and there is no official campaign narrative to counteract the endless speculation? Hell, I went to the McCain campaign's website yesterday to read the official bio of Palin -- and there wasn't one!! In the "About Sarah" page, all they did was reproduce her introduction speech.

Awfully handled by the McCain campaign. Never, ever, let anyone else build your candidate's narrative for them. I thought they had done well in their attacks on Obama over the past month, but now it looks like they are the keystone kops and just managed to get lucky for a bit.
9.3.2008 1:15am
Jon Roland (mail) (www):
Something that too many people forget, or choose to ignore, is that political figures, like people generally, learn and change their positions as they do. That is not flip-flopping, if it comes from increased wisdom and not just pandering to constituencies. Most of the personalities being discussed have been evolving during their course of their careers, and we should look at where they are now and toward where they seem to be moving.

That having been said, most secessionist movements begin with dissent from what they regard as abuses, especially constitutional violations, and call for secession either because they despair of reform, or as a wel to get attention for their concerns. Having been close to several such movements (including the various "Republic of Texas" groups), they are basically political theater. People should not take the calls for secession seriously, but they should take their concerns seriously, because there is usually some merit to them.

If more people would do more to help redress grievances of others, there would be a lot less trouble in the world. Remember the wise words, "There is no peace without justice."

When I examine Sarah Palin's narrative, I see a lady learning fast. She has come a long way, and I expect to see her going a lot further. She is not yet a well-developed libertarian constitutionalist, but I see steady evolution in that direction. I don't see her being stalled in that development like so many others who do not truly respect the Constitution or take seriously their oath to defend it.

On the other side, I see Obama evolving. I like the guy. I don't like his party or their positions. Well, I used to be a liberal Democrat when I was younger. I got over it. And I hope Obama will also. His problem is not lack of experience. He just hasn't learned enough yet to be libertarian. When he does I might support him for President. Until then, I will go with those who either have learned, like Bob Barr or Ron Paul, or who are learning fast, like Sarah Palin.

Even McCain is learning. He made a brilliant choice in Sarah Palin. Obama, I'm sorry to say, made a bad choice in Biden, who is one of those whose development has stalled.

As for a pledge to the Constitution, here is the one I wrote:


I pledge allegiance to the Constitution
for the United States of America,
and to the principles for which it stands:
one Supreme Law [under God], indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all.
9.3.2008 1:21am
dr:
The detente between Hoosier and Loki at 10:24pm gives me a very, very, very small glimmer of hope for the salvation of this blog, which I agree was once a hell of a good place to find interesting, intellectually honest discussion about politics, the law, and so many other things.

As Rocky Balboa put it in his 1984 Moscow speech, "if I can change... and you can change... everybody can change!" Take back the night, people!

(A little more selective comment editing on the part of the proprietors, as above with the cuban, would go a long way. Not that you don't have other things to do. I'm just saying.)
9.3.2008 1:23am
PC:
It was reported that Sarah Palin attended the 1994 AIP convention as a supporter. Is this false? I'd like to have the straight story, because so much is floating around there now that it's hard to know what is true and what is bunk.


The reports are conflicting at right now. Gov. Palin did address the Alaskan Independence/Constitution Party in this video in 2008.
9.3.2008 1:39am
Marvin (mail) (www):
The AIP wants the people of Alaska to vote, to use secret ballots to vote on remaining a state --- And this vote would include the option for the people of Alaska to reaffirm their desire to be one of the great 50 states of America.

The AIP does not call for or conduct violence to promote its agenda.

What is the problem with allowing folks to ask for a vote on their ideas?
9.3.2008 1:54am
LM (mail):
Looks like the debate's off, since Mark Field continues to evade the question of how to raise the dead, as he evades all such questions. So how about Obama v Palin, one on one basketball?
9.3.2008 2:17am
David Warner:
"Next [comes] an act of enormous enormance."

In this case, "enormity" may be appropriate.

"The detente between Hoosier and Loki at 10:24pm gives me a very, very, very small glimmer of hope for the salvation of this blog, which I agree was once a hell of a good place to find interesting, intellectually honest discussion about politics, the law, and so many other things."

Hear, hear. Loki13 is good people, just not much of a trickster god, as it happens. We're unlucky in that.

This attempt to strangle Palin in her (national awareness) crib reminds me of the Republican attacks on the young Clinton (Bill, not Hillary). Sowing, reaping, and all that. In both cases, the parties were/are acting in their (very narrow) interests. I hope it is not necessary to remind anyone that those interests do not coincide with those of our shared country.
9.3.2008 9:44am
pluribus:
Matthew K:

If we can get worked up about just when Michelle Obama became proud of our country, then it is certainly fair game whether Palin's husband has advocated breaking away from the same.

Excellent point. If we are looking at the spouses, it seems eminently fair to compare Obama's wife with Palin's husband. In the case of Todd Palin, I wonder if we are dealing with a kook fringe. If so, it should not be reassuring for Republicans.
9.3.2008 10:14am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
In the case of Todd Palin, I wonder if we are dealing with a kook fringe. If so, it should not be reassuring for Republicans.


The relevance of this issue is underlined when we notice various signs of Todd acting sort of like a co-governor. For example, he met with Monegan to discuss Wooten. The meeting took place in the governor's office. The governor was not present.

It also turns out that Todd's name is on a bunch of government emails, and the governor claims they are covered by executive privilege. In other words, she has officially acknowledged that he has some kind of role as an 'advisor.'

Therefore it's fair to wonder about Todd's potential role inside the White House.

By the way, I wonder if anyone has noticed certain statements that were recently made from the pulpit in Palin's church.
9.3.2008 10:33am
Fury:
jukeboxgrad writes:

The relevance of this issue is underlined when we notice various signs of Todd acting sort of like a co-governor.

Why use the word "co-governor"? That's a sensationalist claim, and you provide only the scantiest of details and no link.

For the record, Todd Palin was asked to meet with Monegan and, yes Wooten was discussed. See jukeboxgrad writes:
9.3.2008 11:00am
Hoosier:
Fury--Don't feed them. They keep coming back if you do.
9.3.2008 11:07am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
hoosier, still no luck finding that page number?
9.3.2008 11:11am
Hoosier:
dr:
The detente between Hoosier and Loki at 10:24pm gives me a very, very, very small glimmer of hope for the salvation of this blog,


Ah, but loki and I are "buddies," (as GWB would say). No hostility, since we both try to keep sane on here. And I think we both recognize that no one's opinion is changed much by what happens on blogs.

But I DO agree that loki really needs to be more tricksey if he wants to live up to his name. And I have to start smoking to live up to mine.
9.3.2008 11:13am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
fury:

you provide only the scantiest of details and no link


Read this and watch the attached video.

If sometime next year we found out that President Obama was routinely forwarding official government emails to Michelle, do you really think no one would make a fuss about that? Even if Obama claimed the emails were going to be kept secret, because they were allegedly covered by executive privilege? Because Michelle was one of his "closest advisors?" That's precisely what Palin has done, and claimed.

Todd Palin was asked to meet with Monegan and, yes Wooten was discussed


The post you linked to is worthless, for many reasons. And I don't see where it says anything to clarify your ambiguous statement. 'Asked' by whom? And how does that change the nature of what happened, that Todd was doing official government business in the governor's office?
9.3.2008 11:22am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
More on Todd's role in Palin's government is here.
9.3.2008 11:29am
Hoosier:
Fury--See what I mean? It's like ducks at a ladnscape pond.
9.3.2008 11:42am
Suzy (mail):
It is a little weird that her husband would be so involved in emails on legislative matters or other governance issues. Is that what we can expect in the future? If so, I do think his political convictions are worth knowing.
9.3.2008 11:45am
Fury:
Jukeboxgrad writes:

Read this and watch the attached video.

I did. And? It's a non-issue, well to I suspect most folks.

If sometime next year we found out that President Obama was routinely forwarding official government emails to Michelle, do you really think no one would make a fuss about that? Even if Obama claimed the emails were going to be kept secret, because they were allegedly covered by executive privilege? Because Michelle was one of his "closest advisors?" That's precisely what Palin has done, and claimed.


A straw man. There's a difference between a sitting governor in Alaska and the President of the United States.


The post you linked to is worthless, for many reasons. And I don't see where it says anything to clarify your ambiguous statement. 'Asked' by whom? And how does that change the nature of what happened, that Todd was doing official government business in the governor's office?

Worthless? Why?

If you follow the original link I posted, it eventually goes to another site which dead-ends to a press release, but does provide enough detail to understand what was going on. I'll keep searching for the primary source document.

You have to weigh all the available information and draw a conclusion on who is telling the truth - Monegan or Palin. Sometimes people are going to draw conclusions and not agree with you or I. That's life.
9.3.2008 12:01pm
David Warner:
"But truly, WTF do people think they achieving by shilling for a candidate on VC?"

If they can't have intelligent discourse, why should anyone?

"It is a little weird that her husband would be so involved in emails on legislative matters or other governance issues. Is that what we can expect in the future? If so, I do think his political convictions are worth knowing."

Suzy, you were passing the Turing test there for awhile, but this one starts me wondering...

"And I think we both recognize that no one's opinion is changed much by what happens on blogs."

Public_Defender and DC convinced me to support gay marriage on this blog. Took about three sallies of very practical arguments aimed at my stated concerns. Happens.
9.3.2008 12:15pm
loki13 (mail):
I would just like to point out I am not always all honey and light! I alternate between being a part of the solution and a part of the problem, depending on my level of boredom and the quality of the discourse.

Hoosier is good folk, though. So, uh, leave him alone, all right? He's a real special kid and, and I have high hopes for him and... I think if he works really hard, he can get an blog scholarship to the Wabash College blog and can get out of this place.
9.3.2008 1:00pm
Christopher Cooke (mail):
I for one am enormously grateful that McCain picked Palin. We have not had a family of a presidential or vice presidential candidate this interesting and fun to talk about since Jimmy Carter, with his red neck brother Billy (anyone remember Billy Beer? his trip with the Libyans?) and Miss Lilian.

This is a western, frontier version of the Carter clan, except husband
Todd is more colorful than Rosalyn Carter ---a fisherman, north sloper, snow "machine" champion, secessionist kind of a guy, you could not ask for better material.

And, all of this does not require dwelling on future son-in-law Levi's My Space page or Bristol's condition. Frankly, I would leave Levi and Bristol out of any serious political discussion. They are just kids, after all, and as teenagers, prone to impulsive, hormonally-driven actions (the pregnancy shows that). I don't see how their actions are relevant to the presidential race, but can understand the media frenzy about it (Jamie Lynn Spears received attention over her pregnancy too). If I were running either campaign, I would say to leave them alone and let them get on with growing up.

In short, just when I thought we were going to be descending into a boring conventional campaign season, McCain jumps in and, perhaps impulsively with this pick, spices things up considerably.
9.3.2008 1:06pm
Andy Freeman (mail):
> Isn't it a basic requirement of the job she aspires to, that of a high-level office-holder, to be able to talk to reporters and answer their questions?

My copy of the US Constitution doesn't mention such a requirement for anyone. Where is the relevant clause in your copy?

However, we know that she's able to talk with reporters and answer their questions. She's choosing not to.

BTW - Since you apparently think that this is bad for her candidacy and you oppose said candidacy, it's irrational for this to upset you.
9.3.2008 3:25pm
Smokey:
Suzy:
It is a little weird that her husband would be so involved in emails on legislative matters or other governance issues.
Does "We are the President!" or "Co-president" of the U.S. ring any bells? Are you claiming Mr & Mrs Palin are even in the same ball park as that? Could you provide a link to any previous comments from you criticizing the Clintons' "weird" co-presidency? Or is this Mr & Mrs Palin attack just liberal desperation? Just wondering where you're coming from. Or if you've forgotten the Clintons' co-presidency so quickly.
9.3.2008 4:00pm
Richard Aubrey (mail):
Todd's name is on some stuff?
I guess that's better than nobody's name. Who hired Craig Livingstone?

Point is, as always, if the Livingstone issue--among others-- didn't upset you, you have no logical or credible reason to claim to be upset about the Todd issue.

You can pretend outrage if you wish. Nobody's likely to be fooled.
9.3.2008 4:41pm
David Warner:
Christoper Cooke,

"Frankly, I would leave Levi and Bristol out of any serious political discussion."

Too late.
9.3.2008 4:45pm
Hoosier:
loki--Oh. SURE.

Send me to an all-male college.

I know what goes on at places like Wabash and Oxford: I've read "Brideshead Revisited." No thanks, pal.
9.3.2008 5:42pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
fury:

There's a difference between a sitting governor in Alaska and the President of the United States.


Of course there is. But since she involves her husband in government matters in her current office, then it's fair to ask if she would do the same thing in the White House. Are you claiming that this question is unfair or irrelevant?

Worthless? Why?


That floppingaces article is worthless, or possibly worse than worthless, because it's laughably biased, incorrect and incomplete. For example, he says this:

if getting Wooten fired was her quest, why did she not take steps to do that in 2005 during the complaint period, instead of specifically stating under deposition she was staying silent in order not to put his job at risk?


(Minor point: it wasn't a "deposition." It was a police interview.) This statement is either extremely dishonest or extremely ignorant. The business about "staying silent in order not to put his job at risk" is simply part of Sarah's explanation for why the alleged death threat in February was not reported to the police until April (on the same day that Molly filed for divorce). But once Molly filed for divorce, then Palin did indeed "take steps to do that [get Wooten fired] in 2005 during the complaint period."

In particular, Palin sent a scathing email on 8/10/05 (pdf), calling Wooten (among other things) "a ticking timebomb" and "loose cannon." After a thorough investigation (roughly 15 people were interviewed), most of Palin's allegations against Wooten were found to be unsubstantiated.

This email is a major part of the story. Yet floppingaces pretends it doesn't exist. This is a more than sufficient basis to ignore the rest of his article. And I could detail a long list of critical omissions, distortions and misstatements he made, aside from this one.

I'll keep searching for the primary source document.


You don't need to do any "searching." Every "primary source document" is here. For some strange reason floppingaces omits that critical link, even though he is purportedly doing a thorough review.
9.4.2008 11:48am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
fury:

You have to weigh all the available information and draw a conclusion on who is telling the truth - Monegan or Palin


The available information is sufficient to prove that Palin lied. On 7/17/08, Palin said this (pdf):

To allege that I, or any member of my family … directed disciplinary action be taken against any employee of the Department of Public Safety, is, quite simply, outrageous


A few weeks later, some important evidence emerged, forcing Palin to backpedal. On 8/13/08, she said this:

I do now have to tell Alaskans that such pressure [to get rid of Wooten] could have been perceived to exist although I have only now become aware of it


We now know that in this statement Palin was pretending to not be "aware" of her own actions. More evidence has now emerged, in the form of her own emails. We now know that on 2/7/07, Palin said this:

This trooper is still out on the street, in fact he's been promoted … It was a joke, the whole year long 'investigation' of him … This is the same trooper who's out there today telling people the new administration is going to destroy the trooper organization, and that he'd 'never work for that b****', Palin'.) … He's still bragging about it [moose kill] in my hometown and after another cop confessed to witnessing the kill, the trooper was 'investigated' for over a year and merely given a slap on the wrist … Though he's out there arresting people today for the same crime! … He threatened to kill his estranged wife's parent, refused to be transferred to rural Alaska and continued to disparage Natives in words and tone, he continues to harass and intimidate his ex. -- even after being slapped with a restraining order that was lifted when his supervisors intervened … He threatens to always be able to come out on top because he's 'got the badge', etc. etc. etc.) … For police officers to violate the public trust is a grave, grave violation -- in my opinion. We have too many examples lately of cops and troopers who violate the public trust. DPS has come across as merely turning a blind eye or protecting that officer, seemingly 'for the good of the brotherhood'.


And on 7/17/07, she said this:

[I want to mention] my ex-brother-in-law, the trooper, who threatened to kill my dad yet was not even reprimanded by his bosses and still to this day carries a gun, of course. … We can't have double standards. Remember when the death threat was reported, and follow-on threats from Mike that he was going to 'bring Sarah and her family down' -- instead of any reprimand WE were told by trooper union personnel that we'd be sued if we talked about those threats. Amazing. . . . So consistency is needed here … No one's above the law. If the law needs to be changed to not allow access to guns for people threatening to kill someone, it must apply to everyone.


Why did Palin say "I have only now become aware" of what could be "perceived" as "pressure" to get rid of Wooten, or impose "disciplinary action" on him? Her own emails could not possibly be "perceived" any other way.

It's not the crime, it's the coverup.
9.4.2008 11:48am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
cooke:

I would leave Levi and Bristol out of any serious political discussion.


Given that the family (and/or campaign) saw fit to parade Levi on the stage last night, it's fair to ask why they did that, and what it's supposed to tell us.
9.4.2008 11:48am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
andy:

Since you apparently think that this is bad for her candidacy and you oppose said candidacy, it's irrational for this to upset you.


It's not about being "upset." It's about asking her supporters to explain why she's avoiding reporters.
9.4.2008 11:49am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
smokey:

if you've forgotten the Clintons' co-presidency so quickly.


It's possible to think a "co-presidency" is OK. But if I think that, I will probably also have an interest in the political background of the co-president. That's why these questions about Todd are relevant.
9.4.2008 11:49am
Smokey:
In 1990, Wally Hickel was elected governor -- on the Alaska Independence Party [AIP] ticket. Hickel beat both the Democrat and Republican candidates.

Citizens of a state presumably voted for the best candidate to represent their interests. Not much criticism of the AIP then, was there? Governor Hickel was widely admired by both major parties.

So why the baseless criticism now, frantically trying to pin the "evil AIP" label on a lady who was simply being polite, and answering the invitation of the party that Gov. Hickel belonged to when he was elected?

I'm glad you asked! So I'll tell you: it's because the 'Rat Party is desperately throwing everything they can think of up against the wall, hoping something sticks.

So far, Governor Palin is Ms. Teflon.
9.5.2008 12:32am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
smokey:

why the baseless criticism


The following quote is featured prominently and approvingly at the AIP web site:

I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions.


Todd was a member, for years. And there also seem to be certain ties between this organization and Sarah Palin herself.

If it was learned that the Obamas had somehow been associated with an organization which glorified the idea that "I've got no use for America or her damned institutions," would you treat that as a "baseless criticism?"

By the way, Palin has said (through her lawyer) that Todd is one of her "closest advisors," and that this is why he is copied on many official emails. Would he have a similar role in a Palin White House? And if he would, we should have a special interest in his association with an organization that promotes statements like the one I cited.
9.5.2008 2:28am
Seamus (mail):

It's possible to think a "co-presidency" is OK. But if I think that, I will probably also have an interest in the political background of the co-president. That's why these questions about Todd are relevant.



I see no indication that Todd is going to be a co-president. All indications are that he hill stay in the background, the way Denis Thatcher did.
9.5.2008 3:55pm
TaxMeMore (mail):
It is pretty sick that the liberals are now trying to paint Joe Vogler as some kind of terrorist. That is ignorant. He's been dead for 15 years without hardly a bad word about him, and the liberals are pissing on his grave in Canada to get some political gotchas in.

I would love to see an examination here of Joe Vogler's arguments about that Alaskan Statehood vote in the 50s. He could make a convincing argument that the Alaskan statehood vote was a sham that violated previous treaties and UN agreements that the US had signed onto. The US Supreme Court refused to hear his case, I believe, although he did brag about taking it to the Supreme Court. Joe Vogler did have a constitutional law degree from the U of Kansas prior to 1942, but he never practiced.

Joe Vogler was due to present his petition to the United Nations just weeks after he was murdered. As it happens Iran was sponsoring him so he could make his case. Vogler was missing and they didn't find his body for 18 months. Conspiracy theories cropped up because of the timing and his history with the feds and their history. Fun stuff. Joe Vogler was a patriot though, and not the terrorist the liberals who are ignorant want him to be.
9.6.2008 6:23am
TaxMeMore (mail):
This is a classic Joe Vogler quote.

"You get to thinking: Why the hell do I owe them anything? And they you get mad and you say the hell with them, and you renounce allegiance and you pledge your efforts, your effects, your honor, your life to Alaska. That's how I do. I'm an Alaskan, see, and they know it. I've told them so to go to hell in every way I can in a nice way. I took a case to the Supreme Court believing in the Supreme Court, and I'd rather be tried in a whorehouse with a madam as the judge, there's more justice. And if they don't like it, they know where they can go. I tried it -- I believed in my country, I believed in the court system, and it stinks."

"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions." - Joe Vogler

That is a great quote. Let it ring throughout Alaska forever.

Hey jukeboxgrab, what if Joe Vogler had said the below instead? Not so different from the man YOU credit with founding YOUR Democratic Party is it?

"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Translated that would be, "I'm an American, not an Englishman. I've got no use for England and her damned institutions."

Jefferson wins on grace, but Vogler gets to the point quicker.

jukeboxgrab, why do believe that people should just bend over and take government oppression? That is sick. Pick another issue to trach Palin on, because this isn't it. And Todd Palin IS a Native Alaskan, btw. Of the variety that never sold their land to Russia in the first place so the US could buy it later.
9.6.2008 6:39am
TaxMeMore (mail):
Here's a little bit of history behind what Joe Vogler believed. While he was born in Barnes, Kansas, he moved to Alaska in 1942 and it became a state 17 years later in 1959. There was still opposition to it in the US Senate at the time, including from Washington St. that was afraid of losing fishing rights. Was Biden in the Senate and opposed to Alaska statehood like Vogler (the liberal created terrorist) in 1959? Close enough?

Land that Vogler had mineral rights and mining claims to prior to statehood were rescinded without compensation and that happened to hundreds of others including Native Alaskans. Joe Vogler wasn't the first or the last to get royally screwed by the federal government enough to warrant such language against it.

Legal Status of Alaska
9.6.2008 8:01am
Mike @ Naughte Relevant (mail) (www):

I see no indication that Todd is going to be a co-president. All indications are that he hill stay in the background, the way Denis Thatcher did.


Actually, the best he can do is Co-Vice-President. Though I guess the Palin's could be planning to knock of McCain.
9.7.2008 12:55am