Palin flap on Alaskan separatism reveals media double standard
It looks like someone spoke too soon, accusing GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin of having been a member of the Alaska Independence Party. Now it turns out that she only attended the party's 1994 convention, and that her husband joined. So the Republicans get to proclaim "false alarm!" Was the overstatement a strategically-leaked strawman in the first place—a spin-control inoculation by Palin's own allies? Because the truth of the Palins' links to the separatist movement would have been newsworthy without the overshoot. Now, we don't have a problem with Alaskan independence per se—although we fear it could just be a scam by the oil and resource industries to weasel out of federal environmental laws. But more to the point—can you imagine the outcry if Michelle Obama had been a member of the Republic of New Afrika?
Details from the New York Times, Sept. 2:
A Palin Joined Alaskan Third Party, Just Not Sarah Palin
In the mid-1990s, the Alaskan Independence Party was experiencing a boom of sorts. A governor had been elected on its ticket in 1990, when the party was not even a decade old. And membership was swelling.
Among the new recruits was Todd Palin, whose wife, Sarah, would later become governor of Alaska. The Palins attended the party's convention in their hometown, Wasilla, in 1994, according to party officials, where the party called for a revote on statehood and a draft constitution for an independent Republic of Alaska. Mr. Palin joined the party.
Ms. Palin remained a Republican and never joined the Alaskan Independence Party, but returned to its convention in 2006 to speak as candidate for governor. After she had been elected, she recorded a video greeting that was played at the party convention this year. "Good luck on a successful and inspiring convention," she said. "Keep up the good work, and God bless you."
Now that she is the Republican nominee for vice president — for a campaign whose motto is "Country first" — the couple’s interaction with the Alaskan Independence Party has gotten attention because of its reputation as a secessionist group.
Alaskan Independence Party officials released a statement Monday saying that Ms. Palin had been a member for two years, from 1994 to 1996, information included in reports in The New York Times and other news outlets. In Internet videos of recent party meetings, other party officials can be seen boasting of Ms. Palin's past membership.
On Tuesday, though, the party's chairwoman, Lynette Clark, said the earlier statement was false. Ms. Clark said that she had based it on information another party member had given her, but that a review of the records showed only that Ms. Palin had attended the 1994 conference.
Ms. Clark added that while the review confirmed Todd Palin as a member, it did not indicate that Ms. Palin had been one.
On Wednesday, Ms. Clark released a corrected statement, saying, in part, "I, foolishly, repeated and accepted as fact what an officer of this membership shared with myself, and husband Dexter Clark, over a year ago."
"I humbly apologize to Governor Palin, and to both national and local press and media," she added.
Ms. Palin has been registered as a Republican since May 1982, according to the State Division of Elections. Mr. Palin registered as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party in 1995, remaining a member for all but two months of the next seven years, until he registered as an undeclared voter in July 2002.
The McCain campaign has described the Palins as "proud Americans" and called reports of her membership in the independence party "a smear."
The Alaskan Independence Party's Web site, akip.org, which includes the motto "Alaska First — Alaska Always" in its banner, describes party members as seeking "a range of solutions to the conflicts between federal and local authority," including "advocacy for state's rights, through a return to territorial status, all the way to complete independence and nationhood status for Alaska." It calls for repatriation of lands held by the federal government "to the state and people of Alaska," as well as, among other issues, the right to home-school children and the privatization of government services.
Ms. Clark objected to descriptions of her party as secessionist, saying it advocates "states' rights" and "state sovereignty."
Ms. Clark said she interpreted Ms. Palin's attendance at the 1994 convention as reflecting an interest in hearing a variety of perspectives. "Her heart is very Alaskan," she said, "and we have Alaskan issues."
Jean Craciun, a political consultant in Alaska, said it would not be hard to believe that Ms. Palin had been a member of the independence party, because polls show that people in Alaska often confuse the party with "independent minded."
Ms. Palin's political philosophy is also often compared to that of Walter J. Hickel, the former Alaska governor and interior secretary in the Nixon administration who was re-elected governor on the Alaskan Independence Party ticket in 1990. Mr. Hickel, a big backer of Ms. Palin, re-registered as a Republican in 1994.
In her recorded address to the party's convention this year, Ms. Palin said: "I share your party's vision of upholding the constitution of our great state. My administration remains focused on reining in government growth so individual liberty and opportunity can expand. I know you agree with that."
See our last posts on McCain/Palin, the struggle for Alaska and the politics of secession.
Politics of Alaskan "independence"
Poking around on the semi-literate Alaskan Independence Party website reveals just how wacky they are. They seem to be quite proud of it, at that. Here's the quote from their founder that is displayed prominently at the top of their platform page:
Note superfluous apostrophe, missing comma and incorrect use of the upper case. Point 7 of the platform states:
In other words, good-bye ANWR. Just in case there is any doubt, check this passage from the party's memorial page to Founder Vogler:
Quote fails to close, of course. (Maybe they should be more concerned with improving their education system than challenging draconian federal control of public lands up there in Alaska.) Note the usual DIY pseudo-constitutional theories (no federal lands permitted in western states? huh?), which just happen to be convenient to BP and Amoco, with their designs on the federally protected areas of the North Slope. Who funds these guys anyway? We'd sure like to know. We'll bet they aren't so interested in "independence" from the oil cartel...
Heart slaps back at GOP
This is lacking a little context here. It seems "Sarah Barracuda" was Sarah Palin's high school basketball team nickname. The Heart in question is the self-consciously Zepplinesque '70s rock band (from the Seattle area, 20 years before the "Seattle sound"). From Entertainment Weekly, Sept. 5:
It actually gets better than that. Here's the pithy but hard-hitting statement as it appears on Heart's website:
music music music
Interesting to note that while the Dems had Stevie Wonder and others in Denver according to ABC anchor Charles Gibson the Republicans had a band named: "Hookers and Blow"
... makes you wonder if they covered 'Higher Ground'.
Hookers and Blow?
I don't believe they actually played the RNC, did they? That would just be a bit too much cognitive dissonance... San Jose Mercury News indicates they were the house band at some ancillary affair in Twin Cities hosted (appropriately enough) by the NRA.
No but how cool would that be ...
They weren't in the convention but ABC had a piece on lobbyists on the semi-canceled first night so along with some footage of Bush in a sweat stained shirt we got partying Republicans in a club with 'hookers and blow'. It was amusing to hear the band name on the national news broadcast.
Seperatist for Veep
I do believe John McCain could have done better in choosing a Vice Presidential Nominee had he selected Staten Island Borough President James Molinaro.
While Staten Island, has a mere 477,000 poplulation while compared to Alaska's 720,000 it did launch a formidable secessionist campaign in it's attempt to sever its ties to New York City. Additionally, Molinaro is a member of the New York State Conservative Party, which would appeal to the base which McCain wishes to mobilize. And as far as being ready to take over the helm at a moments notice ... Well ... He is a President.
Palin's (abysmal) record on Native Alaskan rights
In addition to clearing up the rumors that Palin is married to an Native Alaskan, the Native American website Turtle Talk offers the following dossier on Sarah Palin's Record on Alaska Native and Tribal Issues:
Palin on "God's will"
Just in case you missed it. From AP, Sept. 3:
Palin garbles Lincoln
From the Associated Content blog, Sept. 13:
Good work, although we'd like to know the name and author of the 1943 book. And the headline cuts Palin too much slack. It should say "the quote she says she quoted," not "thinks she quoted." She was obviously coached, and some McCain advisor came up with the Lincoln idea as a face-saver. What Palin actually said contained none of the humility of the putative Lincoln quote...
Palin pawn of petro-oligarchs
Will Yong writes for Iran's Press TV, Aug. 30:
They aren't all idiots up in Alaska, thank goodness
From Mark C. Eades's blog on OpEdNews, Sept. 14:
Sarah Palin: War with Russia? "Definitely... perhaps"
The scariest part of Palin's Sept. 11 interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson, via Raw Data:
Palin plan for Alaskan annexation of Bering Sea?
Is she just fudging the facts, or does this seeming slip mask territorial designs on the Chukotka Peninsula? Just asking. From AP, Sept. 30, links and emphasis added:
Palin to play ball with Big Oil
That's CNNMoney's headline, not ours. Oct. 2:
Palin: cause of global warming "kinda doesn't matter"
From the Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 1:
Which is, of course, right in line with the Bush dogma.
she's got a case though
Does the cause matter that much?
Nobody is saying that emissions plays no role... at least she isn't in those quotes so, if we put aside that strawman, are you saying that nothing should be done about any "natural" changes emissions-wise? Do you really think that these groundless concepts we have about culture and nurture, humanity and nature and stuff actually matter when it comes to climate and other physical phenomena?
And since merely curbing emissions is not likely to make much difference in the present situation (what do you think that would do?), yes, it makes much sense seriously work on mitigation.
Like I argued about population: there is simply no workable plan to stop climate change. If you have one, please share it. We can hope that some day somehow such a plan will be developed and we can rail about capitalism in the meantime but, unless and until there is such a plan, it would be ill-advised to bank on it. Instead, mitigation plans should be made and implemented. I understand the Dutch are doing just that, as they should. Surely you are not suggesting that we should pretend that hope is good enough for those who can't possibly pay for their own mitigation?
Let's focus on what works.
No she doesn't
I have no idea what you mean by "groundless concepts," but the imperative thing is to dramatically reduce carbon emission now. Mitigation measures—such as relocating Alaskan villages that are slipping into the sea due to coastal erosion—are necessary in the interim. But failing to address the roots of the crisis—which there is overwhelming consensus on in the scientific community—will condemn future generations to an uninhabitable planet. Palin is throwing one of her notorious winks to the oil company dogma of mitigation as a substitute for addressing the roots of the crisis.
it may be too late for the roots
Dramatic reductions would have been called 15 years ago as a first step.
I thought the current consensus required not only reducing or even stopping emissions but actually taking CO2 out of the atmosphere somehow... a tall order. In any case, that is a goal, not a plan.
Reducing emissions now could be a first step, and certainly one that I would favour... but it's not clear how one would build upon that. Cutting frivoulous waste only goes so far. And we know waste wouldn't go down without taking some needs with it. Each reduction would be more painful than the one before, and not only for evil corporations.
I don't mean to sound callous, but the worst about this story you linked to is not the relocation but the methane that was likely released by the thawing.
Methane is being released from the sea as well on the Siberian coast now. There's not much time left, if any.
Thankfully, "unhabitable" is over the top. There are limits to these warming effects.
I ride a bicycle, what about you?
There are so many things wrong with this response that I hardly know where to begin.
Yes, we are committed to climate change now. But the question remains of how much. If you have smoker's hack, you've probably already damaged your lungs, but it would be pretty absurd to use that as an excuse to keep smoking. Somehow I doubt you'd hear this kind of cynical prattle in the Maldives or Marshall Islands, which are in danger of disappearing under the waves due to sea level rise.
Why am I always expected to have a "plan"? No critique of Palinesque denial is legitimate unless I have a utopian solution? That said, I think a big step in the right direction would be to plant the interstates with grass seed and bring back the interlocking trolley systems that existed in this country before they were dismantled in a (yes) conspiracy by General Motors and Standard Oil.
"Uninhabitable" is by no means over the top. Unfortunately.
Eye on the ball, please
In the interests of keeping this already rather lengthy item focused on the inimitable Ms. Palin, I am creating a separate page for Anonymous Coward's further responses (just in case anyone is interested).
Palin: fuck the polar bears
From AP, Sept. 4, emphasis and links added:
See our last post on the struggle for the Arctic.
she's got a future in show business
Larry Flint's on this but your title is better.
First Dude says, "Hello"
Has it occurred to you...
that less than 1% of the readers are likely to get your sophomoric pop-lyric reference? This is about communication, not cryptic little in-jokes.
More rock stars dissent from Palin exploitation
First Heart, now Bon Jovi! From AllVoices, Oct. 18: