Tuesday, September 02, 2008

Game On


Democrats and their pals in the blogosphere are really going to regret what they are doing to Sarah Palin and her family. We were treated today to a bunch of reports that alleged that Palin was a member of the secessionist Alaska Independence Party. One of my regular commenters made reference to this today, providing a link to an article from ABC's Jake Tapper as a source (after I had asked for a link). The link to the initial article is here.

Well, Tapper had to back off today. Not just a little, a lot. In the face of evidence provided by the McCain camp, we are now treated to this headline:

Todd Palin, Longtime Former AIP Member

You caught that, right? Now it's the husband who is a former member of the party. You recognize this, right? It's called guilt by association. And as a former resident of Appleton, Wisconsin, let's just say that I know a little bit about how that works.

But you know the best part about this? If Todd Palin and by extension Cindy McCain are fair game, that means that Michelle Obama and Jill Biden are, too, right?

It's a dangerous game, kids. The portside would be well advised to stop it now, because once the genie is out of the bottle, there's no telling what might come out.


Update: here's a little something that tells you a lot about the mindset of the loyal opposition these days.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mark,
Obama has been hammered for months about his connections with everyone he's ever conversed with since he started running for President. And just in the last week or two, you were calling into question his relationship with William Ayers, who he sat on a board with, and took a 300 dollar donation from years ago. You linked to an article about Obama and Ayers that consisted almost entirely of guilt by association.
And now, along comes a story directly linking Palin and her husband to the AIP; An organization whose highest priority is secession from the United States.

We have the McCain campaign admitting that she appeared at the AIP convention in 2000, and that she sent a video greeting to the convention last year while acting in her official capacity as Governor of Alaska. We also have voting records directly linking her husband to membership in this organization as little as 6 years ago, and you don’t think THAT is relevant? So the potential First Man of the United States may very well be a secessionist, but that isn’t important, and to suggest that it is over the top? But Obama’s being on a foundation board with someone who is a passing acquaintance, and who committed crimes when Obama was 8 years old is vitally important. This beggars belief.

BTW, lest we lose sight of just how radical the AIP can be, lets look at statements made by its founder.

Here is what the founder of the AIP, Joe Vogler, had to say about the our Flag and government in 1991:
"The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government."
And,
"I won't be buried under their damn flag, I'll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home."

And yet, Sarah Palin didn’t have a problem appearing at their conventions, and showing solidarity with this group. At the very least, this shows incredibly bad judgment on her part. And her husband’s more than passing acquaintance with this group is disturbing.

Rich

Anonymous said...

Mark,
I would note that the Genie was taken out of the bottle in regard to spouses a long time ago by right-wing operatives who have been attacking Michelle Obama for what I still think was a statement that was taken out of context. And let's not forget that Cindy McCain herself pushed this issue by calling a press conference to breathlessly announce that she has "always been proud of her country." Furthermore, please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought you had defended these actions at the time because the spouses were adults who were stumping for their spouses. Have I misconstrued what you had said? If so, I apologize. If not, I fail to see how their is a big difference between calling out Ms. Obama or Mr. Palin.

Regards,
Rich

Gino said...

lets see if i get this right:
having a husband who supports less federal interference through legal political means is...
at least as bad as being good buddies with a real life domestic terrorist and bomber who sought the deaths of innocent americans.

i glad i got that straight.

by that standard, maybe bin laden should have been a guest speaker at obama's convention?

you lefties often seem to lack a sense proportion.
why is that?

Mr. D said...

Rich,

Obama and his people have been suggesting that he can't be questioned about Ayers and that Michelle is off limits, too. If they are, Todd Palin is, too. If not, then they are not.

The truth will out on Ayers and the relationship will turn out to be much more substantial than you make it out to be. He's going to turn out to be much more than an "acquaintance." Just a guess, but that association will be a lot more problematic for Obama than Sarah Palin's husband's relationship with AIP will be for McCain.

Like I said -- game on. Sarah Palin will get her chance this evening. Your side will not knock her out and after people get a look at her, the disconnect between the wild-ass charges that have been getting retailed and the actual person will be clear.

Mr. D said...

And Gino, as usual, is spot on.

Anonymous said...

Mark,
game on indeed. On a lighter note, I thought you would get a kick out of this link:

http://www.bandofthebes.typepad.com

Very apropos. Don't you think?

Rich

Mr. D said...

The link is funny, Rich. She's definitely been in a Death Race the past few days.

Best,
Mark

Mr. D said...

Rich,

I see the AIP thing is getting weaker - that Hilzoy person is now backing off the earlier claims published on that site. Thought you should know that....

Mark

Mr. D said...

Also, Rich, the NYT is retracting their report about AIP. That now means that Tapper, Obsidian Wings and the NYT have all retracted. Do you still stand by your assertion that "The Palin/AIP story has been mostly substantiated?"

Cheers,
Mark

Anonymous said...

Mark,
I will check out the AIP stories. However, the Bridge to Nowhere flip flop seems to be gaining some credibility (a picture says a thousand words):

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Bridge_to_somewhere.html


http://www.andrewhalcro.com/the_bridge_to_somewhere

Mr. D said...

A t-shirt from 2006? Before she was governor? Great stuff, Rich. That's dispositive.

Tell you what -- just for giggles, I'll stipulate that she changed her mind (even flip-flopped) on the Bridge to Nowhere. In the end, when she was governor, she killed it. That was the right thing to do.

Bill Clinton kicked and screamed about signing welfare reform bills, but eventually he signed those into law. He did the right thing too and I don't have any trouble giving him credit for doing so, despite his original opposition.

Mr. D said...

One other question for you, Rich -- how did Obama and Biden vote on the Bridge to Nowhere? Do you know? I do.

Mr. D said...

Here's a hint on my last question, Rich -- Obama and Biden probably got t-shirts, too.

Cheers,
Mark

Anonymous said...

Mark,
I know that Obama and Biden both voted for it. But their campaign isn't presenting killing the Bridge to Nowhere as proof of their bonafides as reformers. The picture is only part of the links I sent. The editorials from the local newspaper, the Charlie Rose interview, the picture and the chronology of the events paint a picture very different from the one Palin and McCain presented. It is a story of classic political opportunism and grandstanding. The kind of stuff I see in Illinois all the time. I expect this stuff from politicians, but when they do it, most have the good sense to hope nobody notices. And they almost certainly don't hold it up as evidence of a reform mentality.

BTW,
I did go back and read the corrections form Tapper, Hilzoy and NYT. And I read the corrections thoroughly and noted that AIP members have a range of views, and many members are classic States Rights folks. So, I stand corrected. You see a claim in three mainstream blogs, all with direct quotes from Party officials... I stand corrected.

But I still contend that Palin's actions on the Bridge to Nowhere do not qualify as reform politics, and she deserves to be called out on that.

Rich

Gino said...

thanks mark.
here's more...
george washington, john adams, thomas jefferson and a few others all supported sucession from mother country.

palin is in better company than i thouught.

Mr. D said...

Okay, Rich. Consider her called out. In the end, she did the right thing. That's the thing that matters.

And by the way, so did you. And I knew you would.

Best,
Mark