Jake Tapper appears to have conceded that Sarah Palin was not a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, though her husband, Todd, was from 1995 to 2002. And Tapper writes that “at least two AIP officials recall her attending the 1994 convention,” though I count three: Lynette Clark, Dexter Clark and Mark Chryson.
This is messy. It looks like Tapper took Lynette Clark’s word for it when he first reported that Sarah Palin had been a member of the AIP — understandable, given that Clark is currently the chairwoman of the party and was its secretary in 1994, but also risky.
How much of an issue is it that Todd Palin was a seven-year member of an organization whose founder, Joe Vogler, hated America? How much of an issue is it that Sarah Palin may have attended the party’s statewide convention in 1994, and made a cheery video that was played at the AIP convention as recently as this year?
We shall see. I doubt we’ve heard the last of the Alaskan Independence Party.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
MeTheSheeple
In the video, she refers to the benefits of competing political parties, and talks about some specifics they have in common. How far will it go? Dunno, but the video’s a long way from, well, “DAMN”ing.
Aaron Read
Call me conspiracy-theorist, but I’m slightly (only slightly) inclined to believe the Clarks and the AIP’s version of events over Fenumiai and the Division of Election’s versions.Why?Simple: Because the Clarks’ jobs aren’t controlled by Palin. Technically, as Governor, Palin is Fenumiai’s boss.That’s a nasty accusation, borderline “uncalled for”…and damned hard to prove or disprove. Unfortunately, that’s what we’re kinda drifting towards here…a lot of “he said/she said”.
tvoh
How much will it matter?She will be given a lot less of a pass than former Kleagle Sen. Byrd.Anything a tad selective about that?Naaaaah
Rick
Bumiller from The NY Times and Tapper from ABC got the story wrong.That isn’t a couple of hacks from some third rate web site. The Times also had three front page stories on Bristol being pregnant. Priorities
Aaron Read
In their defense, Rick…priorities is a near-meaningless word in Palin’s case, because we’re condensing years of political scrutiny into a matter of a few days. Couple that with the 24-second news cycle pressures and it’s almost impossible to really tell what’s relevant and what isn’t.This is especially true when it comes to character issues, which typically are only borne out over time…and time is something in short support. And, quite frankly, I think Palin definitely has character issues. For a party, and a person, that’s built major arguments on experience, family values, and a “strong America”….they’ve picked a VP with zero experience (don’t give me this “executive experience” bullshit), questionable family values (sure she’s pro-life, but she also slashed funding to help teenage parents and apparently didn’t the abstinence message didn’t stick) and strong ties to a political party with secessionist movement (dude, her husband was a member for years and she was at the convention, obviously she wasn’t heaping the scorn on the AIP).And I think it’s entirely fair game to attack Palin on character issues given her questionable claims about issues that Obama was relentlessly attacked on (lack of experience, incorrect claims about his religion, association with a supposedly anti-American zealot).For what it is worth, though, I happen to believe that there is no such thing as a topic that is “inappropriate” to attack a politician on. It’s all-out war, take-no-prisoners, rip-off-their-arms-and-legs-and-beat-them-with-the-bloody-stumps war! Bring ’em on!!!
Rick
“For what it is worth, though, I happen to believe that there is no such thing as a topic that is “inappropriate” to attack a politician on. It’s all-out war, take-no-prisoners, rip-off-their-arms-and-legs-and-beat-them-with-the-bloody-stumps war! Bring ’em on!!!”That’s why we get who we get running for office.