Sarah and Todd Palin at a rally
It is rather fitting that on the day Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin officially announced her run for the White House (make no mistake about it, that was what she did today), we begin by again delving into a rather intriguing aspect of her "candidacy", one that would portend a certain twist of irony since the "model patriot" made the issue of patriotism a litmus test for future aspirants to the office of the POTUS. What, with her claim during the last general elections that current President Barack Obama had been "palling around with terrorists", primarily due to his limited relationship with sixties radical, Bill Ayers.
In this piece, the future Republican Presidential candidate's relationship, as well as that of stay-at-home-dad and "future first dude", Todd Palin, is also examined. While we begin a series of expose on the current Alaska Governor's political inclinations and proclivities, it is worth mentioning here that her decision to step down at the end of July from her current position is no shrewd political move as some in the GOP spin room would like us to believe. It is in fact evidence of the fact that although she has been portrayed as some sort of tenacious and resilient person, her action today is a more realistic indication of how thin her skin really is when faced with meaningful opposition that seeks to question the depth of not only her intellectual acumen, but also her management and organizational skills.
According to sources, her resignation is in fact as a result of the pressure she continues to face from the Alaska legislature with regard to her ethics violations and I am made to believe by a very reliable source, that there may in fact be a smoking gun with regard to some personal discoveries that would shed light on the character and integrity of the Alaska Governor and possibly, her husband.
Here is the piece by David Neiwert that delves into Sarah Palin's connection to the separatist Alaskan Independence Party and the latter's relationship/association with other separatist groups within the United States.
"It’s now become conventional wisdom that Sarah Palin had nothing to do with the secessionist Alaska Independence Party and is therefore clear of any associations with them.
FactCheck.org is the source for most of this line of refutation:
"She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She’s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.'''
So of course it made its way elsewhere, including a Washington Post story by Jonathan Weisman which repeated that the AIP connection story as one of the “unfounded charges” against Palin – even though, as we’ll see, the question was perfectly well founded.
Moreover, the issue isn’t merely whether Palin has been a member of the AIP – the question is to what degree she has associated with them and supports them.
Remember, folks – Trent Lott was never a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens or the League of the South. Lott got into trouble because he openly associated with them – speaking before them, running his column in their newsletters, telling them what great work they did, lending the authority and weight of his office to their bids at credibility.
And when it comes to Sarah Palin and the AIP, the same is very much true – in no small part because the AIP is cut from the same right-wing populist cloth as the League of the South. The two organizations, in fact, have operational alliances.
And yes, Sarah Palin has lent the authority of her office to the AIP’s effort to gain mainstream credibility – despite the fact that it is largely an extremist organization.
As you can see in the video above, Palin addressed the AIP by video earlier last year, applauding its work with lines like: “Your party plays an important role in our state’s politics” and “Keep up the good work.” She also acknowledges having campaigned at the AIP convention in 2006.
Her husband was enrolled as an AIP member from 1995 to 2002, though the party indicates he was not particularly active. It’s also in dispute whether both Palins attended the 1994 AIP convention.
As for the connection being an “ungrounded” charge: There were perfectly good reasons to believe that Palin was a member of the AIP at one time – most notably, AIP officials had stated publicly that she had been a member before running for Wasilla City Council as a Republican. It was only after questions arose that AIP officials examined their rolls and could not find Palin’s name on it, and then issued a correction and an apology.
You can see in the video below that Dexter Clark, vice chairman of the Alaska Independence party, told party officials in 2006 that:
"She was an AIP member before she got the job as a mayor of a small town -- that was a non-partisan job. But you get along to go along -- she eventually joined the Republican Party, where she had all kinds of problems with their ethics, and well, I won't go into that. She also had about an 80% approval rating, and is pretty well sympathetic to her former membership."
What is the AIP, really? Well, its own website declares as the cornerstone of its platform:
"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."
The AIP is clearly a secessionist movement. It had delegates both at the First North American Secession Convention in 2006, but also at the Second North American Secession Convention in 2007 – alongside fellow members the League of the South (the most prominent neo-Confederate organization and an SPLC-designated “hate group”); the Republic of Texas (a militia/Patriot group whose members at one time engaged in an armed standoff with Texas law enforcement); and Christian Exodus (which advocates creating an all-white homeland, either in South Carolina or in Idaho, depending on who’s in charge). You can also find links to these groups at AIP’s links page.
In other words, this is a group that works alongside acknowledged racists and far-right radicals in pursuit of an agenda that is by definition extremist – that is, secession. Not everyone involved in such groups is necessarily an extremist – and in fact there are some fairly benign organizations involved in the secession movement -- but they are all operating in pursuit of a toxic agenda.
The far-right orientation, in fact, runs quite deep in the AIP -- and it has a decidedly religious component. Chip Berlet’s early assessment remains accurate:
"Given Sarah Palin's rather doctrinaire approach to conservative libertarian Christian evangelicalism, her political flirtation with the secessionist Alaska Independence Party (AIP) is hardly surprising, but the AIP's ties to the U.S. Constitution Party raise some creepy issues. It is not fair to suggest that Palin agrees with all of the political positions of the AIP or Constitution Party. It is fair to ask with what policies she does or does not agree. It is already clear that on the issue of the "Sanctity of Life," Palin and the theocratic Consititution Party are on the same Dominionist page."
The AIP did place the candidate of the U.S. Constitution Party on the Presidential ballot in Alaska in the 2008 race. Let's be clear, the U.S. Constitution Party seeks to impose a form of theocratic neo-fascism in the United States. And I am not a person who tosses the term fascism around lightly.
I’ve written about the Constitution Party at length previously. This is the party that, in its 1990s guise at the American Taxpayers Party, was on the front lines in promoting the “militia” movement, and a large portion of its membership comprises former and current militia members. It remains, in its current guise at the Constitution Party, the main active party for “Patriot” movement followers who still find the GOP to be too “soft.” In more recent years, it has been the party of Roy Moore, the “Ten Commandments” zealot. Jim Gilchrist, the Minuteman Project’s co-founder, ran under the umbrella of the Constitution Party’s California wing.
Besides being oriented toward far-right conspiracy theories and belief systems, it also is clearly aligned with the Christian Dominionist wing of the conservative movement. According to the Constitution Party’s own platform:
"The mission of the Constitution Party is to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity through the election, at all levels of government, of Constitution Party candidates who will uphold the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. It is our goal to limit the federal government to its delegated, enumerated, Constitutional functions and to restore American jurisprudence to its original Biblical common-law foundations."
… The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries.
As Berlet says:
The Constitution Party has adopted the ideas of a militant form of Christian Dominionism known as Dominion Theology.
And how does it intend to achieve its ends? You get the flavor of the idea by watching the video of Dexter Clark all the way through – especially the part where he advises on tactics:
"You should infiltrate – I know the Christian Exodus(?) is in favor of it, the Free State movement is in favor of it – I don’t think they even care which party it is. Whichever party in that area you can get something done, get into that political party, even though it does have its problems. Right now that is one of the only avenues."
Given what we know already about her religious beliefs, it all makes you wonder what Sarah Palin was hiding behind that refusal to be interviewed without proper “deference” from the media."
Well, at least Katie Couric did lend us a veritable insight into the GOP leading candidate's dearth of even the most basic sense of perception and intuitive acumen.
Comments
Please provide proof that this statement is true: "Christian Exodus (which advocates creating an all-white homeland, either in South Carolina or in Idaho, depending on who’s in charge)." I have never read or heard Christian Exodus advocate this, and you should publish proof or a retraction.
Thank you,
Angela Wittman
Volunteer Coordinator
Christian Exodus
This whole article of yours is absolute garbage. The AKIP (the proper acronynm) is NOT a secessionist party; it merely advocates that secession, among the other alternatives, be subjected to a popular vote.
Considering that you also smeared Christian Exodus, you obviously did not do any homework before publishing this drivel. All you've done is spew a bunch of latently racist anti-White bigotry. You also smeared the Constitution Party as well.
Harsh criticism? You bet - because I only behave with respect towards those who act respectable. This garbage you published makes you unworthy of respect.
Feel honored Mr. Coker. Not everyone can be accused of a "smear" by a smear merchant like Carl Loerbs. He hangs around blatantly racist sites like the Vanguard News Network, where he left this response to an article supposedly showing that black people drink more.
"Cognac? Detroit? Blacks drinking cognac? My God, they’ve been drinking so long and so hard they’ve now become choosy. Cognac’s not cheap. Those welfare checks must be fatter than I thought. Of course, Michigan’s governor wants to give them even more through affirmative action."
As for Christian Exodus, they certainly do advocate resettlement on theri web site, but list Latin America as a potential place. They seem to be more super-extreme Christian zealots than overtly racist, at least on their web site.
Isn't it hilarious how the liberal media always loves to bring up Palin's connection to the Alaska Independence Party, yet completely ignores her much stronger ties to the Libertarian Party of Alaska.
Some facts:
In 2005/06 Sarah Palin was the guest speaker at two Libertarian Party meetings in Anchorage.
In 2006, the Libertarian Party of Alaska endorsed her campaign for Governor, despite having their own candidate in the race.
In 2006, Palin was hammered in the GOP primary for "not being a real Republican, but rather a Libertarian."
You see, Palin the Libertarian, doesn't quite fit the left template. They want to paint her as some social conservative, this despite the fact, that up until 2006, in Alaska politics she was clearly designated as a "Libertarian," and the social conservatives even tried to smear her as a "Wasila booze legalizing, marijuana decriminatlization supporting, radical Libertarian."
Isn't it hilarious how Eric Dondero thinks his question is relevant?
If someone is sympathetic to secession, what earthly difference does it make if they are ALSO sympathetic to some branch of the Libertarian?
Boy, you extremists seem to monitor every inch of the internet. No lives?
What she also did was quit and IMO, that says a lot about her character!
This is a highly biased article. Anyone that cites factcheck as a source is deep in the kool aid. Factcheck is now apparently the vetting arm of the democratic party as that is where Obama posted his picture of a Certification of Live Birth.
As an Independent I hope Palin does switch parties. It is time for a viable third party in this Country. Third parties have been difficult due to the control of writing the election laws by the Democrats and Republicans. I think there is enough angry people now to make a third party a contender.
I just got back from our local Tea Party. Good turn out. There will be change starting in 2010. Change we can hope for.
Angela Wittman,
Proof? Grand Inquisitors don't need proof. An accusation of racism is all the proof that's needed!
And when the Southern Poverty Law Center issues a fatwa against one of its victims to frighten rich liberals into fattening the SPLC's coffers, that's that -- no chance to defend yourself or appeal.
Here it is Independence Day and Mr. Coker tries to make it a crime to advocate secession... I wonder what Patrick Henry or Sam Adams would think about this article? After all, they were the firebrands advocating secession from Great Britain.
Mr. Coker engages in the politics of personal destruction and could care less about the truth when it comes to his enemies. People like him are not journalists in the true sense of the word as they are simply too lazy to conduct research and verify facts.
One wonders if he has ever read the Founding documents with an open mind.... I'm sure the Black Studies Program was more to his liking in college.
His racism is offensive and odious to thinking people.
Angela Wittman said: "Mr. Coker tries to make it a crime to advocate secession... I wonder what Patrick Henry or Sam Adams would think about this article? After all, they were the firebrands advocating secession from Great Britain."
A. We didn't "secede" from Britain, for God's sake, we were never an equal unit of it. Remember "no taxation without REPRESENTATION?" I believe Alaska is well represented in the federal government.
B. Where does Mr. Coker try to make it a crime?
C. If secession is such a source of pride, why do you think Palin is trying to conceal her sympathies for it?
D. If Palin was honest about her support for AIP, how much support do you think she'd get from the mainstream folks in the US?
I wonder what Lincoln would have thought of Angela Wittman and all the other "secessionists" roaming the landscape--after all, we did fight a war over the supposed right to secede, spilling a hell of a lot of blood.
Dear Mr. Lee R,
Here is a definition of secession from Webster's Dictionary: 1.Act of withdrawing. I believe we withdrew from Britain. Secondly, I would hope Mr. Lincoln would find himself in disagreement with me. Thank you for the dialogue.
Angela Wittman:
We weren't talking about any and all definitions of secession, we were talking about "secession" as advocated by the AIP. That would be the withdrawal of the state of Alaska from the United States.
You then brought up the notion of our nation seceding from Britain. If you intended that reference to use some definition of secession other than the one that was being discussed, you needed to make that clear.
The issue of Alaska seceding from the US, a union of states with equal rights and equal representation, has nothing in common with the break between us and Britain in the 1700s.
And, having risked life, limb, and property to bring the United States into being, I would not be certain that Henry and Adams would be big fans of breaking it up.
Well, I read the first two paragraphs of this article and couldn't go any further. The "author" claims that Mrs. Palin has basically garaunteed her intentions to run for POTUS in 2012 with this resignation. That statment alone signifies the stupidity of said author. If Mrs. Palin has aspirations to be president, quiting her job as govenor with 1.5 years left and only a couple years experience(most of which has been spent campaigning and arguing with media) is the stupidest move possible. There was no need for her to quit her job to run for pres. She quit because she had to. she quit because she's done something corrupt, embarassing, illegal or all of the above. And she wants to high tail it out of the spot light before it comes out. Why do people with no knowledge of political science write articles about politics?
Sarah Palin's ties/connections to the fringe/extreme right is well documented and a piece in the Jackson Free Press dated Sept. 9, 2008 sheds some light on this. Here is an excerpt below:
"The extreme right is declaring a third-party victory with Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin on the presidential ticket this fall. “News of Sarah Palin’s ties to the Alaskan Independence Party inflamed the left yesterday, and what a joy it was to behold!” crowed League of the South board member Michael Tuggle on the League’s “Rebellion” blog. The “LS Blog” button on the League’s home page, dixienet.org, links directly to Rebellion (subtitled “Current events and commentary from a Southern perspective." The Constitution Party, which the Southern Poverty Law Center defines as a “patriot” group, lists the AIP as its Alaska state affiliate.That casts the Palin’s links to the AIP in a whole new light, as her vice-pres. candidacy moves the party from the fringe into the mainstream."
Dexter Clark, VP of the AIP and someone known very well to the Palins was one of the signatories to the Memorandum of Understanding adopted at the Second North American Secessionist Convention in Chattanooga, Tennessee on October 4th, 2007. Among the declarations at that conference were the following:
a)The American Empire is no longer a nation or a republic, but has become a tyrant aggressive abroad and despotic at home.
b)Without secession, liberty and self-government can never be sustained, and diversity among human societies can never survive.
I found it interesting and somewhat of a conundrum that they would posit the "survival of Diversity" when advocating for an end to same. Talk about speaking from both sides of your mouth. More to come!
The core tenet of belief of the Christian Exodus as it relates to "Christian Identity" is that:
"Christian Identity is based on a racist interpretation of the Christian Bible. It teaches that Jews are the literal children of Satan, and people of color are subhuman "mud people." Its followers also believe that people of Northern European descent are God's chosen people, because the lost tribes of Israel migrated to this region of Europe. America is viewed as the Biblical Promised Land. Identity's views are frequently combined with anti-Semitic conspiracy theories purporting Jewish control of American government, resulting in an ever-present threat of violence based on the belief that the "promised land" must be liberated from the "anti-Christ."
Source: "The Radical Right Wing's Collision with Mainstream Politics. Report issued by the Montana Human Rights Network. P.O. Box 1222, Helena, MT 59624.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!