First there was Troopergate (re Palin’s sister’s ex-husband)…followed quickly by Abstinence Problems (Palin’s 17-year-old daughter’s pregnancy).
Now, up pop allegations that Palin and her husband are secessionists. As yet entirely unconfirmed, the head of the Alaskan Independence Party (a legally authorized party in the state that historically receives about 3% of the vote), is on the record stating that the Palins were, in 1994, registered members of the AIP and even attended the party’s convention in Wasilla that year.
Why should anyone care?
AIP’s platform espouses “states rights [that] seek the complete repatriation of the public lands, held by the federal government, to the state and people of Alaska in conformance with…the federal constitution.” It also:
—supports the privatization of government services.
—opposes the borrowing of money by government for any purposes other than for capital improvements.
—fosters a constitutional amendment abolishing and prohibiting all property taxes.
In addition, according to a speech given by AIP vice chairman Dexter Carter at the party’s 2008 convention, the AIP, positing that the votes and referenda for statehood in the 40s and 50s were flawed, is also demanding a new vote for Alaska to become an independent country, a commonwealth of the USA, a territory (like Guam), or to remain a state.
As of this date, Palin and McCain have not responded to the AIP story. Neither has the AIP demonstrated proof of Palin’s membership. Nonetheless, most media and bloggers are reporting the Palins’ AIP membership as fact, quoting other unsubstantiated sources as proof. Such unprofessional, irresponsible reportage is cousin to the small town telephone operator who gets a call every day at five minutes before noon, asking for the local time. After many weeks of such inquiries she finally asks who the caller is and learns that it is the man who blows the noon factory horn by which she sets her telephone office clock.
The irresponsible reportage also includes innuendos and slurs about Palin’s recorded video message welcoming the AIP membership to their 2008 convention. There is nothing in the video to assassinate her character. She chooses her words carefully, as any politician would, and “shares [the AIP's] vision of upholding the constitution of our great state.” This is a non-issue.
How will all the other allegations play out?
—Someone will have to affirm or deny the Palins’ AIP membership and if true, explain the political philosophy underlying it. McCain uses a “Country First” campaign slogan. The AIP’s slogan is “Alaska First—Alaska Always.” Awkward.
—An investigation is underway regarding Troopergate.
—Whether Palin’s support of abstinence-only sex education teaching is responsible governmental policy will come out in further debate. (I agree with Obama’s statement that families should be off-limits. “Back off,” he said.)
By far most important is whether McCain performed adequate vetting of Palin before anointing her as his Veep. If he knew about all these issues, did he ignore them…or simply believe that they were inconsequential? Are they inconsequential? And if McCain did not know about these, what does that say about his decision-making process?
Paraphrasing the conclusion of my first post about Palin: by election day, these will not be unanswered questions.
