Oh, Sarah Palin - Why do you Hate America?

The stuff about GOP Veep-nominee Sarah Palin's daughter and her self-described redneck boyfriend (who evidently knows little except how to play hockey and reproduce) has been clogging the news arteries and giving Wolf Blitzer yet another reason to churn out the synonyms.  It's utterly meaningless to Gov. Palin's fitness to be a heartbeat away from the office currently sought by her melanomaic septuaginarian runningmate, of course, so I expect the dust will settle on that non-issue soon enough.  I also suspect that the Governor will be cleared of wrongdoing in respect of the allegations that she tried to get her state trooper ex-brother-in-law fired.  Not that I know anything about it, but it seems inconceivable that the GOP would put her on the ticket if it wasn't completely satisfied that the allegations are unprovable.

More troubling, however, might be Gov. Palin's past affiliations with the Alaska Independence Party, whose motto ("Alaska First") seems to be at odds with the GOP slogan for '08 ("Country First").  The party seeks a referendum on Alaskan independence.  What is apparently not in dispute is that Gov. Palin's husband, Todd, was a member.  What is in dispute is whether Gov. Palin participated in AIP events some years ago. 

Irrespective of whether or not Gov. Palin was involved at any time with the AIP, she does seem to maintain a soft spot for the party, as evidenced by her oddly warm address to its Convention earlier this year. 

Assuming McCain's people actually vetted Gov. Palin, it seems that the GOP has gone soft on questions of loyalty to country.  This opens the field a bit, of course, such that if Gov. Palin withdraws (which I don't think will happen), McCain could choose a replacement from the surviving members of the Daughters of the Confederacy.

Comments

[Jack]

If only the media would devote half as much resources to scrutinizing Obama than Palin. The NYT has run zero articles detailing Obama's connection with Rezko or former domestic terrorist Ayers. Yet, 3 front page stories of mistruths and tabloid material on Palin yesterday.

People are fair game once in the public spotlight, but every day of silly trash - i.e., how could Palin let her daughter get pregnant! - makes the media look like another wing of the Democratic party. Maybe Palin should have claimed John Edwards was the father to get the media off her daughter's back.

Re: the AIP. Another false rumour spread by the NYT (False story here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/us/politics/02vetting.html?bl&ex=1220587200&en=a5543a98005b8c75&ei=5087%0A)
(Proven false here: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/members-of-frin.html)

[Russ Brown]

Right - Sarah Palin wasn't a member of the AIP. But her keeping company with AIP'ers (and her Welcome Wagon smile for them earlier in '08) should have removed her from the list of McCain's VP contenders. Why risk the distraction, especially if one already suspects that the newsmedia are giving Obama a free ride on his past associations? McCain's people can dress up his runningmate choice as somehow eschewing "politics as usual in Washington" all they want, but at root their handling of the choice of runningmate is turning out to be an instance of breathtakingly boneheaded politics.

I have resisted making Michaelle Jean comparisons (since they might be seen as focussing on their common gender - which would not have been my point - as opposed to their common inexperience). Now I think the comparison is more obviously apt, since it seems reasonable to infer from their respective pasts that they have both harboured secessionist sympathies. I don't, by the way, necessarily view that as a bad thing (I hoping for a "Oui" vote in '95), but I expect that most voters see things differently.

[Gareth Morley]

We have a long history of former secessionists, irredentists and other dubiously loyal types playing an important role in our politics. Canada was founded by two politicians (Brown and Cartier) who had flirted with separatism and republicanism in Brown's case and actually participated in Papineau's rebellion in Cartier's. Laurier opposed Confederation. Riel got away with insurrection once, but not twice. Trudeau had connections with both far-right nationalists and later communists.

Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Miliband were all in or around ultra-left sects when they were young, as were half the politicians in continental Europe. No one cares.

The American obsession with this kind of stuff is unhealthy. Maybe now that both parties are running people vulnerable to guilt-by-association, we will see less of it. Very few votes seemed to shift because of Rev. Wright, and very few votes will shift because of this.

[Russ Brown]

I agree the obsession with (youthful, indiscrete) past affiliations is unhealthy, but (I can't believe I'm using this phrase) it is what it is. And if McCain believes that his election is important to the cause of reforming the American political culture, then he has made an irresponsible selection because it distracts attention away from his central message. There's nothing to be achieved in his being a boy scout looking in from the outside, all because he decided a little too early (i.e. before the election instead of after it) to buck the system.

[Gareth Morley]

I don't know, Russ. It's not about this or that person -- it's systemic. You have a situation where extremely bright, ambitious men with literary gifts like Roberts and Obama go decades without publishing anything even slightly controversial to keep themselves politically viable -- and they get attacked anyway for stuff no rational person really thinks they believe. Will a McCain/Palin administration support the secession of Alaska? Will an Obama/Biden one stop AIDS research because it was all a CIA plot? Of course not, but they have friends or family members with views that differ from the median voter in Ohio, so the whole country has to have a big freak out.

[Brock]

It appears the daughter loves guns, I remember spending my teens sleddin' and ridin' the backtrails...sans guns. The following website has a few interesting photos taken from her myspace (which I borrowed from another internet source):

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-72627

[Russ Brown]

Gareth,

Of course the country has a big freak out. It shouldn't, but it does. It's the Excited States of America. My point is that McCain should have anticipated that. That he didn't speaks to political ineptitude, not to a courageous, principled selection. It's hard to believe that a four-term Senator who now purports to be a serious candidate for the presidency of the United States would stake his candidacy on the reputation of someone who he barely knew and who had expressed political views that mainstream voters would find dubious. In short, the decision on his runningmate smacks of pollyanna political immaturity. Were I a GOP campaigner, I'd wonder why I'm spending evenings phoning strangers or pounding the pavement for someone who is more interested in "making a statement" than in actually winning an election. Until last week, I thought John McCain was the better choice (and I thought he was by far the best choice in '00). But, back then, I assumed he had some basic political acumen. I'm starting to wonder if Obama isn't the more reliable player to go toe-to-toe with Putin.

Another thing: if (1) you're running for president, (2) you're actually depending on your VP candidate to rally your base, and (3) rallying your base is still your first priority eight weeks prior to E-day, THEN your presidential campaign is in serious trouble.

All that said, I still have a bet with Lewis Klar that McCain will win. But of course I took that bet when I thought McCain had some vague understanding about the political culture in which he has been immersed since the Carter administration.

[Gareth Morley]

It's hard to say whether this was a good decision or not. If he had done something more boring, he probably would have lost -- but not by much. The chances of a rout got bigger. But the chances of winning got bigger too. Since there is no prize for a close second, McCain may have made the right choice.

[Derek J. Anderson]

CAn't help but be reminded of a line from an old Gram Parsons song--equally as applicable to Palin as to McCain: "I hope you know more than you believe."