The Shotgun Blog
« What will Harper run on? | Main | Stephen Harper and Stephane Dion on the Rick Mercer Report »
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Sarah Palin may never have been a member of the Alaskan Independence Party
Yesterday, I posted an email exchange between myself and Lynette Clark, chairman of the Alaskan Independence Party. She assured me that Sarah Palin, veep pick for the Republican Party, was a member of the AIP.
Today, the John McCain camp contested this claim, repeated by Elisabeth Bumiller in the New York Times, saying that Sarah Palin was a lifelong Republican, with documents showing that she was a GOP member since 1982. With respect to these claims, the McCain camp said that it was "Not true. An unsourced."
Newsbusters has a post about this. "Here is the bottom line: Sarah Palin never belonged to the AIP," writes John Stephenson, "and those that want to bark up that tree will be doing no more than howling at the moon."
ABC News' Jake Trapper has since updated his original story which also cited Lynette Clark's claim that Sarah Palin was an AIP member. The update reads, in part:
"After refraining from commenting on the charge for a day, the McCain campaign on Tuesday asserted that Palin was never a member of the AIP.
But Lynette Clark, the chairman of the AIP, tells ABC News that Palin and her husband Todd were members in 1994, even attending the 1994 statewide convention in Wasilla. Clark was AIP secretary at the time.
This, it should be noted, does not square with official records.
Gail Fenumiai, director of the Alaska Division of Elections, tells ABC News that regardless of the impression given to members of the Alaskan Independence Party, "Gov. Sarah Palin first registered to vote in the state in May 1982 as a Republican, and she has not changed her party affiliate with the Division of Elections since that time."
Clark, for whatever reason, thought that in 1994 Palin was a kindred spirit."
...
"A day after ABC News requested a response from Palin as to whether
she was ever a member of the AIP, McCain campain spox Brian Rogers told
ABC News that Clark's "allegations are false."
"Governor Palin has been a registered Republican since 1982," Rogers says, providing voter registration documentation showing her to be a Republican. "As you know, if she changed her registration, there would have been some record of it. There isn’t."
Rogers says that Palin didn’t attend the AIP convention in 1994, "but she visited them when they had their convention in Wasilla in 2000 as a courtesy since she was mayor."
He would not comment as to why AIP officials are so convinced Palin was a member of their party. When asked if Palin ever identified herself as a member of the AIP, Rogers said, "No, she's a lifelong Republican."
Meanwhile, Ed Morrisey at Hot Air has uploaded a document to prove Sarah Palin's registration with the Republican Party. He writes:
"Sarah Palin never belonged to the AIP. That’s the bottom line. Instead of making this argument about Bumiller, the McCain report would be better served by pointing the finger at Lynette Clark, who is obviously so desperate for attention that she exploited Palin’s newfound fame to get her 15 minutes in the limelight.
Update: I got a PDF copy of the documentation showing Palin to have remained Republican her entire adult life. Even I don’t pass that test; I flirted with the Libertarian Party briefly in 1992, but wound up voting Republican anyway in the presidential election."
I requested additional evidence from Lynette Clark to prove that Sarah Palin was, in fact, a member but, as of this writing, have not yet heard from Clark. I will post any response she might have to offer. I have also attempted to contact the Frotiersman, the local paper from Wasilla where Sarah Palin served as mayor, to see if they have anything that might help clear this up. If anything comes up, I'll post that as well.
UPDATE: Jesse Walker, over at Reason's Hit & Run blog, writes: "I don't know if Palin was ever a member of the AIP. I do know that it's
entirely possible to be registered one way on the voting rolls while
paying dues to a third party and attending its events. The fact that
I've been a registered independent my entire adult life didn't keep me
from joining the Libertarian Party for a year in college. And the fact
that Ron Paul is an elected Republican congressman hasn't kept him from
maintaining his Libertarian life membership.
But again, why
should this bother anyone? At a time when the GOP is plunging ever
deeper into mindless nationalism, Palin's willingness to hang out with
northern separatists is a breath of fresh air. The political class's
collective case of the vapors over this woman is even more ridiculous
than the panics over Michelle Obama and Jeremiah Wright. There are
reasonable criticisms of Palin, topmost of which is the fact that she's
willing to run on a ticket with John McCain. This is not one of them."
For the record, I also think that Palin's possible connection to the AIP would be a good thing. At the very least, it would demonstrate that Palin is a political maverick (maverick!), and not a boring fart. Dear reader, if you come across any news on this, please post it in the comments so that I can give it my attention, and update this post.
h/t Richard Evans, in the comment section to my original post, alerted me to this story by posting a link to the newsbusters pieces.
UPDATE2: Fact Check links to this piece in the TPMmuckraker: "Retracting past statements, the chair of the secessionist Alaska Independence Party told TPMmuckraker that they were mistaken in stating that Sarah Palin was once a member of their party -- but that her husband Todd, was.
"We searched for it everywhere, but we couldn't find anything to back up what we had been told by our source," Lynette Clark, chairman of the fringe third-party AIP told TPMmuckraker. "We made a mistake, but Todd definitely was a member of the party. We know that for sure."
Sure enough, ABC News' Jake Trapper has some pretty good evidence: "Gail Fenumiai, director of the Alaska Division of Elections, tells ABC News that regardless of the impression given to members of the Alaskan Independence Party, "Gov. Sarah Palin first registered to vote in the state in May 1982 as a Republican, and she has not changed her party affiliate with the Division of Elections since that time."
But Fenumiai adds that Palin's husband Todd was a member of the AIP from October 1995 through July 2002, except for a few months in 2000. He is currently undeclared."
For some reason, people think it's important whether or not Sarah Palin actually attended a 1994 AIP convention in Wasilla. I guess it is, since the McCain camp is denying even this. Trapper quotes a second source, Mark Chryson, chairman of the AIP from 1995 to 2002, saying that "Palin was at the convention in 1994. She was there."
If Todd was an official member from 1995 through 2002, I see no reason why Sarah would not come with him to a 1994 convention in her home town.
Posted by P.M. Jaworski on September 2, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e554f98d0b8834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sarah Palin may never have been a member of the Alaskan Independence Party:
Comments
UPDATE: Lynette Clark retracts the claim that Palin was a member of AIP.
"We searched for it everywhere, but we couldn't find anything to back up what we had been told by our source," Lynette Clark, chairman of the fringe third-party AIP told TPMmuckraker. "We made a mistake, but Todd definitely was a member of the party. We know that for sure."
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/aip_we_were_wrong_sarah_was_ne.php
Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-09-02 11:13:00 PM
Jaws,
You know, a lot of people mad a fuss about Michelle Obama saying "for the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback." One was Bill Kristol, who wrote a column for the NY Times about it ( http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25kristol.html ). Kristol was also one of the head cheerleaders for picking Palin - a choice he advocated for weeks before it was made. So now that it turns out that her husband was a card-carying secessionist for many years, should the same criticism be leveled at him? Is not sauce for the goose also sauce for the gander here?
If Kristol were a man of integrity, would he not denounce Palin's husband's political associations just as strongly? Should not all who made a fuss of Michelle Obama's comments do the same? What say you Jaws?
Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-09-02 11:47:09 PM
I say, "yes, if he were a man of integrity, and not merely a partisan, he should."
But partisan blinders are really, really difficult to see around. Identical in-all-relevant-respects advertisements from Republicans and Democrats elicit different reactions from partisans.
Here's an ad with John McCain holding a baby. The voice-over says, "John McCain likes family." Democrats say, "this advertisement is empty and stupid." Republicans say, "this advertisement is good and effective.
Here's an ad with Barack Obama holding a baby. The voice-over says, "Barack Obama is a family man." Republicans say, "this advertisement is empty and stupid." Democrats say, "this advertisement is good and effective."
We now have the same thing happening in this case. Kristol slams Michelle Obama for reasons that are analogous to the situation with Palin. But, of course--of course!--it will somehow turn out to be *really, really* different. Not at all the same.
(Hey, come to think of it, did Sarah Palin wear a U.S. flag pin while governor? Has she forgotten about 9/11? Does she hate America? Does she?)
*Deep sigh*
Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-09-03 12:03:11 AM
I went to the AIP website, and found some videos of their leader talking about Palin. He said explicitly that in order to further the cause of Alaska state's rights, it is important to join whatever party is expedient. So, it would be completely consistent with their ideology for her to always be a registered member of the GOP.
Posted by: harriet | 2008-09-03 1:04:20 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.