Sarah Palin's terrorist connection

[Sauron]

Something yguy won't talk about or bring you....

[Ensign Steve]

Ug. Do we really need to stoop to their level?

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by Ensign Steve

Ug. Do we really need to stoop to their level?

Yep. It shows the conservative's hypocrisy.

Obama was supposed to repudiate Rev Wright for things that he said as a private citizen, correct?

Well, here we have this asscrack Joe Volger talking about separating Alaska and taking up arms against the federal govt:

"I hope we don't have to take a human life, but if they go on trampling our property rights, look out we're ready to die."

The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government. And I won't be buried underneath their damn flag.

And instead of repudiating these comments, we instead see Sarah Palin in her official capacity as governor of Alaska sending the Alaska Separatist Party a personal message from her office.

Can you *imagine* what would happen if Barack Obama had sent a "congratulations" message from his US Senate chamber office to a group of black muslim separatists who wanted to form their own country out of the USA?

Can you even *begin* to imagine the froth-fest that the right wing would be having ?

Do we have to talk about this? You damn right we do.

[Ensign Steve]

Originally Posted by Sauron

Yep. It shows the conservative's hypocrisy.

Everybody already knows. And those who are still in denial about it aren't about to be swayed by the nth youtube video.

Do we have to talk about this? You damn right we do.

No. We really don't.

Criticizing them for slinging mud and then slinging it back is the height of hypocrisy.

[erimir]

The question is whether we're actually claiming that Palin has a terrorist connection, or that she would be considered to have a terrorist connection by the same logic she's using.

I think the latter claim is acceptable, the former is not.

[Adam]

FWIW, I think it's completely valid to go after Palin on the grounds that her husband was a member of, and she at least paid lip service to, a group that openly advocates treason. It's not like the line of reasoning goes "she met Volger once when she was 8, and one time he made a campaign donation to her!!!11!". During her recent political career she expressed approval for AIP's goals. That's significant. I wish we could avoid using the nonsense word "terrorist" in conjunction with that, though.

[erimir]

Would it be better if we called her a terrsymp?

[yguy]

Originally Posted by Adam

FWIW, I think it's completely valid to go after Palin on the grounds that her husband was a member of, and she at least paid lip service to, a group that openly advocates treason.

You don't know what the word means, obviously.

[Watser?]

We are in dire (3 a: desperately urgent <dire need>) need of a yguy-English dictionary.

[Deadlokd]

Originally Posted by Watser?

We are in dire (3 a: desperately urgent ) need of a yguy-English dictionary.

Allow me.

Originally Posted by yguy

You don't know what the word means, obviously.

yguy: Someone has made another valid point and I have no comeback so I shall fall back on my demonstrated legal skillz.

[Angakuk]

It should be noted that, Volger's personal opinions notwithstanding, the official platform of the Alaskan Independence Party makes no mention of secession from the United States of America.

[Watser?]

It is pretty much implied in the name though, I would say.

[Logan]

Don't go blaming/accusing 'them' or the 'other guys', your all equally full of shit .

Logan

[Deadlokd]

No we aren't.

[Logan]

Not with stubby fingers on a tiny keyboard it's not .

Logan

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by Watser?

We are in dire (3 a: desperately urgent <dire need>) need of a yguy-English dictionary.

Why bother?

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by Watser?

It is pretty much implied in the name though, I would say.

Never having heard of the Alaskan Independence Party before Palin's nomination, I only know what I have read about it since then. In any case, I am not nearly so sanguine about the likelihood of determining a political party's objectives from the name it calls itself. Using that metric one might reasonably conclude that the two major political parties in the U.S. have some particular interest in promoting democracy and preserving the republic.

[Deadlokd]

Another victim of WSDSS (Word Selective Digit Stubbiness Syndrome).

Will we ever be free of this scourge?!

[Ensign Steve]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

It should be noted that, Volger's personal opinions notwithstanding, the official platform of the Alaskan Independence Party makes no mention of secession from the United States of America.

Why would we let actual facts get in the way of our hysterical mudslinging?

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by Angakuk

Never having heard of the Alaskan Independence Party before Palin's nomination, I only know what I have read about it since then. In any case, I am not nearly so sanguine about the likelihood of determining a political party's objectives from the name it calls itself.

Then by the same logic, you ought not to place too much weight on a political party's actual goals merely from reading their public platform.

Oh, and by the way: their goal.

[Angakuk]

Originally Posted by Alaskan Independence Party

The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:

1) Remain a Territory.
2) Become a separate and Independent Nation.
3) Accept Commonwealth status.
4) Become a State.

The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, that Alaskans achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, and promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences.

If the goal is to have the opportunity to vote for one of the four listed options, and the vote is in favor of an option other than becoming a separate and independent nation, I wonder if the party faithful would be prepared to accept that result.

In any case, if we take the official platform at face value it would appear to be the case that a person (eg.Todd Palin) could be a supporter of the party and be in favor of holding the vote while not being in favor of Alaskan independence. Reversion of federal lands to state control, homesteading on public lands and unrestricted access to public lands all seem to be issues that might attract someone with Todd Palin's interests.