Does supporting secession from the United States disqualify one from being vice president? Well, I think so, but I guess we’re about to find out for sure:
The campaign of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., likes to herald the independence of its new running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
Officials of the Alaskan Independence Party say that Palin was once so independent, she was once a member of their party, which since the 1970s has been pushing for a legal vote for Alaskans to decide whether or not residents of the 49th state can secede from the United States.
And while McCain’s motto — as seen in a new TV ad — is “Country First,” the AIP’s motto is the exact opposite — “Alaska First — Alaska Always.”
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.
D’oh! So who does the AIP want to monitor the election?
Its best-known policy is its call for a United Nations vote, which they claim should have been offered as an option in the plebiscite on statehood under international law.
Well, that should go over well with the GOP faithful!
Other than that, the AIP is a pretty standard-issue right-libertarian party, with the little caveat that they’d like to secede from the country. Now, they’re allowed to want that (though they can’t actually do it, as we settled in 1865), and indeed, Palin’s free to have supported that. But — and I’m serious about this — actively working for independence for your state from America should disqualify you from leading America.
And flatly, this is further evidence that Palin was vetted as much as I was for the vice presidency. The comparisons to Eagleton grow more apt every day.
UPDATE: Palin addressed the convention via video this year:
There’s pretty clear precedent on this. John C. Calhoun at times advocated for secession prior to becoming Vice President. And Aaron Burr tried to set himself up as ruler of a chunk of the Louisiana Territory after leaving the Vice Presidency.
In Canada, we’ve had the party serving as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition be the Parti Quebecois, whose primary platform is Quebec separation, and whose secondary platform is “grab as much as you can for Quebec”. Apart from a certain amount of amused commentary, it doesn’t seem to have been any more of a problem than some of our other choices.
Maybe that’s what they consider to be her “foreign/international affairs” experience? o.O
Maybe it’s relevant, maybe it’s not, but both precedents were set prior to us fighting a bloody four-year war over, in part, that very question.
I think the question is less if she’s qualified, then if she’s just too weird to be acceptable to voters.
I mean, having once joined a party that advocated for secession is really weird. It’s weird on a level of seeing UFOs or being a nudist or having laces installed up your back. It’s way weirder than — say — liking a slightly unusual type of lettuce.
Oh, come now. Truthfully, who hasn’t dreamed of seceding from the Union from time to time?
I think I agree that the problem is not so much one of disloyalty to these not-so-United States, as it is that it just makes the woman look, well, flaky.
All hail the Republic of Cascadia!
Oh, come now. Truthfully, who hasn’t dreamed of seceding from the Union from time to time?
Yes, but how many of us have joined an organization devoted to that purpose. How many of us have joined an organization that associates with white supremacist groups & have maintained contact with that organization up to the present time? For all my mistakes, I haven’t made that one.
I can’t believe that this VP pick is actually more entertaining than Senator Zoidberg would have been. This is, undoubtedly, the most entertaining election year of my adult life.
I mean, having once joined a party that advocated for secession is really weird.
Almost like when you have a provable 20 yr attendance at a church where your spiritual mentor preaches a theology based upon “God must destroy the whitey opressor”- after you decided Frank Marshall Davis wasn’t radical enough for you…
“Please Sir, may I have some more?”
I actually find the peaceful secession thing to be the least distressing part of the AIP platform — I don’t see any God-given reason that the northwesternmost bit of the North American continent must be politically unified with the central part, but I do object to the policies they’d implement once free of that union. (Same thing with the Confederacy — I don’t care that they wanted to be their own country; the problem is that they wanted to be their own country *so they could keep owning slaves*.)
The more I think about it the more I find the McCain/Palin campaign to be like the end skit on every Benny Hill Show ever. Palin and McCain are unfortunately cast.
Cue that theme music one more time. Benny Hill will never die!
Mischaracterizing Wright’s theology as you have implies that AIP’s politics are being mischaracterized – is that your contention? Because I know you can’t be expecting us to fall for your bullshit description…