On the wonderfully informative site called The Cognoscenti, Graham asks a very pointed question.
Why does Sarah Palin get a free pass?
This question is in reference to her membership in the Alaska Independence Party. I've read about this here and there, but frankly didn't pay much attention. But, while reading what Graham has to say about it, I realized there's a major double standard going on. Imagine if Obama had selected a VP running mate who had said the un-American things Sarah Palin has said? Do you think the Republican mud-slingers would have been so quite about it? Examples:
"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."
"And I won’t be buried under their damn flag. I’ll be buried in Dawson. And when Alaska is an independent nation they can bring my bones home.”
I'll answer my own question. If Joe Biden had ever said things like that, we would have been bombarded with it like there's no tomorrow. Look at what they've done with the Ayers business, the desperate, straw-clutching Republicans.
The explanation is obvious. Obama must have instructed his advisors to try, as much as is possible in a presidential campaign, to maintain some dignity, to not stoop to using every low blow they could. And the reason for that is also obvious. He could afford to do it. He's the better candidate. People are ready for a change.
What do you think?
Mike,
ReplyDeleteFirst Sarah Palin has never been a member of the AIP. Her husband Todd is a member, but not her.
Second, those comments were from the founder of the AIP, not Sarah.
Third, have you looked at any newspapers or websites lately? Sarah hasn't gotten a free pass on this issue. It's been covered in great detail and every time, what I've said has been found out.
I think the answer for the Obama campaign is simpler: The didn't want to bring up associations because they knew it would open the door for Ayers/Wright/Pflager/etc.
Lastly, have you actually looked at what the AIP stands for or are you just taking other people's word for it?
You might be surprised to find out that the AIP isn't the secessionist white power extremist movement many are making it out to be.
+1, Your quotes appear to be wrongly atributed to Palin, when they were said by Vogler. Please clarify so you aren't part of the problem, Mike.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Bob with most of what he said. AIP overall is a good organization. I'm not a fan of their Secessionist agenda, but their small govenment/libertarian ideals appeal to me, and those ideals that Palin agrees with is one of the reasons why I'm such a fan of her.
Meanwhile Obama was an active member in the Racist Anti-American Trinity United Church, He was a member of the Socalist "New Party" of IL, he's worked closely with terrorist braggart, Bill Ayers. Looks like there's evedence Barry was Buying Votes through ACORN....
These things get a little bit of Press, but frankly I'm suprised Obama isn't collecting unemployment, let alone running for President.
And you say Sarah-Cuda is getting a "free pass" your bias is showing, Mike. Best work on that.
Gotta agree with the other two guys on this one Mike. Not on their Obama bashing, but on the AIP stuff.
ReplyDeleteThis kind of post is just as heinous as anything that is being slung from the other side of the campaign. She wasn't a member of that party and she didn't say those things. Vogler did.
I don't think Palin gets a free pass, certainly not from the press. Part of that is her own fault in showing her obvious disdain for them. I think the Dems are just letting her hang herself at this point. Pointing this stuff out from Obama or Biden would just seem petty at this point. "Well she said this, but she does this..." kind of nyah nyah nyah stuff. It would be sad.
The guilt by association game is a tough one for the Repubs to play, or the Dems to pay giving that each side has their skeletons. Obama has Ayers, Wright and some connection to ACORN. McCain has his lobbyists, the Keating Five, and worst of all George W. Bush. Plus all of Palin's awful associatinos (AIP, that freakin' witch doctor, etc...).
That either would pull the trigger on this gun is a bit weird. It either opens up attacks from the other side or it gives the other side the opportunity to claim they are above it all. Looks like the Dems are going with the latter.
Thanks for that feedback, guys. I bow to your greater knowledge of the subject. It should be obvious by now that I believe everything I read on the internet especially if I like what it says.
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteI found myself doing the same thing about things I wanted to be true about the "other side". Then I started doing the research before I spoke up. I feel your pain in that regards.
That is how I came to be pro-gun, I wanted to prove that firearms were as dangerous as the papers, Brady Campaign said....turned out not to be entirely true as portrayed.
I welcome the chance to read valid criticism of either party. I enjoy finding out if what I know is true or not, I learn much by reading your site.
As much as we disagree, it's nice to have someone willing to host a group of us "gun nuts" as openly as you do.
Can you please edit this post, Mike, so it doesn't intentionally spread lies.
ReplyDeleteAll that's needed is atribution to the quote.
Thanks
In the beginning, at least, I also think the Obama campaign was reluctant to go after Palin for fear of being labelled sexist--as the Clinton campaigned tried to label them during the primaries.
ReplyDeleteI think the repubs were counting on that. Of course (and I say this as a woman, not as a democrat)her own campaign then went on to treat her like a Barbie Doll by only allowing her to be seen and rarely heard unless it was to deliver a well-rehearsed speech.
Then they got wind that the public was suspicious of this tactic and started letting her talk to the media. At that point, the Obama campaign didn't even have to worry about her. Tina Fey took care of it for them as did Palin herself.