Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston



Monday, October 6, 2008


The dishonesty and cowardice of the right

I posted the italicized text below on a conservative blog called Mike's America, over the weekend.

I also posted it on a blog call The Conservative News.

Mike's America blog scrubbed my comments on the Palins' involvement with the treasonous, antiAmerican, Alaskan Independence Party, and the other, The Conservative News, called me a nut job for pointing it out.

If the conservative movement wants to know why their candidates are doing so poorly, all they need to do is look at themselves in the mirror. They create their own little comfy conservative world, and, as we can see, it's devoid of all reality.

Don't like the fact that the Palins were associated with an antiAmerican group? Just pretend it never happened; and when someone brings it up, delete it or call them nuts. Yeah. That'll work.

Here is the post I left on the two blogs:

While campaigning this weekend, Palin referred to an article in Saturday's New York Times about Obama's relationship with Ayers, now 63. But that article concluded that "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called 'somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.'"

Several other publications, including the Washington Post, Time magazine, the Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The New Republic, have debunked the idea that Obama and Ayers had a close relationship.

If Sarah Palin wants to talk about palling around with people who find America less than perfect, then it's time to talk about her association with the Alaska Independence Party (AIP), the secessionist group whose founder, Joe Vogler once said:

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

I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions.

Palin's complete dealings with the group isn't entirely clear, and unfortunately we can't ask Mr. Vogler about it since he was murdered in a plastic explosives sale gone bad," but we do know this: Sarah Palin probably attended the AIP convention 1994, the McCain campaign admits she attended in 2000, and as governor, Palin taped a welcoming message to them in 2006, saying:

"Your party plays an important role in our state's politics. I've always said that competition is so good, and that applies to political parties as well. I share your party's vision of upholding the constitution of our great state... So I say good luck on a successful and inspiring convention. Keep up the good work, and God bless you."

So Palin says "God bless you." to a group of people who hate America?

Add to that, Todd Palin, aka, the "First Dude," was a registered member of AIP from 1995 until 2002, coincidentally changing his party affiliation when she began her first campaign for public office.

I'd say that was an extremely close association with a group of traitors--her own husband belonged to that group of treasonous America haters. That's rather close, eh?

So, we have Sarah Palin, actively involved with a secessionist group that professes its hatred for America, and whose husband was a card-carrying member of the group for seven years.

If Sarah Palin wants to talk about questionable associations, bring it on.

And then we can discuss McCain's shameful behavior in the Keating Five Scandal--which is also a discussion on his "character."

In any event, the American people don't actually give a fig about this crap--the economy is the most important issue, and the McCain campaign knows that and is trying to take the focus off of it.


Patrick M said...

If the conservative movement wants to know why their candidates are doing so poorly...,

Conservatives don't really have a candidate, Republicans do. Therein lies the problem McCain really has.

If you want the reason The Marxist (Obama) is doing as well as he is, it's because McCain can't differentiate himself when both he and his opponent are voting for pork-laden bills that expand government. It's not conservatism.

shaw kenawe said...

Who would have been your conservative candidate?

Snead said...

You'd have more luck convincing Reagan to pull himself out of the ground and endorse Obama than trying to get anyone at Mike's America to accept an alternative viewpoint.

Shaw Kenawe said...


Mike resorts to name-calling when he's backed into a caller--he usually calls me a "commie."

I was surprised, then amused that he cowardly scrubbed my comments on Todd and Sarah Palin's involvement with the treasonous AIP.

I think most of these far right conservatives suffer from cognitive dissonance.

In psychology, cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling or stress caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a fundamental cognitive drive to reduce this dissonance by modifying an existing belief, or rejecting one of the contradictory ideas.

Often one of the ideas is a fundamental element of ego, like "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision." This can result in rationalization when a person is presented with evidence of a bad choice, or in other cases. Prevention of cognitive dissonance may also contribute to confirmation bias or denial of discomforting evidence.

I believe Mike, and his blog buddies especially, suffers from this. His replies to my posts are most often nonsequiturs or, as I said, name-calling. His blog rarely rises above the level of "Nyah, nyah, nyah."

As for Reagan--his wife, according to Ron Reagan, actually admires Senator Obama, and Nancy had many nice things to say about him.

Mrs. Reagan never quite got over her dislike of McCain, since she and Ronald were close to McCain's first wife, Carol, and they didn't like what he did to her.

Thanks for stopping by.

Shaw Kenawe said...

That should have been "backed into a CORNER."

Toad734 said...

I thinks it's a pretty big stretch for either Palin or McCain to play the "shady people you know" card. Clearly Palins husband hates America and that's why he was a part of that group.

Snead has a point. Mike doesn't live in the real world.

Eric Dondero said...

Funny how you completely ignore Sarah Palin's ties to the Libertarian Party of Alaska which are much stronger and more recent than her ties to the AIP.

A little bias against Libertarians perhaps?

shaw kenawe said...

No, Eric, no bias. A few people in my family are Ron Paul supporters.

I didn't know that about Palin.

Thanks for stopping by.

And toad, you're always welcome here, too.

Patrick M said...

Eric: Sarah's got leanings toward the Libertarian party?

No wonder I like the idea of her on the ticket.

Patrick M said...

Shaw: I don't know who would have been the good candidate. Of the pack that was around when the primaries started off, Fred Thompson was the best we had, except for the lack of pulse. Everybody else was to the left of him. Bob Barr, the Libertarian candidate, is probably the closest to me politically, but he dissed the troops so he's out on that.

But if I were to choose the one man with the qualifications (even less than Sarah), vision, principles, common damned sense, and magically great looks, the only person I could pick would be...

Me. (you'd have to look at the early days of my blog for that megalomania, but it's there)

Shaw Kenawe said...

Patrick, I don't doubt your abilities, but there's one other thing that a president needs that I'm not sure your have going for you.

The ability to NOT see people who have ideological differences with you as "the enemy."

A president has to be a leader of ALL the people, not just Rush Limbaugh's audience.

If (as Sarah would put it) we are so blessed with an Obama presidency, I think you will be surprised at how he will include people from the other side of the aisle in his administration.

A great leader is not afraid of ideas that are contrary to his or hers.

When you build a cocoon around yourself that shuts out the opposition's voice, you get into deep trouble--just look at the wreck that is the George W. Bush administration.

Patrick M said...

The ability to NOT see people who have ideological differences with you as "the enemy."

You've been on my blog. And you've seen I can see what the other side things, and why.

The real challenge (and Bush does have this one) is differentiating between times where all sides matter and times where a guiding principle matters. In comparison, Bill Clinton did better because he polled endlessly and led based on the polls. There were times, though, that true leadership was needed, and that's when someone like Bush shines.

Except for the Dastardly Bastardly Bailout and BS bill, of course.