McCain campaign: Palin a Republican since 1982; Update: Documentation

posted at 12:05 pm on September 2, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, the New York Times reported that Sarah Palin had belonged to the Alaskan Independence Party in the early 1990s instead of the Republican Party.   The AIP now exists mostly as a fringe political party, but had been mainstream enough in 1994 that their gubernatorial candidate had attracted 38% of the vote.  Later, though, the party appeared to emphasize an effort to explore options regarding secession and independence.

Now, however, the McCain campaign blog McCain Report states that New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller simply made it up:

While the press scrambles to report on the process by which Governor Palin was offered the second spot on the Republican ticket, New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller has opted instead to make up her own version of events. As the AP reports, “Sarah Palin voluntarily told John McCain’s campaign about her pregnant teenage daughter and her husband’s 2-decade-old DUI arrest during questioning as part of the Republican’s vice presidential search, the lawyer who conducted the background review said.” Yet according to Bumiller, yesterday’s disclosures “called into question” how thoroughly Governor Palin had been vetted. Why the discrepancy? It seems one reporter actually reported the story, while Bumiller made up her own. …

And Bumiller writes that Governor Palin “was a member for two years in the 1990s of the Alaska Independence Party.” Not true, and unsourced. Governor Palin has been a registered Republican since 1982.

I’m not aware that Bumiller reported on this story, but she’s not the only one who did so.  Jake Tapper, generally regarded as a balanced and careful political reporter, also reported on the story yesterday.  Lynnette Clark, an AIP official, went on record with ABC at least to make this allegation, such as it was.  Given that, it hardly seems accurate to call it “unsourced” or to focus one’s ire on Bumiller, at least in this case.

Tapper also contacted the McCain campaign, though, who provided documentation to refute the allegation:

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 some 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 the McCain campaign provided ABC News with all the voter registration information that exists. 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.”

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.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

This is turning into one hell of a dirty campaign.

Blake on September 2, 2008 at 1:01 PM

“I’m a new kind of politician”-Messiah the Lightworker

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:04 PM

HOPE AND CHANGE!!

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on September 2, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Because only Spartan Women give birth to real men.

Speakup on September 2, 2008 at 1:06 PM

I have lived in Alaska for quite some time also, and I’ll let you in on a little secret that the MSM is not aware of yet…

Alaskan women are NOT the kind of women that the average woman can identify with in any way..

Without disclosing too much, I’ll give you a little hint.

For every woman in Alaska, there are about 100 desperate men, willing to kill for her

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Making sure this doesn’t get lost at the bottom of the last page, so Upinak can see it when she gets back. Until she confirms, I call shenanigans.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on September 2, 2008 at 1:06 PM

This is turning into one hell of a dirty campaign.

Blake on September 2, 2008 at 1:01 PM

Boy, did you say a mouthful there!
And just to clarify, I KNOW you can’t trust Wiki, that’s why I posted it – so we can get it cleared up. Sorry, I should have stated that when I posted originally.

One of the posts was from an editor of Wiki. He proposed that people submit as much information as they can about Palin. If enough submit similar info (he was referring to false accusations) then it will “stick”. He said the more disinformation the better.

Boy, that is REALLY in the spirit of Wiki and The Internet in general! Not to mention Free Speech, a Democratic Government, the rule of Law…..Seriously when will the “Liberals” just admit that they are really Communists?

KMC1 on September 2, 2008 at 1:09 PM

For every woman in Alaska, there are about 100 desperate men, willing to kill for her

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Think about the sheep! We must protect the sheep!

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:10 PM

The crazy libs never fail to disappoint!

hump1201 on September 2, 2008 at 1:00 PM

Let me see, Obama grandmother, a child out of wedlock…the smartest person in the world is what Obama said of her.
Obama, son of a teenage mother whose bio father never raised him…let’ see the time line. Mother married on Feb 2, 1961, Obama born on August 4, 1961, is that just 6 months???

right2bright on September 2, 2008 at 1:10 PM

Just finished reading comments over at the Washington post….The fringe left will hurt Obama’s campaign if what I read is a representative sampling.

The Post writer Richard Cohen compares Palin to Caligula’s horse, comments range from calling Palin white-trash, to calling her an idiot etc….and objectifying her sexually. Obviously Palin is a dolt and worthy of ridicule because she departs from the orthodoxy.

I think the moveon.org/KOS elements could start to alienate voters. They are over reaching and down right mean.

Moreover, many of the posts strike my midwestern ear as elitist. The liberals run the real risk of overshooting and attacking the identity of a lot of potential voters.

The Democrats talk about the “average American family” and the need to be their advocate, yet they are people worthy of derision behind closed doors. How cute that one of them wishes to lead the country.

Chalk it up to noblesse oblige.

moxie_neanderthal on September 2, 2008 at 1:12 PM

ALASKA: Where the ugliest,trashiest women are followed around like supermodels.

Hey I got another one

ALASKA: Where the only decent human beings are the tourists.

I’m really surprised I haven’t heard any of these here yet.
Seems like most here are not too familiar with the Great North Country.

Don’t know what Mac is thinking, picking an Alaskan…

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:13 PM

They should have just provided the documentation that she’s been Republican since the 80′s, and left it at that.

Denying she attented a convention, or talked to them is going to come back to bite them in the ass. There’s already a second person coming forward saying she was at the 1994 convention.

There could be any number of reasons she went to the AIP convention–simple curiosity. Doesn’t mean she ever agreed with their position.

Enoxo on September 2, 2008 at 1:13 PM

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Either Palin must be the exception, or you must be blind.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on September 2, 2008 at 1:16 PM

She is the exeption…but you see my point….they elected her governor!

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:18 PM

You seem bitter.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on September 2, 2008 at 1:20 PM

There could be any number of reasons she went to the AIP convention–simple curiosity. Doesn’t mean she ever agreed with their position.

Enoxo on September 2, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Same refrain, new song – Youtube.

Palin thanks the AIP for all their good work and wishes them the best. On video. Can’t really but guess at the context and what she meant. Sympathetic ears hear “Now behave, otherwise I’ll throw you bums out.” Slightly skeptical ears hear “WTF????”

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:21 PM

Conservatives to the liberal media:

“Clearly you don’t know our women”.

Bishop on September 2, 2008 at 1:23 PM

Markos KOS was the first to push this – New Yorks Times is nothing but a radical left wing blog gossip rag.

No wonder they are broke. They lie.

Topsecretk9 on September 2, 2008 at 1:23 PM

“Mother married on Feb 2, 1961, Obama born on August 4, 1961, is that just 6 months???”

um, yeah — that’s already been well-documented. that’s why oblahblah has put the brakes on the whole bristol thang right quick …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:23 PM

Palin thanks the AIP for all their good work and wishes them the best. On video. Can’t really but guess at the context and what she meant. Sympathetic ears hear “Now behave, otherwise I’ll throw you bums out.” Slightly skeptical ears hear “WTF????”

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:21 PM

*slightly skeptical*….

stop punching her to try to hit John….

she was doing her job, and if we are now going to hand Obama the Presidency because Sarah may have done oppo research or even agreed with their 10th amendment vibe…..

well it will become my mission to get the truth out on Barry and I will not be alone.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

I’m a pro-family male feminist.
I back my soldier wife getting equal pay for equal work. I support her having whatever career she wants that she is qualified for. If the good of the family were to require me to scale back I would.
sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 12:52 PM

Gender-roles aside for the moment, I’m just wondering, who takes care of the kids in a dual-income family? Leaving kids in daycare isn’t very family-friendly.
Now, in terms of the role of men: how do feminists portray their role in the family?
I have no issues with the concept of “equal pay for equal work.” The military has problems in this regard.
1) Are women serving honorably in the military? Yes, most assuredly.
2) Are they physically capable? In some cases, yes, but it’s hard to tell based upon their PT scores, because they are scored differently. Situp scoring is identical, but pushups, for example: a male 17-21 yrs of age needs 42 to pass whereas a female of the same age gets a perfect score. The 2-mile run: a male 17-21 yrs of age needs can run it in 15:34 and pass, whereas a same age female can run hers in 15:36 and get a perfect score. Is this “fairness?” Battlefields do not have a sign saying “Men this side, women that side.”
3) Have men lost all sense of chivalry that they no longer feel compelled to protect their homes, wives, sisters and mothers? I’ll be damned if I’m going to hide behind my wife or mother and let them go to war in my stead. If more men heeded the call to arms, then our wifes, sisters, and mothers wouldn’t have to fight. Can we imagine women fighting at the Hot Gates of Thermopylae because the men were too scared?
4) Should women serve their country? Most certainly. The question is in what role. The age-old saying, “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world,” comes to mind. There’s a reason this saying is age-old. If a woman without children wishes to serve outside the home, then here are some possibilities. Though not exhaustive, you can probably get the idea. During WW2, we had the WAC. Non-combat roles, such as nursing, linguistics, cryptography, administration, cartography, etc., provide opportunity to serve.
5)As you can probably tell, I’m not so much against women serving in the military, but instead their current role within the military.
Though I don’t necessarily agree with everything stated in it, I’d recommend the following: “Weak Link: The Feminization of the American Military” by Brian Mitchell.
This is probably more than what you were expecting on this particular topic. I can only hope responses to this aren’t filled with ad hominem attacks, but we shall see.

Send_Me on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

hey olaf, look up at the Fred! thread above — those who STILL insist on sowing divsisiveness at a time like this are a special kind of evil — kindly stfu …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

“Mother married on Feb 2, 1961, Obama born on August 4, 1961, is that just 6 months???”

um, yeah — that’s already been well-documented. that’s why oblahblah has put the brakes on the whole bristol thang right quick …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:23 PM

He is finding out the meaning of the word “figurehead”….

the M$M exposing Barry is a “token” in a way I never would have said or even dared to believe.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:26 PM

hey olaf, look up at the Fred! thread above — those who STILL insist on sowing divsisiveness at a time like this are a special kind of evil — kindly stfu …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

11th commandment for the win

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Who cares what she said in a video? She was not a member of the party. The media are reporting falsely that she was.

rockmom on September 2, 2008 at 1:27 PM

Alaska has a population of 676,987 according to 2007 estimates, 346,406 of whom are male, 330,581 of whom are female. That is a male:female ration of 1.04787:1

Immolate on September 2, 2008 at 1:29 PM

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:21 PM

And she was the Governor when she made that video. It’s one of the top three political parties that at least 38% of Alaskans belong to.

Enoxo on September 2, 2008 at 1:29 PM

ALASKA: Where the ugliest,trashiest women are followed around like supermodels.
Hey I got another one

ALASKA: Where the only decent human beings are the tourists.
I’m really surprised I haven’t heard any of these here yet.
Seems like most here are not too familiar with the Great North Country.

Don’t know what Mac is thinking, picking an Alaskan…

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:13 PM

No wonder you like Huckabee so much. You two practice the same kind of “Christianity” == the fake kind.

Elizabetty on September 2, 2008 at 1:30 PM

I think the saying is something like this:
Behind every palm tree in Alaska, there is a beautiful woman.

right2bright on September 2, 2008 at 1:30 PM

hey olaf, look up at the Fred! thread above — those who STILL insist on sowing divsisiveness at a time like this are a special kind of evil — kindly stfu …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

Don’t care what Fred says…he was a phony and a Mccainiac from the beginning.

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:30 PM

stop punching her to try to hit John….

she was doing her job, and if we are now going to hand Obama the Presidency because Sarah may have done oppo research or even agreed with their 10th amendment vibe…..

well it will become my mission to get the truth out on Barry and I will not be alone.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

Not hitting at her for the sake of St. John. He is his own problem.

Before I invest in any pol, I want to believe in them. Right now I don’t know enough about Palin to be other than ‘slightly skeptical.’
I’m not skewering you for pulling the lever on Palin, I’d ask that you not gut me because I haven’t.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:31 PM

This is probably more than what you were expecting on this particular topic. I can only hope responses to this aren’t filled with ad hominem attacks, but we shall see.

Send_Me on September 2, 2008 at 1:25 PM

I’m an ex-11 series.

I said equal work for equal pay.

I have scaled back my own work load because of the fact we are at war.

My wife is on her 3d overseas tour. The choice I faced was either scale back to part-time, deny my wife her career, or hurt my child’s upbringing….I chose the middle.

A 60 pound shell does not make itself 35 pounds because of who lifts it but she types at 96 words a minute knows the pertinent regs to her job with enough fluency she passed AIT with 100% on the skill tests way back when and I’d put her head to head with ANY 42a2.

I’ve read the feminizing of the force….my wife and I both agree it is a bit much but a lot of that is due to officer corps level pandering to feminists in power in the ’90s and the manpower needs of a force in a protracted war.

I take the extra time I have when not busy tutoring the boy I study locksmithing and am taking some coursework.

My malesness is not threatened by a strong woman.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:31 PM

Immolate on September 2, 2008 at 1:29 PM

Good work. Now tell me exactly how many of those women are eskimos far from the cities.

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Who cares what she said in a video? She was not a member of the party. The media are reporting falsely that she was.

rockmom on September 2, 2008 at 1:27 PM

Is that what this is all about – the MSM? I thought this was about the fitness of Palin to be VP.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM

….I chose the FORMER

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Is that what this is all about – the MSM? I thought this was about the fitness of Palin to be VP.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM

If she did not welcome the third largest party and try to recruit some of them by showing common ground she’d be remiss in her duties as Governor and less qualified IMHO.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:35 PM

If she did not welcome the third largest party and try to recruit some of them by showing common ground she’d be remiss in her duties as Governor and less qualified IMHO.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:35 PM

Maybe. It is an assumption. What if the Alaska Communist Party were the 3rd largest? Same argument hold?

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:36 PM

the point is olaf, **everyone** in the room is telling you that yer drunk; you can choose not to listen and make yerself to be a bigger ass, or you could, just once, stifle it …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:37 PM

“Right now I don’t know enough about Palin to be other than ’slightly skeptical.’”

my gods, how willfully blind can u be?

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:39 PM

the point is olaf, **everyone** in the room is telling you that yer drunk; you can choose not to listen and make yerself to be a bigger ass, or you could, just once, stifle it …

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Oh, right, and he could cut of his face to spite his nose. St. Olfa is the resident crazy uncle we all love to torture, but what would we do without the entertainment?

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:39 PM

“Right now I don’t know enough about Palin to be other than ’slightly skeptical.’”

my gods, how willfully blind can u be?

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Right back at ‘cha.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:40 PM

…but what would we do without the entertainment?

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:39 PM

I could think of a few things.

Conversation would flow more smoothly, to be sure. ;)

I kid, I kid. I think.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on September 2, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Maybe. It is an assumption. What if the Alaska Communist Party were the 3rd largest? Same argument hold?

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:36 PM

so we are equating people who want to be a protectorate like Puerto Rico with communists…..but we can’t mention on the air about barry or his Dad’s advocacy of marxism?

Yeah it’d be silly for Palin not to address the concerns or designs of a CPA that had 38.7% of the electorate.

Just like it’d be silly for her not to have them watched closely….probably in both cases.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Good work. Now tell me exactly how many of those women are eskimos far from the cities.

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:32 PM

2006 census:

Female White: 233,562
Female Native American: 58,700
Female African American: 14,280
Female Asian and Pacific: 19,983
Female Hispanic: 13,206

That would be 71.5% white, 18% eskimo or other native americans

Immolate on September 2, 2008 at 1:42 PM

my gods, how willfully blind can u be?

Buckaroo on September 2, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Willful enough to not be blinded by hype flowing in either direction.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:43 PM

Immolate on September 2, 2008 at 1:42 PM

Ok then…can you tell me how many of them are good looking?

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Yeah it’d be silly for Palin not to address the concerns or designs of a CPA that had 38.7% of the electorate.

Just like it’d be silly for her not to have them watched closely….probably in both cases.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Good of her to thank the CPA for “all their good work” and wish them luck? I think it would be better to knock them down a notch, or to have nothing to do with them. I think it would show more character and less expedience.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Ok then…can you tell me how many of them are good looking?

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:45 PM

All women are beautiful to one who sees clearly my son.

Immolate on September 2, 2008 at 1:47 PM

Fabulous work, Ed, by both you and the McCain campaign!

Beldar on September 2, 2008 at 1:48 PM

The Beach Boys sang that “the northern girls, the way they kiss, they keep their boyfriends warm at night”. In the United States, you can’t get any further north than Alaska.

Steve Z on September 2, 2008 at 1:53 PM

AverageJoe on September 2, 2008 at 12:48 PM

That TV show with Geena Davis was “Commander in Chief”. She was the VP and became president with the elected POTUS died. She had been an academic prior to being VP. The only saving grace of that show was the kids and father had real-life issues. Otherwise it was pretty much liberal drivel. IIRC the POTUS was actually a conservative who selected the female VP to get the female vote.

If McCain/Palin win in November we could have a similar situation in real life, only the VP is more conservative than the POTUS.

Snidely Whiplash on September 2, 2008 at 1:53 PM

All women are beautiful to one who sees clearly my son.

Immolate on September 2, 2008 at 1:47 PM

*Applause*

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on September 2, 2008 at 1:57 PM

Rosie O’Donnell too?

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:59 PM

Rosie O’Donnell too?

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:59 PM

he said women not male lesbians who still fear the bicycle bar.

sven10077 on September 2, 2008 at 2:00 PM

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:59 PM

To those who see clearly, yes. Hell of a lot of messed up crap in the way, but … go back and look at Rosie before she lost her marbles.

With a different circle of friends (i.e. not Hollyweird) she could’ve been a lovely person.

Mew

acat on September 2, 2008 at 2:40 PM

If he hadn’t made his choice for VEEP at the last second, a lot of this crap wouldn’t be raising its ugly head, cause it would have been talked out somewhat before hand. It’s why a ‘fully vetted’ candidate is important in the ‘do no harm’ scheme of running mates. McCain brought this on himself. Doesn’t excuse the media, but he knows the system better than most.

trailboss on September 2, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Give me a break. Do you believe for one millisecond that had Maverick announced Palin a month ago, the attacks against her would be any less?

A “fully vetted” candidate is apparently one that the media likes. And there is no way that a conservative woman will fit that definition. The entire basis of the leftist coalition is that certain groups are monolithically Democrat. Anyone who saw what happened to Clarence Thomas would have to know the Schidt-storm that would come down on Palin’s head for having the temerity to be a conservative woman.

The playbook calls for the willing accomplices in the media to literally make up charges against Palin, in hopes that either she’ll withdraw from the campaign, or voters will tire of “all the scandals”. That the scandals are concocted of whole cloth, and there is no “there” there

She isn’t quite the lib’s worst nightmare; that would be Baldilocks.

The Monster on September 2, 2008 at 3:37 PM

I fail to see how feminism jives with the idea of being “pro-family.”

 
Send_Me, it depends on which wave of feminism you’re talking about. We have to distinguish between “equity feminism” and “gender feminism.”
 
Early feminism in the U.S. was equity feminism. The early advocates of women’s rights focused on improving conditions for women where those conditions weren’t good, and on gaining certain specific legal rights for women such as the right to vote, the right to work outside the home, and the right to manage their own money.
 
Far from “subverting the patriarchy”, early feminists used examples from history and Scripture to make their case, citing successful female monarchs and Biblical heroines, and using support from Scripture to make the point that men’s and women’s souls are equal in the sight of God. (Galatians 3:27-29 is one example.) Early feminism was bound up with Christianity, finding early expression in the Temperance movement. For every “Puritanical zealot” in a temperance march, there was a fed-up, desperate woman whose male protector (husband or father) was a drunk.
 
Temperance as a political movement resulted in the Prohibition amendment, a spectacular failure whose repercussions are still with us, but at the time it galvanized women politically. (I can hardly imagine the helplessness of a woman in those days married to a drunkard who spent the household money on his habit, starving and even beating her and their children, but unable to leave him because there was no way for her to earn a living outside the gutter.)
 
Most Christians are on board with the kind of feminism that enables women to lead good and virtuous lives even if the men who should protect and care for them default on their responsibilities as ordained by God, and the kind that acknowledges women as just as much part of God’s creation as men. Christians believe that God has given each man or woman his or her own gifts of the spirit, and men and women should have equal opportunity to use their gifts to glorify their Creator. (Christians are not unique in this belief, by the way.)
 
It wasn’t until much, much later that equity feminism was succeeded by gender feminism, the hallmarks of which are male-bashing and lawsuits. ;-) Most Christians are not on board with gender feminism, for two reasons: (1) Christians believe that God ordained different roles within the family for a father and a mother, and (2) gender feminism rejects “the Judeo-Christian paradigm” altogether, drawing on an idealized pagan past when priestesses were the spiritual and political centers of their community (and of course there was no war, no slavery, no oppression, and nothing bad ever happened. :-) )
 
The logical endpoint of gender feminism is to reject men altogether under the claim that any relationship of a woman to a man is inherently oppressive. This leads naturally to the idea of same-gender relationships as the only non-oppressive ones. Christians value same-gender friendships and even communities (such as convents and monasteries), but believe that gay and lesbian relationships are contrary to God’s plan for the human race (or else, why would He have made humans and animals both male and female?).

Mary in LA on September 2, 2008 at 4:40 PM

“The librarian kept the job, despite a dispute over inquiries by Palin on how to ban books that included language she deemed inappropriate.[25]“

Could someone with a Wikipedia account question them on this?

The note [25] links to a Times article that was posted today. The article states that Palin inquired about banning books, but indicated that they couldn’t vet this with the Librarian. The Times article says that “full support” was the reason Palin ‘threatened’ to fire her but they’re reaching. The insinuation is that because Mary wouldn’t help Palin ban books she’d fire her.

I’ve googled this and it seems that there is some circular logic going on here. The Times floats this without verification in an article online today. Wikipedia adds it to the biography of Sarah Palin today. Now the likes of Air America and Oliver Willis are using it to trash her. Yikes. This is actually scary stuff to me.

This is such tripe and so liberally biased it reminds me of the movie Footloose. Don’t you know that conservative Christians the country over are all about banning books and free speech.

Sultry Beauty on September 2, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Rosie O’Donnell too?

SaintOlaf on September 2, 2008 at 1:59 PM

So desperate for a compliment you hide here, Rosie?

Noelie on September 2, 2008 at 5:18 PM

Comment pages: 1 2