God only knows what she is now. Apparently, she has changed her mind and will, no doubt, change her mind again if she wants to stay on McCain's ticket.
Right now, I can say that she has a very COZY relationship with the secessionist Alaskan Independent Party (AIP), as is evident form this 2008 VIDEO
Then there is testimony of AIP officials such as this one:
Clark was AIP secretary at that time.
Sarah Palin refuses to answer the question directly, so McCain's staffers are denying it for her. Why won't she just call a conference and simply state if this is true or not? But, as long as she says nothing, she's not liable. Why should I listen to and believe McCain's staffers? I want to hear her say in public that she wasn't.
So far, all the supporters of hers on this forum provided no documentation to show that their judgment (yes they judge too!) was somehow right. She is simply accepted on blind faith (why am I not surprised!?!).
Palin enters the race with baggage mile high, refuses to deny or confirm allegations about her association with a secesisonist (anti-American) political party, addressed that same party this year as a "healthy completion" and wishes it success, also acknowledging that her side and the AIP had a "lot in common."
She is running on a conservative, Evangelical platform with a 17-year-old out-of-wedlock pregnant daughter. What a great role model she is! So much for raising children with strong Chrisitian values.
She disagreed with McCain on a number of issues. In Dec 2007 McCain said climate change is man-made. Sarah Palin disagreed in as recently as August 2008! Will she now change her tune?
McCain is also against Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) drilling. Palin is empathic ally in favor of it. This is what she had to say on this (my emphasis):
And she is running with a politician she thought three months ago was "wrong" and lived in a La-La Land?
Finally, when it comes to choosing who's going to run the country that also happens to be the leader of the free world, I hope every voter in this election judges each and every candidate thoroughly. This is a not beauty pageant.
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.
I just read an article that says she was NOT a member but her husband was for two years. Careful how you judge, Kosta, for YOU will be judged by God as YOU judge others. Even Christian kids screw up their lives in spite of how well brought up they are.