Alaska secede from the Union? What a silly question one might ask, and why ask it anyway. Well, it really makes a difference when we find out about those who want to do that. Who they support can also make a difference. One of their strongest advocates has been Sarah Palin, whose support hasn't been token but has been strong enough to make definitive statements about the Independence Party of Alaska and its direction towards independence for the State where she is Governor. Perhaps that was a plan before John McCain stepped up to save the Union but perhaps not save it after all with a candidate who has long been someone who has stood behind some of the specific objectives of those who would secede from the Union. In fact Sarah Palin is shown on a video clip that one can find on the Internet supporting the objectives of the Independent Party of Alaska, the chief one of which is to withdraw from the United States. In the clip she tells the Alaska Independent Party to keep up the good work in 2006.

Palin hasn't been a member of the Alaska Independence Party, but her husband Todd Palin has. http://donklephant.com/2008/09/09/debunking-palin-rumors/ Sarah Palin also talks about how closely she will be working with her husband if she is elected Vice President. So if she wins we will have someone right beside her whose organization advocates as its principal aim the withdrawal of Alaska from the rest of the country. No, I did not make this up; the support for this can be found lots of places on the Internet. With enough of that backing, in addition to the direct words from Palin herself, we have know that the viewpoint exists.

The motto of the Alaska Independent Party is "Alaska First, Alaska forever. The movement leader has said in 1991 "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," - Joe Vogler Sarah Palin provided encouragement for Vogler and the Party at the 2006 convention of this political party and attended their conventions in 1994 and 1996. Her husband was a member of it for seven years.

Now before we get into that tangle of guilt by association with Barack Obama and his preacher, the latter of which was shown with his own "ultra" positions, let's talk for a moment about what might be unique between passive sitting and listening and advocacy by one's specific words and who has stated in public that the positions shared by a radical organization are what is supported. Whose husband belonged to that organization for seven years. Can we imagine how this election would be if Michell Obama were a member of a black separatist organization for seven years?

The Alaska Independent Party claimed Sarah Palin as one of their own, although there is no evidence that she indeed was. But to be close enough to identify with them just might be good enough to consider a close association. As in active association, since again there is a difference in having one's friend a radical Muslim and belonging to an organization that sponsors a type of radical separatism that one finds among populations of the Middle East.

This article is written to point out the foolishness of the guilt by association arguments and the difference between active participation in activities of a group and someone who associates with someone who participates in the group. In other words, there is a whole different order of magnitude in the association. One should also examine timelines. Indeed there is a difference between participating in a group with extreme views recently and those whose views were translated into action, as was the case with Ayers, that Obama has been tied to and being involved with someone who has extreme views and has been an intimate member of the group as one's husband. In addition publicly proclaiming one's agreement and appreciation of that group as a leader of a State like Alaska should raise concern. So why is it only discussed in Alaska and not on the mainstream news?