Community

One of the arguments made about Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) is that, aside from her personal dramas, she is a political chess master. Apparently, she instinctively knows how to play the game of politics well and is especially adept at navigating the terrain. That angle was again amplified by Todd Purdum's current piece in Vanity Fair, and is a staple of pretty much any in-depth look at Palin as a political creature.

But the latest piece from CBS News -- based on a book that two of its reporters are writing about Palin -- shows that Palin was not nearly as savvy as we were led to believe. As you can see from the excerpt below, McCain campaign chief Steve Schmidt was 100% on target on how to deal with the emerging issue of Todd Palin's membership in an Alaskan secessionist party, in contrast to the likely disastrous route that Palin wanted to pursue:

Palin blasted out an e-mail with the subject line "Todd" to Schmidt, campaign manager Rick Davis and senior advisor Nicolle Wallace, copying her husband on the message (all of the e-mails are reprinted below as written).

"Pls get in front of that ridiculous issue that's cropped up all day today - two reporters, a protestor's sign, and many shout-outs all claiming Todd's involvement in an anti-American political party," Palin wrote. "It's bull, and I don't want to have to keep reacting to it ... Pls have statement given on this so it's put to bed."

Her reference to a single protestor's sign and "many shout-outs" was indicative of Palin's occasional tendency to take anecdotal evidence of a minor problem and extrapolate it into something far more menacing. The final of the three presidential debates was just hours away, which would mark the unveiling of the soon-to-be canonized Joe The Plumber.

The Joe The Plumber narrative was the Republicans' secret weapon -- the last chance to put a chink in Obama's seemingly impervious armor. It was not a time for distractions, but the campaign was compelled to deal with the drama that seemed to follow Palin wherever she went.

Schmidt hit "reply to all" less than five minutes after Palin's e-mail was sent. "Ignore it," he wrote. "He was a member of the aip? My understanding is yes. That is part of their platform. Do not engage the protestors. If a reporter asks say it is ridiculous. Todd loves america."

This clear cut response from the campaign's top dog carried an air of finality, but it did not satisfy Palin. She responded with another e-mail, adding five more names to the "cc" box, all of whom traveled on her campaign plane. They included her senior political adviser Tucker Eskew, senior aide Jason Recher, the lone traveling aide from her Alaska office Kris Perry, press secretary Tracey Schmitt and personal assistant Bexie Nobles.

Palin's insertion of the five additional staffers in the e-mail chain was an apparent attempt to rally her own troops in the face of a decision from the commanding general with which she disagreed. Her inclusion of her personal assistant was particularly telling about her quest for affirmation and support in numbers, since the young staffer was not in a position to have any input on campaign strategy.

"That's not part of their platform and he was only a 'member' bc independent alaskans too often check that 'Alaska Independent' box on voter registrations thinking it just means non partisan," Palin wrote. "He caught his error when changing our address and checked the right box. I still want it fixed."

Palin was attempting to bend the facts ever so slightly to fit neatly into her version of events. In truth, the box that Alaskans have the option of checking when registering to vote states the full name of the party, "Alaskan Independence Party," not "Alaska Independent," which would make an error by uncommitted voters more plausible.

Clearly irritated by what he saw as Palin's attempt to mislead her own campaign and apparently determined to demonstrate that the ultimate authority rested with him, Schmidt put the matter to rest once and for all with a longer response to everyone in the e-mail chain.

"Secession," he wrote. "It is their entire reason for existence. A cursory examination of the website shows that the party exists for the purpose of seceding from the union. That is the stated goal on the front page of the web site. Our records indicate that todd was a member for seven years. If this is incorrect then we need to understand the discrepancy. The statement you are suggesting be released would be innaccurate. The innaccuracy would bring greater media attention to this matter and be a distraction. According to your staff there have been no media inquiries into this and you received no questions about it during your interviews. If you are asked about it you should smile and say many alaskans who love their country join the party because it speeks to a tradition of political independence. Todd loves his country

We will not put out a statement and inflame this and create a situation where john has to adress this."

Schmidt's rebuttal to Palin's suggestion that reporters had asked her about the issue was particularly blunt in that it implicitly questioned her truthfulness. Furthermore, his unwillingness to budge an inch on the matter was a remarkable assertion of his power to pull rank over the candidate herself.

Palin was silent after his second e-mail and the campaign did not issue the statement she demanded.

In the next hour, South Carolina's Law Enforcement Division is expected to release its report on whether Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) broke state law to visit his Argentine mistress. So, stay tuned.

Meanwhile, The State has this update to the ongoing Sanford saga:

Gov. Mark Sanford left the Governor’s Mansion without a security escort, 38 times in 2008. In the first six months of this year, he left the mansion without security, 39 times.

Those trips are about one-third of the 195 trips Sanford made from the mansion, with or without security, over that 18-month period.

...Sanford spokesman Joel Sawyer said Wednesday he has no response to the information in the logs.

“We have a 6½-year policy of not discussing the specifics of the governor’s security detail,” Sawyer said.

...An analysis of the records shows Sanford logged 195 comings and goings during the 18-month period. He had security with him 119 times and was unaccompanied 76 times.

The State’s count did not include trips on which Sanford was accompanied by his wife or any of their four sons.

Update (2:07 pm ET): MSNBC is reporting that the law enforcement report shows no evidence of improper use of state funds on Sanford's trips. Nothing yet from The State's website. If the report had found wrongdoing, Sanford would have been forced to step down or quickly be impeached ala Rod Blagojevich since it would have a legal matter, not simply one that involved politics and morality. As a result, will the legislature have the guts to force him out, or will the state be stuck with this kook for another 18 months?

Finally, it seems that even House Republicans -- no less -- are fed-up with the idiocy coming out of the mouth of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and have spoken out publicly about her latest rant where she encouraged Americans to violate federal law by not filling-out their 2010 Census forms:

Three House Republicans on the subcommittee overseeing the 2010 Census are asking Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) to reverse her decision to boycott the national population count, fearing others will follow her lead.

“Boycotting the constitutionally mandated Census is illogical, illegal and not in the best interest of our country,” Reps. Patrick McHenry (N.C.), Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.) and John Mica (Fla.), members of the Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Information Policy, Census and National Achieves, said in a statement Wednesday.

“[A] boycott opens the door for partisans to statistically adjust Census results,” the trio’s statement said. “The partisan manipulation of census data would irreparably transform the Census from being the baseline of our entire statistical system into a tool used to wield political power in Washington.”

...Sources say the GOP Members approached Bachmann privately over the past few weeks and asked her to stop the boycott. They decided to go public because Bachmann appeared unfazed by their request, according to a GOP aide.

Five bucks says this will be the second -- and probably not the last -- act of the South Carolina gubernatorial drama now pathetically playing out publicly:

During an interview Monday, [South Carolina Lt. Governor Andre] Bauer, who is a bachelor, voluntarily brought up the subject of his sexual orientation, which he said has been the subject of rumors.

Asked, then, if he’s homosexual, Bauer said: “One word, two letters. ‘No.’ Let’s go ahead and dispel that now.

“Is Andre Bauer gay? That is now the story,” he said. “We’re a long way from where we were a week ago.

“We have diverted what the real topic should be here: Is the governor capable for carrying on the duties for which he was elected?”

Furthermore, keep in mind that one of the most widely-rumored closeted gay Republicans on the national stage is none other than South Carolina's senior Senator -- Lindsey Graham. If this Bauer issue starts getting traction and the topic of more discussion, you can bet that Graham's sexuality will get sucked into this drama eventually.

Here's a sampling from the Charleston City Paper:

Is Lindsey Graham gay?

At 52, the life-long bachelor has been fodder for such rumors for years, but with the resignation of Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho — the anti-gay politician who pled guilty to disorderly conduct after allegedly soliciting sex in an airport men's room — the internet is abuzz over who's next, and they're dying to know what's going on in Graham's bedroom. Is it the latest grasp for the light switch in South Carolina's powerful political closet? Or the inevitable labeling of "closet-clinging self-hater" that befalls any content bachelor?

Mainstream media often avoids asking older, single politicians what they do in their free time. While there were rumors dating back 25 years, it wasn't until blog reports about Craig trolling cruisy D.C. restrooms that The Idaho Statesmen put a reporter on the story. And even though they held the story until after Craig's arrest was made public, some still accused the paper of orchestrating a witch hunt.

When GQ asked last year, Graham wasn't mean, just dismissive. He said he's not gay, just a loner. But that denial isn't stalling renewed interest in the question. In a post on who's next out of the closet following Craig's arrest, blogger Michael Signorile (www.signorile.com) first points a questioning finger at Graham.

Calling Mike Rogers...

How much more damage can Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) do to himself?

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford has backed out of a promise to release personal financial records proving he did not use state money for trips to see his mistress.

...Sanford agreed this week to provide the AP with proof of his payment for trips to New York and Argentina to see her.

His staff first said the records might be made available Tuesday, and then the governor's spokesman said Wednesday Sanford would not release them.

Meanwhile, the calls by fellow Republicans, as well as some of state's larger newspapers, for his resignation gets louder. Here's the latest:

Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell is the latest -- and one of the most significant -- members of the S.C. legislature to say the governor should consider stepping down after admitting to an affair.

In a statement released Wednesday, McConnell encouraged Sanford to do the right thing:

"Neither I nor my colleagues in the General Assembly can require that the Governor resign," McConnell said in his statement.

"That decision is his alone. I do believe, however, that the Governor has lost the support of the people that is needed to govern. Therefore, I would ask the Governor to look in his heart and decide whether with his family situation and the public uproar over what he has done and said locally and nationally whether he can lead our state for the remainder of his term."

In a state with the one of the fastest-growing Hispanic population in the US, such an idea is not so far-fetched.  Along these same lines, Tim Kaine, Chairman of the DNC, has announced its fall meeting will be held in Texas.

Its gubernatorial race has also taken on national tones as Governor Rick Perry and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison battle each other, as an almost proxy showdown between a Republican party of far-right conservatives, and one of 'moderate' conservatives.  In other words, will we be looking at a party of Limbaughs, Hutchisons, or Huntsmans? 

Says the National Journal:

In one corner stands Perry, the two-term incumbent who has sought to rally conservatives and anti-Washington, populist types with a solid diet of red-meat bravado. One day, he's headlining a tax day "Tea Party" and threatening to secede. Next, his campaign adviser is warning that if the GOP broadens its tent too much it risks becoming a "whorehouse." He's already been endorsed by Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R), among others.

In the other corner stands Hutchison, who recently has become less restrained in criticizing the man she's abandoning a Senate seat to challenge. For her, the race is as much about the future of the GOP as it is about the future of Texas. "Republican voters have to decide whether they want to have a [gubernatorial] nominee who is going to rejuvenate our party and provide the leadership for Texas, or a nominee who will continue on this harsh rhetoric course of narrowing our base and acting like if you don't agree on every issue, you aren't conservative and should not be Republican," Hutchison said last week in an interview. "That's not me. I reject that."

With the Republican Party in flux for the heart and soul of the party, and Dems poised to both gain seats and tackle health care, climate change, and gay rights; if you thought the 2008 election was exciting, wait until the 2010 midterms.

Real change has only just begun.

Democrats upped the ante in the ongoing power struggle in the state Senate today, when after a Republican lawmaker walked through the chamber, they claimed a quorum (which technically would allow them to convene a session), and began voting on, and "passing" bills.  Obviously, such a move is of dubious legality.

Lawmakers of both parties should be utterly ashamed of themselves.  At some point, partisanship and partisan control of a legislature needs to cede to the more serious business of governance.

If I were a voter in New York, I'd be looking at throwing out every damn lawmaker in the state Senate because neither Republicans nor Democrats have demonstrated even a minimal level of political maturity. 

What makes them think they deserve to remain in office if they can't even meet to discuss a bill, much less pass one?

Today's Times has the dish on the final drip drip before what now must be an inevitable resignation, with nearly half of the State's GOP Senators calling on the Governor to resign.

What's more, the article offers this bizarre quote from Sanford during his interview with the AP:

''I don't want to blow up my time in politics,'' he told the AP. ''I don't want to blow up future earning power, I don't want to blow up the kids' lives. I don't want to blow up 20 years that we've invested. But if I'm completely honest, there are still feelings in the way. If we keep pushing it this way, we get those to die off, but they're still there and they're still real.''

Anyone else wondering what the hell he's talking about?

The Party of Family Values has truly become the Party of No Values.

Hypocritical dirt ball:

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford said Tuesday that he "crossed lines" with a handful of women other than his mistress - but never had sex with them.

The governor said he "never crossed the ultimate line" with anyone but Maria Belen Chapur, the Argentine at the center of a scandal that has derailed his once-promising political career.

"This was a whole lot more than a simple affair, this was a love story," Sanford said. "A forbidden one, a tragic one, but a love story at the end of the day."

During an emotional interview at his Statehouse office with The Associated Press on Tuesday, Sanford said Chapur is his soul mate but he's trying to fall back in love with his wife.

He said that during the encounters with other women he "let his guard down" with some physical contact but "didn't cross the sex line." He wouldn't go into detail.

Drip, drip, drip...

First, philandering Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) is now admitting to more encounters with his Argentine love interest than he previously disclosed:

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford admitted Tuesday that he saw his Argentine mistress more times than previously disclosed, including what was to be a farewell meeting in New York chaperoned by a spiritual adviser soon after his wife found out about the affair.

In a lengthy and emotional interview with The Associated Press in his Statehouse office, the governor described five meetings with Maria Belen Chapur over the past year, including two romantic, multi-night stays with her in New York before they met there again intending to break up.

Then comes word that Ms. Chapur might not be the only woman involved with Sanford:

A reporter called a Sanford staffer, saying the paper had e-mails that outlined an affair between the governor and Maria. Unless Sanford would address the issue privately, The State would have no choice but to ask him — with TV crews filming — if he knew Maria at his press conference that afternoon.

The names of two other women tumbled into the newsroom.

Fearful Sanford’s staffers did not get it — that the paper would ask publicly what Sanford’s relationship was with Maria — a State editor called Davis, Sanford’s former chief of staff.

If you have a spare 15 minutes, you might want to check out Todd Purdum's latest piece in Vanity Fair on the whack job from Wasilla, aka Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK). While Purdum doesn't break any new ground in his lengthy look at the disaster/brilliance of the person we all unfortunately came to know less than a year ago (can you believe it's been just 10 months since McCain named her running mate?), it is amusing to learn that the McCain staff (still all anonymously sourced) still detest and ridicule the woman, and it's, overall, an entertaining piece. 

Here's one excerpt that stood out for me:

As Palin has piled misstep on top of misstep, the senior members of McCain’s campaign team have undergone a painful odyssey of their own. In recent rounds of long conversations, most made it clear that they suffer a kind of survivor’s guilt: they can’t quite believe that for two frantic months last fall, caught in a Bermuda Triangle of a campaign, they worked their tails off to try to elect as vice president of the United States someone who, by mid-October, they believed for certain was nowhere near ready for the job, and might never be. They quietly ponder the nightmare they lived through. Do they ever ask, What were we thinking? “Oh, yeah, oh, yeah,” one longtime McCain friend told me with a rueful chuckle. “You nailed it.” Another key McCain aide summed up his attitude this way: “I guess it’s sort of shifted,” he said. “I always wanted to tell myself the best-case story about her.” Even now, he said, “I don’t want to get too negative.” Then he added, “I think, as I’ve evaluated it, I think some of my worst fears … the after-election events have confirmed that her more negative aspects may have been there … ” His voice trailed off. “I saw her as a raw talent. Raw, but a talent. I hoped she could become better.”

None of McCain’s still-loyal soldiers will say negative things about Palin on the record. Even thinking such thoughts privately is painful for them, because there is ultimately no way to read McCain’s selection of Palin as reflecting anything other than an appalling egotism, heedlessness, and lack of judgment in a man whose courage, tenacity, and character they have extravagantly admired—and as reflecting, too, an unsettling willingness on their own part to aid and abet him. They all know that if their candidate—a 72-year-old cancer survivor—had won the presidency, the vice-presidency would be in the hands of a woman who lacked the knowledge, the preparation, the aptitude, and the temperament for the job.

Recall that Purdum got under former President Bill Clinton's skin when he penned a similar piece about him last year.