BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:57 PM

"Neither McCain nor Palin..."

You're having that problem reading again. I never said that neither Palin nor McCain did not believe what they hear in church. In fact I pointed out to you that Palin has heard some things in church which would make a thinking person have concerns. But of course that wouldn't include you, it seems.

Point is: Palin and Obama both have heard disturbing things by their ministers. Obama has stated he does not agree with the statements of the minister in question. Palin has not made any such declaration about the statements of the minister in her church til 2002. Therefore there are much greater grounds for concern regarding Palin than regarding Obama. For anybody who has any powers of logic.

But it seems your unfortunate inability to think --or read--prevents you from seeing this.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:38 PM

Ron - Neither McCain nor Palin have said that they don't believe what they heard in church. Of course, only one is a woman.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:18 PM

"What that tells you is he hasn't really".

Wrong.

What that tells us is that you don't believe a word of what Obama says. But you do believe what McCain and Palin say.

Interesting. All are politicians. But only one is black.

Looks like Ebbie was right.

Your racism is getting rather obvious. I may have to stop defending you.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:13 PM

"(look it up)-"                Ron - Look what up?


                "Obama has rejected Rev Wright's outlandish ideas."


                Obama says he has rejected Reverend Wright's ideas, but the folks who believe in Reverend Wright still support Obama. What that tells you is: he hasn't really.

                But it's comforting to know that you find Wright's ideas outlandish. The fact that you don't agree with Sarah Palin's addictions either gives me hope that we might be able to save mankind from the scourge of religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 07:42 PM

"He sat in a pew..."    By that logic--not that logic is one of your strong suits-- you should totally reject Sarah. She also sat in a pew for 20 years--and I've quoted to you--if you're capable of reading--what she heard.

Specifically she heard about the "end times" --do you know what that is?--and how do you like somebody who looks forward to the "end times" having access to the nuclear button?   Also that the president (GWB was meant) was put into his post by God and therefore any criticism of him is "bringing in hell with the criticism".

In fact she is more culpable- (look it up)- than Obama. Obama has rejected Rev Wright's outlandish ideas. She has rejected nothing of what she heard at the Wasilla Assembly of God--so far.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 07:33 PM

Doug--

It's really too bad you have a problem reading.

I gave direct quotes from the AP.   What blog is that, pray tell?

It's also too bad the limit of your thought processes is just to deny anything you don't like.

Perhaps when you do learn to think and read you'll have something worth contributing. Or perhaps not. But it would be a pleasant change if you'd try.

Just a suggestion.

No offense meant, of course.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 06:45 PM

Stringsinger- A goodly portion of the folks that share Palin's values would probably be in favor of banning books...or maybe burning them.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 05:43 PM

"What evidence do you have that Obama believes the wacko ideas of Rev Wright?"


               He sat in a pew and listened to him for 20 years!

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Amos
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 05:37 PM

The press generally acknowledges no books were banned, but that (a) the chief librarian was pressured by multiple separate discussion on the subject of banning books, which indicates Sara was considering that course of action should it prove politically expedient to do so.

Two specific books about gayness -- "Pastor I'm Gay" and "My Father's Roommate", have been identified as points of contention in the articles I've seen on the topic.

What has been successfully "hung around Palin's neck" is that she is adequately oblivious of the constitution to actual think public libraries should consider politically-inspired book banning.


And a lot more pretentious twaddle, besides.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Stringsinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 05:33 PM

Dick what is worth a damn is that she tried to get the Wasilla librarian Emmons fired for not
following her orders on the book ban. That is an abuse of power. Emmons was not fired
due to protestations.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 05:24 PM

I suspect that this story has the inertia of a normal fear of zealous christian fundamentalism but may be exactly how sarah describes the incident with the Wasilla Librarian.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 04:45 PM

To recap, it doesn't matter a tinker's dam whether or not she tried to get books banned. If you like her political stands on international affairs, taxes, abortion, etc. she's fine. If you don't, she's just a further right-wing version of McCain.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: DougR
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 04:32 PM

Ron Davies: thank you for your very insightful lecture.
Has it not occurred to you that if they could legitimately hang the book banning charge around Palin's neck the liberal press would already have done so. Of course most of those folks don't need real proof, rumors are proof enough for most of them. Or stuff folks like you write in their blogs.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 12:44 PM

What evidence do you have that Obama believes the wacko ideas of Rev Wright?

Otherwise, your last post will be revealed as yet another smear. And we know that's not so--right?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 11:50 AM

Ron - I don't think Rush has been on TV for a long time, and I don't listen to him on the radio. I do watch Hannity, from time to time, but it's hard to take a lot of what he says seriously.

                And I would agree that Sarah Palin's fundamentalism is disturbing, but I don't think it is as threatening to the country as Obama's Reverend-Wright brand of self delusion.
                Obama is supposed to be progressive, after all, so I think the citizenry will come to its collective senses sooner following the more obvious false choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 11:39 AM

But please take a few minutes to tell us about your feelings on Sarah's religious fundamentalism, keeping in mind that you've been defending her recently. Can you spell      
H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 11:36 AM

No, actually it has to do with the fact that your post just doesn't make any sense.   But I suppose I should accept this as normal. Don't let me take you away from your important job of watching TV to get all your knowledge from Sean and Rush.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 11:01 AM

"Obviously they didn't think a witchdoctor should be gay."


             Let's see: In order to make it coherent, I should have had a comma after "Obviously," and "witch doctor" should be two words, though I've seen it written the other way.


                         Is that the basis of your complaint, Ron?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:51 AM

" didn't think a witch doctor..."---have you taken a vow against making sense? Are you capable of writing a coherent sentence?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:48 AM

"same with kids"---so just how do you feel about religious fundamentalism--which Sarah endorses--having an influence on what books are in your library?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:40 AM

"1) Why did Sarah ask more than once--up to three times?"

The librarian was hard of hearing.



'"Emmons told him that year that several copies of "Pastor, I Am Gay" had disappeared from the library shelves, Bess said."'

This is probably the book she was asking about banning, don't you think? Obviously they didn't think a witchdoctor should be gay. It's funny the extent these addicts will go to to find ways to amuse themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 09:33 AM

"Same with kids in most schools - they're "required" to say the Pledge - or get beat up by some patriotic bully."

             We used to say the pledge in school. Once the put "under god" in it, we quit saying it.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 08:09 AM

"Obviously, Doug..."   "...said"

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 07:45 AM

Obviously Doug, you make it a habit to never read anything but pablum which supports your view.   You really should read a bit more widely. And perhaps start to think. If it's not too much of a strain, of course.   A bit of friendly counsel.

AP 12 Sept 2008:

"Shortly after taking office in 1996 as mayor of Wasilla, a city of about 7,000 people, Palin asked the city's head librarian about banning books. Later the librarian was notified by Palin that she was being fired, although Palin backed off under pressure."

What part of this do you not believe and why?



1) Why did Sarah ask more than once--up to three times?

Snopes: "According to Emmons (the librarian), Palin "was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can't be in the library". Emmons reported that Palin pressed the issue, asking if Emmons' position would change if residents were picketing the library."

2) You evidently are not aware of the fact that at the time of the "policy discussions" religious fundamentalism was coming into Wasilla, and changing the ethos that had prevailed up to then. Sarah was elected partly due to bringing in issues of abortion and gun rights which had little direct bearing on how to govern Wasilla--but had people outside Wasilla ready to bankroll a candidate on the "right" side. It is well known that the "Religious Right" did not like certain books. The "list" bandied about on the Net has obviously no connection to the situation but certain books were possible targets.


AP: 12 Sept 2008:      "A local author, Rev. Howard Bess, a liberal Christian preacher in the nearby town of Palmer, saidd the church Palin attended until 2002, the Wasilla Assembly of God, was pushing to remove his book from local bookstores."

"Emmons told him that year that several copies of "Pastor, I Am Gay" had disappeared from the library shelves, Bess said."

3) Not only did the librarian feel under threat, but others in town banded together to defend her against pressure she felt.

4) If you don't think that such questions, given that atmosphere at the time, were pressure on the librarian, you should think again.

As I said, just how naive are you?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Joe Offer
Date: 14 Sep 08 - 04:21 AM

Well, Doug, I was a government employee or contractor for 30 years, overlapping another 30 years registered with the Boy Scouts, and I've lived in a heavily Republican county since I left the Government and the Scouts. I don't know about the rest of you, but I am "required" to recite the Pledge of Allegiance by powers higher than the Constitution - if I value the condition of the paint job on my car.
So, I mumble and don't make an issue of it...
Same with kids in most schools - they're "required" to say the Pledge - or get beat up by some patriotic bully.
I used to mumble and slouch during the National Anthem before every movie I watched in the post theater when I was in the Army.
I like my country just fine, but I don't like enforced patriotism. It's plain, damn jingoism, I think.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: DougR
Date: 13 Sep 08 - 07:36 PM

Oh, and Joe: I don't recall there being a requirement in the constitution that a US citizen is REQUIRED to say the pledge of allegiance to the flag on any occasion. No problem with mumbling it either if it suits you better. Or you could recite Mary had a little lamb! Nobody would probably know. :>)
DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Emma B
Date: 13 Sep 08 - 07:34 PM

Can we go home now?..............please

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: DougR
Date: 13 Sep 08 - 07:32 PM

Ron Davies: you obviously did not see or hear Charlie Gibson's recent interview with Gov. Palin on ABC. She asked the librarian what would be the policy SHOULD someone ask that a book be banned. She never asked that any book be banned. If you can produce valid evidence that she did, you can be assured that your picture will be on next week's edition of the major magazines in this country.

Carol: and when YOU read the title you did not believe the thread was about Governor Palin supposedly asking the librarian to ban some books?

Gimme a break.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Sep 08 - 06:09 PM

9 Sept 2008 8:08 AM

"....various department heads, such as police chief, have regular meetings with the mayor as part of official government business, both policy and planning sessions. I think this would qualify as a policy discussion".

The mayor of Wasilla asks the librarian 3 times about the procedure for removing books from the library. This is a "policy discussion"? Just how naive are you?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Peace
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 08:35 PM

Dick just wrapped it up. Can we go home now? That was a line from "Jaws".

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 08:26 PM

None of this is really to the point---Palin's political beliefs are pretty clear. Whether she banned books, or tried to ban books, or just asked about banning books, she still isn't anyone I'd like to see in a position of power in the Federal government.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 08:21 PM

And the more I see people distorting what has been said in this thread, the more I'm inclined to agree with those who are suggesting that the original posting of the list was a Rovian type of tactic by the McCain people.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 08:18 PM

The thread title is, Alaska gov. Palin and banned books.

The title does not make any accusation whatsoever. The thread is about Governor Palin and banned books. So the title is perfectly accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 07:50 PM

"All left-wing smear."

I blame the right-wing. It smells of their usual slimy tactics and I think this was done just as a diversion. Never trust a conservative!

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: DougR
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 07:48 PM

Misleading thread title. Palin never tried to ban books from the city library. All left-wing smear. No truth to it.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:41 PM

I know it's difficult for people to determine which points I am addressing in my posts, since I can't quote or copy past what other people have posted, but there's nothing I can do about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:40 PM

I don't have a point. I'm just correcting a piece of incorrect information that was posted to the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:36 PM

Yep, that's all correct, Carol, but I'm still trying to figure out what your point is. As far as I know, the "official" U.S. government stuff has been relatively careful to stay away from things that are exclusively Christian - although there have been slip-ups here and there, the references to God are generally inclusive of all who acknowledge a deity. If I were an atheist, I'd have some problem with all of this, however. Actually, as a liberal, I have some problem with both God and Flag because it seems the Republicans have taken ownership of both. The Pledge of Allegiance makes me uncomfortable, too. I try to mumble the worst parts of it...

In general, Deists like Thomas Jefferson believed in a God who created and then left creation more-or-less alone. That's an oversimplification, but you get the idea.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:29 PM

By the way, the term "Nature's God" is very Deist.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:29 PM

Christians don't have a monopoly on God and The Creator, you know. I said they were mostly Deists. Got any idea what "Deist" means?

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:23 PM

Carol, do these sound familiar?

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation....

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

What does the Pledge of Allegiance have to do with Christianity, that the Declaration of Independence does not? Both mention God, but not Christ.
Oh, I didn't find any reference to God or Creator in the U.S. Constitution (maybe it's there and I didn't find it) - but the Declaration of Independence makes clear reference to God.

I thought was had always had "In God We Trust" on our coins and currency, but the U.S. Treasury says this is a far more recent innovation, not even proposed until an upsurge of religious sentiment during the Civil War. SRS, I believe that "under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, in response to a campaign by the Catholic Knights of Columbus.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 06:08 PM

The Founding Fathers were mostly Deists and not really Christians of any sort.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:55 PM

"under God" was added the the pledge of allegiance in the last century (1930s?). None of that was around when the Founding Fathers were. They worked pretty hard to keep religion out of government, primarily because the Baptists were afraid that the Puritans would lord it over them. How things have changed. . .

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:39 PM

I assume her church made certain suggestions to her and she was feeling out what is involved and what the liabilites were.

This issue will be trumped by the next new thing
I don't know what it is but I imagined this... http://usera.imagecave.com/donuel/PalintoddJohn.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Donuel
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:33 PM

Good answers, Poppagator and Amos

It sometimes scares me that I, of clearly average or below average intelligence, have reached certain conclusions that goes over the heads of "the villagers" like a helium filled dog turd balloon at the Thanksgiving day parade. One or two people look up and exclaim "ewww" and then go back to cheering the baton twirler.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Joe Offer
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:32 PM

Well, Barry, I spent an hour typing a long, well-reasoned response to your message, and then I lost it when somebody closed this thread before I finished typing. I admit I screwed up in the process of recovering the message, but I couldn't figure out why it was justified to close the thread in the first place.
Anyhow, here's what Barry said, with my abbreviated response:

She asked about banning books
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?
Well, she just asked - and it was 12 years ago, when she was 32 years old and a new mayor. And maybe the book she wanted to ban was in the children's section and had pictures of women having sex with goats - we don't know what she intended, if indeed she intended to do anything.
She wanted to dump the librarian
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?
She DID fire the librarian, and the librarian got her job back right away. Politicians often fire the appointees of their predecessors - do you want an Obama-Biden Administation to keep the Bush Cabinet?

She wanted to sell "her" plane on e-bay
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?
She had to sell it elsewhere, at a huge loss
The previous governor bought the plane for $2.7 million, and the Palin Administration sold it for $2.1 million, a loss of about 22 percent. Did you ever try to sell a used car for only 22 percent less that the price you paid for it?

She built a 15 million dollar sports complex in a town of 5,6,7000?
& they didn't own the land it was built on, & now the legal fees are throught the roof of that tiny town
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?
What would it cost to build a gym for a high school for a town of 7,000? Click here to see photos of the complex, and judge for yourself whether or not it's extravagant. As for the title to the land, it's a complicated issue. This Wall Street Journal article says the City of Wassila began construction after winning title to the land in a federal court suit, but before an appeal. An "arbitrator ordered the city to pay $836,378 for the 80-acre parcel, far more than the $126,000 Wasilla originally thought it would pay for a piece of land 65 acres larger." But hey, $836,378 is far less than you'd pay for 80 acres here in California.

She want's to declare open season of protected species, Bears & wolves
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT
I'd like more facts - is she out to hunt down all protected species, or what?

The war in Iraq & the pipeline are both parts of God's plan
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?
Some religious groups believe that everything that happens, is according to some sort of divine master plan. Others call it "fate" or "karma." If there's war, it's God's plan - but if there's no war, it's also God's plan. Now, if Sarah is hearing God instructing her to build pipelines and fight wars, then I'd be worried - but there's no evidence she's heard any such voices.

SHe backed the "bridge to nowhere" till she knew it was going no where & then said "No Thanks" but still took the money
WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT?
Well, the "bridge to nowhere" was actually a bridge to the airport. As things stand now, people have to take a ferryboat to the airport, and they cannot drive anywhere from the city at all - they have to take a plane or a ferry. I'm glad I don't have to depend on a ferry to make it to flights on time. I have to cross dozens of bridges on my way to the airport, and I'm sure that together they cost billions of federal dollars. The Palin Administration decided the Alaska bridge was too expensive, even with the federal contribution, so they decided against it - not really a heroic decision, but probably wise. Were they required to return the Federal money, or were they allowed to spend it on other highway projects? If Palin was required to return the money and didn't, whey didn't the Feds go after her?

She thought that standing up for the 'Pledge of Alliance' put her in the same league as our 'Founding Fathers'. They are rolling on the floor laughing their asses off. Does she know they're all dead?
I think this page reports the matter accurately, but who can tell?

Here is Palin's response to a candidate questionnaire for the Alaska 2006 gubernatorial race:
Are you offended by the phrase "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
SP: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I'll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance

Now, if Palin were a lawyer, she might have parsed her phrases more carefully. Was she saying the pledge came from the Founding Fathers, or was she merely saying that the Founding Fathers made frequent references to God, which is certainly true? Do you really believe that the Governor of Alaska thinks that the Pledge of Allegiance was written by the Founding Fathers? I don't think so - it's just that she should have written more clearly.

She doesn't know about 'THE' war?
Where's she been for the past 7 yrs?
In her speech to the Republican Convention last week, Palin said her son is going to be shipped to Iraq. Do you think she believes he's going there as a tourist? What war are you talking about? Of course she knows about the war in Iraq. Or is THE war some other war.


She doesn't know what the office of the vice Prez is for?
Shit, Barry, she was being ironic. If you read the constitution, you do wonder what productive work the Vice President does, other than sitting in the front seat in the Senate and hoping for the President to die. The last Vice President who did what a Vice President is supposed to do, was Dan Quayle, who opened a lot of shopping centers. I think Dick Cheney should be prosecuted for overstepping his authority; and I certainly don't appreciate Al Gore privatizing my job as a federal investigator (and wasting so much taxpayer money in subsequent contracts) in his attempt to "reinvent Government."

Great resume for a job interview.

How's she gonna explain all this when confroned in a debate, or is no one gonna ask the easy questions?

Can't wait

Barry

I'm voting for Obama and Biden because I agree with their political philosophy, not because of all the half-truths that are being posted to smear McCain and Palin. I also deplore all the falsehoods that have been circulated about Barack Obama, but I don't think it's a good idea to fight falsehood with more falsehood.

This is an election with four good candidates. Why don't we debate issues in this campaign, instead of perpetuating falsehood?

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:32 PM

"Ron, I agree with you a good deal of the time, but not on this issue. This is one of several forms of harassment which are constituted by the implied threat"

Big Mick, I respect your opinion and if there was any way that you could prove the "implied threat" I would agree with you too. Unfortunately, none of the information that I have read in the articles, Snopes, etc. is EVIDENCE of a threat. The "implication" is in the mind of the person interpreting.

I do agree, that my analogy with the reporter is a different set of circumstances. The point I was trying to make is that the question "Would you ban books" could be asked in a number of different ways.   Because of the opinion that many of us have formed of Sarah Palin, it is very easy to take it as intimidation.   It very well could have been coming from a "boss".   However, we are often asked similar questions in our day to day routines. Life is full of intimidations and how we handle it determines our character.

Yes, the librarian was fired and rehired. I do not think Sarah Palin showed good judgement as an executive through her actions, and the line of questioning was unneccessary.   It is still not enough to convict her of wishing to ban books.    PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE - let us find some more convincing evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:18 PM

"To hold a private meeting, or send an individual inquiry, to (in this case) a librarian indicating your displeasure, as the Mayor, at some books is an abuse of power"

which is NOT what happened.

"The answer, based on what we have all read from newspapers reports from the time give an indication of a conversation about banning books - no specific evidence she tried to actually ban books.   If evidence to the contrary is out there, none of us can claim to have seen it. "

No mention of specific books. No action taken to ban any books.


from
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html


Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn't cut it at all. In fact, she tripled per-pupil funding over just three years.

She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She's been registered as a Republican since May 1982.


Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.


Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: PoppaGator
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:09 PM

Amos, I beg to differ. This is what I was writing about when I lost my message a few minutes ago, about the jury still being out on the stupidity of the American public:

Vast numbers of voters regularly cast ballots in direct opposition to their own financial and other interests for no other reason than that their favorite demagogues give lip service to proven popular notions of public morality.

These guys may or may not intend to restore the orderly behavior of earlier and simpler times, but they certainly can't and don't succeed in keeping their implied promises to the "social conservative" folks; all they do is mouth the preferred rhetoric. Then, once they take office, most of their energy is directed towards protecting the greedy two percent as they continue to enrich themselves at the expense of all the rest of us, fundamentalists and leftists alike and everybody in between.

So, the masses of sheep happily being led to slaughter are one example of mass stupidity, but theyr'e not the only ones. The very many folks who more-or-less-accurately perceive what's going on, but who sit on their hands and refrain from voting, out of either cynicism or some kind of purist notion that "both sides are no good," are dumb enough to let the demagogues and their followers continue to rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Alaska gov. Palin and banned books
From: Big Mick
Date: 09 Sep 08 - 05:04 PM

Ron, I agree with you a good deal of the time, but not on this issue. This is one of several forms of harassment which are constituted by the implied threat. Your analogy of the reporter is not accurate, as the reporter has no specific ability to hire, fire, discharge or demote. S/he is not a supervisor under any of the accepted constructs. The reporters job is to report the news as s/he discovers it. A person in a position of authority, speaking with a subordinate over whom s/he has the ability to affect said employee's employment, is assumed at all times to be acting in an official capacity when having a work related communication of any kind. Ms. Palin, or any elected official, surely has the ability to discuss policy, in this case on the books, or music (you paying attention?), that can be found in the library or be played over the publicly funded airways. But it should be on the record, and available for public scrutiny in order that the public has the opportunity to hold accountable, or reward, that same official for their position. To hold a private meeting, or send an individual inquiry, to (in this case) a librarian indicating your displeasure, as the Mayor, at some books is an abuse of power, and should be considered job harassment. Further it is inflicting one set of beliefs on everyone. The obvious implication to the librarian is that the person that signs my check, and has the ability to have me removed, will not be happy with me for respecting Free Speech rights.

Mick