Should Politicians Ban Books That Are...
Find a Conversation
Should Politicians Ban Books That Are...
| Wed, 09-10-2008 - 5:17pm |
Should Politicians Ban Books That Are Decadent Or Unconventional?
- No. People should decide for themselves what they want to read.
- Yes. I'm with Sara Palin. Ban the books that endanger our minds.
You will be able to change your vote.

Pages
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
Yes, Factcheck has looked into this "accusation" and has come up with this:
"According to a widely circulated e-mail from Kilkenny, “city residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin’s attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter.”
Brian Ross just regurgitated (in quite dramatic flare mind you)
Fair enough. I personally think her intention was to actually ban books. I don't know why else she'd try to fire the librarian. I think she's displayed a disturbing willingness to abuse her power and to lie frequently. It looks pretty obvious that she fired Walt Monegan simply
Shortly after taking office in October 1996, Palin began to make staffing changes. She eliminated the position of museum director and asked for updated resumes and resignation letters from Wasilla police chief Irl Stambaugh, public works director Jack Felton, finance director Duane Dvorak, and librarian Mary Ellen Emmons. Palin stated this request was to find out who supported her. She temporarily required department heads to get her approval before talking to reporters, stating they first needed to become better acquainted with her policies. She hired a new city administrator and reduced her own salary from $68,000 to $64,000.
According to Emmons, she and Palin twice discussed the question of library censorship: first in early October, then in detail on October 28. Emmons stated Palin asked her if she would object to censorship, and Emmons replied "it would not be just me ... the American Civil Liberties Union would get involved, too." Palin raised the possibility of people circling the library in protest, to which Emmons replied "it would definitely be a problem the ACLU would take on then." In early December, Palin spoke publicly about the issue, using it as an example of a discussion she'd had with her department heads, and stated, "many issues were discussed, both rhetorical and realistic in nature." She added that censorship "was discussed in the context of a professional question being asked in regards to library policy" and that she did not have a specific list of books in mind. No books were removed from the library.
Palin gave signed letters to Emmons and Stambaugh on January 30, 1997, that stated: "I do not feel I have your full support in my efforts to govern the city of Wasilla. Therefore I intend to terminate your employment..." Palin rescinded the firing of Emmons the next day after meeting with her and after what the Anchorage Daily News called "a wave of public support for Emmons." Palin stated that her concerns had been alleviated when Emmons agreed to support Palin's plan to merge the town's library and museum operations. Palin also spoke with Stambaugh at least three times about the matter, but ultimately he was fired as planned. Stambaugh filed a lawsuit which was later dismissed by a court that found the mayor had the right to fire city employees for nearly any reason, including a political one.
I find it interesting that you are so willing to dismiss Palin's obvious interest in restricting access to certain books as "foolish" or "outlandish". Why? Would you be equally comfortable with a Democrat asking about restricting access to something like the Bible?*
After eight years of a man who portrayed himself as a "born again Christian" and whose actions seemed quite markedly at odds with the precepts of Christ, it gives me the heebie-jeebies to see ANOTHER sanctimonious and narrow-minded person get close to the highest offices of the land.
*Not likely that they would restrict access except in public school classrooms.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Facts stifle the will, hobble conviction.
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
"There's no question in my mind that she's a right-wing book burner"
The only thing lacking in your mind's conclusion is any evidence to say that she is in fact a book burner.
"I find it interesting that you are so willing to dismiss Palin's obvious interest in restricting access to certain books as "foolish" or "outlandish". Why?"
Why?
Because there is no proof that she in fact wanted to or even banned any books. What you have are innuendos, interpretations and wild arsed guesses as to the meaning behind Palin's question.
That's why I dismiss the "accusations" as foolish and outlandish.
Edited 9/11/2008 11:03 am ET by philmercer66
Pages