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
So, I went to factcheck and have copied what they had to say about book banning.
Not a Book Burner
One accusation claims then-Mayor Palin threatened to fire Wasilla’s librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. Actually, Palin never asked that books be banned; no books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren't even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication. The librarian was fired, but was told only that Palin felt she didn’t support her. She was re-hired the next day. The librarian never claimed that Palin threatened outright to fire her for refusing to ban books.
It’s true that Palin did raise the issue with Mary Ellen Emmons, Wasilla’s librarian, on at least two occasions, three in some versions. Emmons flatly stated her opposition each time. But, as the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (Wasilla’s local paper) reported at the time, Palin asked general questions about what Emmons would say if Palin requested that a book be banned. According to Emmons, 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 whether Emmons' position would change if residents were picketing the library. Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who was at the meeting, corroborates Emmons' story, telling the Chicago Tribune that "Sarah said to Mary Ellen, 'What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?' "
Palin characterized the exchange differently, initially volunteering the episode as an example of discussions with city employees about following her administration's agenda. Palin described her questions to Emmons as “rhetorical,” noting that her questions "were asked in the context of professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city." Actually, true rhetorical questions have implied answers (e.g., “Who do you think you are?”), so Palin probably meant to describe her questions as hypothetical or theoretical. We can't read minds, so it is impossible for us to know whether or not Palin may actually have wanted to ban books from the library or whether she simply wanted to know how her new employees would respond to an instruction from their boss. It is worth noting that, in an update, the Frontiersman points out that no book was ever banned from the library’s shelves.
Palin initially requested Emmons’ resignation, along with those of Wasilla’s other department heads, in October 1996. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all of them (except one, whose department she was eliminating) to retain their positions. But in January 1997, Palin fired Emmons, along with the police chief. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons’ firing, but said she didn’t feel she had Emmons’ support. The decision caused “a stir” in the small town, according to a newspaper account at the time. 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.”
As we’ve noted, Palin did not attempt to ban any library books. We don’t know if Emmons’ resistance to Palin’s questions about possible censorship had anything to do with Emmons’ firing. And we have no idea if the protests had any impact on Palin at all. There simply isn’t any evidence that we can find either way. Palin did re-hire Emmons the following day, saying that she now felt she had the librarian’s backing. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned.
So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken “from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board”? If it was, the library board should take up fortune telling. The list includes the first four Harry Potter books, none of which had been published at the time of the Palin-Emmons conversations. The first wasn't published until 1998. In fact, the list is a simple cut-and-paste job, snatched (complete with typos and the occasional incorrect title) from the Florida Institute of Technology library Web page, which presents the list as “Books banned at one time or another in the United States.”
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html
Why do you exhaust yourself trying to look up dirt and smear her?
If you don't want to answer the question about where you found info that some "parents" asked Palin about banning books, that is your privilege.
What I posted is from news sources.
What Undefeated did was what each of us should do--ascertain as fully as possible, what actually happened in another setting since Palin has ZILCH, ZIPPO, NADA exposure in the lower 48. There are clearly at least two sides to the story and bringing them out into the open is valid, unless you aren't particularly interested in finding out facts which don't fit your preconceptions.
Quit already? Not on your life! When a person has a public record which is not well known; digging, peering, thinking critically, and discussing pros-and-cons, are vital to making an informed decision. Go back several months and look at the discourse on this board. The same thing was being done to Barack Obama--still is to some degree with the Bill Ayres link.
Tedious? Yeah, I can agree with that but we're going to keep getting mud-slinging, accusations, and counter accusations from both sides until the actual elections. There's a reason it's called a "race" and no runner worthy of the name would stop before crossing the finish line/date.
Biden apparently was trying to minimize the damage done by an Obama fan who misfired at a time when the Democrats CANNOT afford to alienate women, particularly former Hillary supporters, who are flocking to the McCain/Palin ticket in a short-sighted burst of misplaced feminism.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/10/politics/fromtheroad/entry4437794.shtml
You can chant until the cows come home that "Sarah Palin is NOT running for President" but the simple facts are that IF John McCain is elected, and IF Sarah Palin is as ambitious as it looks like she is and/or IF he does not make it to his 76th birthday, then Palin could be president at some point in time, either by succession or by election. If elected, McCain would be the oldest president to be inaugurated and his physical health has been adversely affected by both his POW imprisonment and his bout with cancer. Failing to consider the possibility of his demise before term end would be exceedingly unrealistic.
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.
"I thought people had a problem with Wiki links.
"what actually happened in another setting since Palin has ZILCH, ZIPPO, NADA exposure in the lower 48."
What frightens you the most about people from the north? Think they are all rednecks?
My Alaskan in-laws would probably bridle at being called rednecks. There are well-educated, cosmopolitan, and experienced people in every state--and hicks ("rednecks") in every state too.
Palin, before her vice-presidential nomination, had no Southern Exposure (pun intended), between Alaska's geographic isolation and her very insular past. She has no federal experience whatsoever. A near-total unknown to all but the voters of the 47th least populous state--and she's been in the governor's office for less than two years.
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.
Pages