Palin the book censor

[symbiosis 0]

it takes a lot of balls (or a severe misreading of the first amendment) to equate mom throwing out a Playboy with government censorship at the behest of a fundamentalist religious sect.

While, I'm not saying there's proof of the latter, the circumstantial evidence seems strong. That's EXACTLY what the founding fathers wanted to prevent.

Edited September 11, 2008 by symbiosis

[pedroh 21]

save the playboys!!

or sell them on ebay lol.. dumb moms..

[metta 0]

i don't see anything related to the book issues here metta.. a diff perspective means 'i attack the reps, now let me attack the dems'?

Hi Pedroh, this is the para that briefly explaind the book issue;

And those are just the facts. A full accounting of the rumors and myths circulating about Palin would fill this page. Briefly, she didn't pose in a bikini with a rifle, doesn't want to teach creationism in school, isn't a secessionist and didn't ban books. Palin did ask the librarian in Wasilla (twice) how she would respond if the community wanted some books excluded from the library.

[pedroh 21]

it's just weird to ask something like that if you're not planning to do so..

besides.. IMO censorship is never good under any circumstance, specially public libraries..

[jundp 191]

i'm sure that everyone who's mother or wife threw out their playboys/porn also considers that individual a book censor too.

that's in their private home, not a public library

plus.. even though playboy has very good articles sometimes, they are not books

If this is true that she attempted censorship, or even enquired of the librarian about banning books, then it's sad. I don't have any huge problems with Palin, but I don't see how we can tolerate a VP who would voluntarily (or under "pressure") violate the First Amendment.

IF this is true.

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

it takes a lot of balls (or a severe misreading of the first amendment) to equate mom throwing out a Playboy with government censorship at the behest of a fundamentalist religious sect.

While, I'm not saying there's proof of the latter, the circumstantial evidence seems strong. That's EXACTLY what the founding fathers wanted to prevent.

there was no censorship. that's the point. she didn't direct the librarian to remove the books. why she asked if it would be done we can only speculate. but i think tarring and feathering her for a what if conversation is a bit excessive.

save the playboys!!

or sell them on ebay lol.. dumb moms..

send them to almaty, his collection needs to grow.

[pedroh 21]

i'm sure that everyone who's mother or wife threw out their playboys/porn also considers that individual a book censor too.

that's in their private home, not a public library

plus.. even though playboy has very good articles sometimes, they are not books

If this is true that she attempted censorship, or even enquired of the librarian about banning books, then it's sad. I don't have any huge problems with Palin, but I don't see how we can tolerate a VP who would voluntarily (or under "pressure") violate the First Amendment.

IF this is true.

agreed.. if it's true.. it's so fukcin sad.. and what surprises me the most is how can people look censorship so lightly.. and sometimes even justifiable..

[metta 0]

it's just weird to ask something like that if you're not planning to do so..

besides.. IMO censorship is never good under any circumstance, specially public libraries..

I think these news articles are written from a certain position though pretending to be objective.

It seems obvious to me that she got her political base in the PTA comprised especially of like-minded moms (read evangelist and born-agains). So once in position as mayor, she'd get suggestions/ demands from her base. So it is conceivable that she asked the librarian what if scenarios.

But do note that she as mayor did not make a move to ban books. So that is an example of an executive decision she took. Executives always have to look at the what ifs and then decide to implement or not to implement a certain line of action.

I am a very big believer in the 1st Amendment. Even then I remember coming to a realization that my belief in first amendment has limits. For example when the Tim Mcveigh bombing took place I learned that he was an avid fan of the guy who wrote a book on :"How To carry out assassinations." It was then that my belief in the first amendment was challenged and that's where i'd draw the line. I came to realize that when it comes to freedom of expression i no longer remain a purist.

[symbiosis 0]

i don't see anything related to the book issues here metta.. a diff perspective means 'i attack the reps, now let me attack the dems'?

Hi Pedroh, this is the para that briefly explaind the book issue;

And those are just the facts. A full accounting of the rumors and myths circulating about Palin would fill this page. Briefly, she didn't pose in a bikini with a rifle, doesn't want to teach creationism in school

a big leap in logic there, since she did say in the campaign: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both." ... even if she didn't PUSH it.

, isn't a secessionist and didn't ban books. Palin did ask the librarian in Wasilla (twice) how she would respond if the community wanted some books excluded from the library.

... to which the librarian said she'd have nothing to do with it. Two weeks later, Palin ordered her fired.

your half-truths are as telling as the ones being flogged by the McCain-Palin campaign.

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

i don't see anything related to the book issues here metta.. a diff perspective means 'i attack the reps, now let me attack the dems'?

Hi Pedroh, this is the para that briefly explaind the book issue;

And those are just the facts. A full accounting of the rumors and myths circulating about Palin would fill this page. Briefly, she didn't pose in a bikini with a rifle, doesn't want to teach creationism in school

a big leap in logic there, since she did say in the campaign: "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both." ... even if she didn't PUSH it.

, isn't a secessionist and didn't ban books. Palin did ask the librarian in Wasilla (twice) how she would respond if the community wanted some books excluded from the library.

... to which the librarian said she'd have nothing to do with it. Two weeks later, Palin ordered her fired.

your half-truths are as telling as the ones being flogged by the McCain-Palin campaign.

since you can't find the link, i'll paste the story for you:

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.”

Update, Sept. 9: We have revised this section dealing with accusations that Palin wanted to ban books from Wasilla's library to include more detail about what transpired at the time.

not that you'll go look at it

[no name 1]

Apparently VJers do believe what they are fed on here even though it's been sourced before.

Read for yourselves, PLEASE.

http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2008/...d9379155484.txt

[pedroh 21]

but I think there's a difference between censorship because of public safety, like the how to carry assassination book that you mention, or censorship because a certain religious group thinks it's against their beliefs..

I know there are several books that teach you how to make bombs from materials found at home... but IMO the book 'Pastor, I'm gay' doesn't represent such a threat to public safety as a molotov cocktail handbook

it's just weird to ask something like that if you're not planning to do so..

besides.. IMO censorship is never good under any circumstance, specially public libraries..

I think these news articles are written from a certain position though pretending to be objective.

It seems obvious to me that she got her political base in the PTA comprised especially of like-minded moms (read evangelist and born-agains). So once in position as mayor, she'd get suggestions/ demands from her base. So it is conceivable that she asked the librarian what if scenarios.

But do note that she as mayor did not make a move to ban books. So that is an example of an executive decision she took. Executives always have to look at the what ifs and then decide to implement or not to implement a certain line of action.

I am a very big believer in the 1st Amendment. Even then I remember coming to a realization that my belief in first amendment has limits. For example when the Tim Mcveigh bombing took place I learned that he was an avid fan of the guy who wrote a book on :"How To carry out assassinations." It was then that my belief in the first amendment was challenged and that's where i'd draw the line. I came to realize that when it comes to freedom of expression i no longer remain a purist.

Edited September 11, 2008 by pedroh

[symbiosis 0]

Apparently VJers do believe what they are fed on here even though it's been sourced before.

Read for yourselves, PLEASE.

http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2008/...d9379155484.txt

perhaps in much the same way that the Justice Department asking "who did you vote for?" during hiring interview was purely rhetorical.

Well, since Palin failed to list the liklihood of the librarian to carry out a censorship agenda as a reason for her firing, it must have been something completely innocuous.

I wonder, why the "stir" over firing the town librarian? Could it be the people of Wasilla saw something nefarious?

Edited September 11, 2008 by symbiosis

[Peikko 1,575]

It's ok to test a librarian's "loyalty" to an elected administrator? How come? That there stinks to me but then what do I know? Maybe it's perfectly normal to only be surrounded by 'yes' men.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Worked for GWB...