Palins book banning (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


bipolarber -> Palins book banning (9/10/2008 11:24:06 AM)

Since I brought this subject up when it was first reported, I thought I'd post a follow up on the "rumor."

1) Palin did ask the librarian of Wassilla, about what steps she would have to undergo, and what the librarian's reaction would be, if Palin were to ask her to remove certain books from the collection.

2) The list that has been circulating about the net, supposedly of the books Palin wanted taken off the shelves, is not accurate. It's a cut and paste from a website that lists books that have been targets of book banning. There is no record of which books Palin intended to ban.

3) Palin herself characterizes the question about the books as being a "rhetorical loyalty test" and that she never intended to bad any books.

4) Apparently, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, didn't pass. She was first asked for her resignation by Palin, then was summarily fired, when she didn't comply.

5) The local paper ran the story on Emmons firing.

6) Palin reinstated the librarian's job, once it became publicly known.

7) Palin later asked Emmons TWO MORE TIMES, during her stint as mayor, if she could ban books.

8) Emmons retired from the library system in 1999.

9) as of this date, no books have been banned from the Wassila township library... there is no hard evidence, no memos, no mayoral edicts, of Palins attempts at this. Only the reporting of the incident from the local paper, from editions of the time, and word of mouth.

(All I can say is, thank god for people like Mary Ellen Emmons...)




bipolarber -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 1:22:41 PM)

Oh, yeah, I suppose I should cite the source: factcheck.org. The entry entitles "Slimming Sarah"... skip down to the analyisis fir the full story, and their sources.




rulemylife -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 1:41:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bipolarber

Since I brought this subject up when it was first reported, I thought I'd post a follow up on the "rumor."

1) Palin did ask the librarian of Wassilla, about what steps she would have to undergo, and what the librarian's reaction would be, if Palin were to ask her to remove certain books from the collection.

2) The list that has been circulating about the net, supposedly of the books Palin wanted taken off the shelves, is not accurate. It's a cut and paste from a website that lists books that have been targets of book banning. There is no record of which books Palin intended to ban.

3) Palin herself characterizes the question about the books as being a "rhetorical loyalty test" and that she never intended to bad any books.

4) Apparently, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, didn't pass. She was first asked for her resignation by Palin, then was summarily fired, when she didn't comply.

5) The local paper ran the story on Emmons firing.

6) Palin reinstated the librarian's job, once it became publicly known.

7) Palin later asked Emmons TWO MORE TIMES, during her stint as mayor, if she could ban books.

8) Emmons retired from the library system in 1999.

9) as of this date, no books have been banned from the Wassila township library... there is no hard evidence, no memos, no mayoral edicts, of Palins attempts at this. Only the reporting of the incident from the local paper, from editions of the time, and word of mouth.

(All I can say is, thank god for people like Mary Ellen Emmons...)


A "rhetorical loyalty test"?  That's pretty scary in itself. 

No, that's really scary.




Briena -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 1:56:55 PM)

Shame...  Trample all over the first amendment, and fire the woman who defends it.  Nothing good comes from book burnings, and nothing good comes from the people who desire them.




cloudboy -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 2:11:06 PM)

Apparently, too, she also tried to get her ex-brother-in-law fired from his state trooper job and lodged several complaints against him. Then, when when she became governor, she kept up the effort and possibly fired public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, for not removing Palin's ex-brother-in-law from the state police force..

In each case, assuming they are true, she used a public office to try and effect a private agenda.

If one incident is true, it suggests the other is even more plausible.




xensuous -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 2:15:39 PM)

As to her brother-in-law...he was drunk on duty more than once...he used a taser on a ten year old child...he threatened to kill members of her family...there were valid reasons he should've been relieved of duty. I wish the media would tell ALL the story.




bipolarber -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 2:16:32 PM)

Now, let's not overstate the case. She never advocated BURNING books... only taking them off the shelves for public access... (The thing that bothers me about this, is that most libraries have a "restricted" section, where books of a more adult nature are kept away from the kiddies. She apparently didn't feel that was good enough. She didn't ask for the books to be moved to a restricted state, as a concerned mother. No, she wanted to make sure whatever books she [and her church group] didn't like, weren't available to ANYONE.)

Probably just as bad as burning them, but I'm trying to be more accurate in my reporting. Otherwise, the "friends of Bill O' on this site will bitch and bully me.




LaTigresse -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 2:25:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xensuous

As to her brother-in-law...he was drunk on duty more than once...he used a taser on a ten year old child...he threatened to kill members of her family...there were valid reasons he should've been relieved of duty. I wish the media would tell ALL the story.


Yaaa, the woman is slippery, I will grant her that. For the WHOLE story, do a search on Bita's posts and you will find a great link to an impartial fact sheet on Palin.




MistressNew -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 2:27:12 PM)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZII0GjcJMus

It's a good piece on this from ABC News.




rulemylife -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 3:40:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xensuous

As to her brother-in-law...he was drunk on duty more than once...he used a taser on a ten year old child...he threatened to kill members of her family...there were valid reasons he should've been relieved of duty. I wish the media would tell ALL the story.


If true, there were legal avenues that could have, and should have, been pursued.

Instead, she's been accused of using the power of her office to bypass those legal avenues to satisfy a personal grudge.

The media didn't invent this.  If there were not a reasonable suspicion of impropiety she would not be under investigation. 




SilverMark -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 4:24:55 PM)

The brother in law is no saint....but he was not accused as being drunk on duty...He tasered his step son at his step-son's request and there are no denials of the statement, on what he refered to in an interview as a test mode(I know nothing of tasers so I wouldn't know the difference)...there is no evidence of threats to kill anyone. So perhaps the REAL story has been told?....




Level -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 4:36:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife


A "rhetorical loyalty test"?  That's pretty scary in itself. 

No, that's really scary.


Agreed.




StudFL -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 6:11:57 PM)

And they declared it unlawful to ban OJ so what's the point?




philosophy -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 6:14:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: StudFL

And they declared it unlawful to ban OJ so what's the point?


...i must be missing a cultural reference here.....what's your point?




MistressNew -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 6:25:38 PM)

This whole story scares me.  It can be broken down pretty easily:
1. Palin asked a librarian if banning books was ok.
2. The answer was no.
3. The librarian lost her job, only to regain it after a giant outcry from the (very small) town. 

It reminds me of this:
On 31 August, an Alaskan General says Palin had no hand in decision making. On 3 September, he says it again. On 5 September, he completely changes his story. On 8 September, he is promoted.
These people have no shame.  They must think the American populace is stupid.





LookieNoNookie -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 6:41:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xensuous

As to her brother-in-law...he was drunk on duty more than once...he used a taser on a ten year old child...he threatened to kill members of her family...there were valid reasons he should've been relieved of duty. I wish the media would tell ALL the story.


Truth doesn't sell soap.




Jeffff -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 7:46:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MistressNew

This whole story scares me.  It can be broken down pretty easily:
1. Palin asked a librarian if banning books was ok.
2. The answer was no.
3. The librarian lost her job, only to regain it after a giant outcry from the (very small) town. 

It reminds me of this:
On 31 August, an Alaskan General says Palin had no hand in decision making. On 3 September, he says it again. On 5 September, he completely changes his story. On 8 September, he is promoted.
These people have no shame.  They must think the American populace is stupid.





Would they be wrong?........... we get the government we deserve

Jeff




Sanity -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 7:48:58 PM)


There's a rumor that as mayor she inquired what library policy was.

The horror.




MistressNew -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 8:20:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


There's a rumor that as mayor she inquired what library policy was.

The horror.



Either you are willfully ignoring the story or you are.... unable to read?  I can't figure out what would prompt such a response.

She asked about banning books and when she was turned down, SHE FIRED THE LIBRARIAN!!  This all happened within two weeks.  How anyone could defend it, I'll never understand.




bipolarber -> RE: Palins book banning (9/10/2008 8:30:16 PM)

That was a really lame ass comeback, Sanity. Tell you what, we'll all ignore that one and let you come up with something better. You could have said:

Oh, maybe she was just trying, as a Mom, to protect her kids and the kids of the community...

Or Maybe that she felt that foul language wasn't something that public tax money should be used to support.

Or maybe that she was in the right to try and ban books because they promoted violence.

You could have brought any of that up....

But NO... all you could come up with was a dickish little "Whaaaaa" of a post about her inquiring about policy. (The policy about banning books from the publicly funded shelves... about removing information from free access to the rest of her community, because she felt that she had the right to do so becaause she had been voted the big Kahuna, therefore (she reasoned) it was her devine right to tell other people how to live their lives.The library policy that was, and is, an expression of the first ammendment to the Constiution to the United States, which as VP, she would be sworn to protect.)

You are supporting a woman who wanted to become a mini-Hitler of her tiny Alaska town.... and now you want to hand her the keys to the United States of America... to fuck over... without so much as looking at her record once with a critical eye. Some GOP stratagist weasel decides she's "perfect" to continue their agenda, and you guys follow like  "pod people" from a Body Snatchers movie....utterly without thought, soul, or American indepentant spirit.

Pathetic, AND disgusting....





Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875