# Palin tried to ban books



## Chris

When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to have books banned. When the librarian wouldn't go along, she tried to have her fired....

Library Garden: Banned Books


----------



## Jon

Blog.

Next.


----------



## chapstic

i'll give krik some credit here, at least it wasn't about her daughter.


----------



## Chris

jsanders said:


> Blog.
> 
> Next.



Too bad you never learned to read....

Mayor Palin: A Rough Record - TIME


----------



## Caligirl

jsanders said:


> Blog.
> 
> Next.



It's in Time magazine.

Mayor Palin: A Rough Record - TIME



> Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." That woman, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor.


----------



## Chris

Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." That woman, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1837918,00.html


----------



## Jon

Then why didn't you just link to the article directly? Most of what you post is bullshit blogs, so when I see blog, I don't click the link.

And, this article is just a bitter loser's whining about how Palin smoked her in a race.


----------



## Chris

jsanders said:


> Then why didn't you just link to the article directly? Most of what you post is bullshit blogs, so when I see blog, I don't click the link.
> 
> And, this article is just a bitter loser's whining about how Palin smoked her in a race.



Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast." The librarian, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, but *news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire her for not giving "full support" to the mayor. "*

Sound familiar?


----------



## Jon

Show me the "news report from the time."


----------



## greenpartyaz

I think the Democrats have their new scandalmonger! Look out Drudge, it's Kirk!


----------



## Chris

greenpartyaz said:


> I think the Democrats have their new scandalmonger! Look out Drudge, it's Kirk!



I have the librarian's phone number, believe or not.


----------



## Caligirl

jsanders said:


> Show me the "news report from the time."



I'm glad you asked.

This chick is bad news.

Here's one. Emmons is the librarian. She *was* fired, and this report shows that she got her job back, by deciding to support Palin after all.



> *City librarian Mary Ellen Emmons will stay*, but Police Chief Irl Stambaugh is on his own, Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin announced Friday. The decision came one day after le*tters signed by Palin were dropped on Stambaugh's and Emmon's desks, telling them their jobs were over as of Feb. 13.*
> 
> The mayor told them she appreciated their service but felt it was time for a change. ''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 ...'' the letter said.
> 
> Palin said Friday she now feels Emmons supports her but does not feel the same about Stambaugh. *As to what prompted the change, Palin said she now has Emmons' assurance that she is behind her.* She refused to give details about how Stambaugh has not supported her, saying only that ''You know in your heart when someone is supportive of you.''



adn.com | Wasilla keeps librarian, but police chief is out (2/1/1997)

I suggest you read the article. And, I'm sure there's more in the results tab. I'll keep looking.


----------



## dilloduck

Kirk said:


> I have the librarian's phone number, believe or not.



cmon dude----you cant give out your sister's phone # and tell her to pretend she's a librarian !


----------



## Jon

So, Palin fired people who were not in favor of her reform? That's how reform works. It's the same reason she dismissed Commissioner Monegan. If you aren't doing your job, you lose it. Sarah obviously felt these people were not performing their jobs to her standards.

As for banning books, yeah, that's a bit crazy. But, as you see, it didn't happen.


----------



## Chris

Caligirl said:


> I'm glad you asked.
> 
> This chick is bad news.
> 
> Here's one. Emmons is the librarian. She *was* fired, and this report shows that she got her job back, by deciding to support Palin after all.
> 
> 
> 
> adn.com | Wasilla keeps librarian, but police chief is out (2/1/1997)
> 
> I suggest you read the article. And, I'm sure there's more in the results tab. I'll keep looking.



The abuse of power thing goes back to Wasilla. Now she stepped in sh*t and has to hire a lawyer. She's going down.


----------



## Chris

jsanders said:


> So, Palin fired people who were not in favor of her reform? That's how reform works. It's the same reason she dismissed Commissioner Monegan. If you aren't doing your job, you lose it. Sarah obviously felt these people were not performing their jobs to her standards.
> 
> As for banning books, yeah, that's a bit crazy. But, as you see, it didn't happen.



It did happen. I'm sure within the next day or so, someone will interview the folks in the library. Can you imagine firing a librarian for not banning books? 

This woman is a freak!


----------



## Jon

Kirk said:


> It did happen. I'm sure within the next day or so, someone will interview the folks in the library. Can you imagine firing a librarian for not banning books?
> 
> This woman is a freak!



Barack Obama voted against funding our troops. What's worse? Banning books, or killing soldiers?


----------



## chapstic

Kirk said:


> The abuse of power thing goes back to Wasilla. Now she stepped in sh*t and has to hire a lawyer. She's going down.



speaking of going down, i'm waiting for you to go down to your local contractor and get those solar shingles installed along with that wind turbine.  when you do, i do.  still waiting for you to walk the walk mr. kirk.


----------



## CrimsonWhite

Kirk said:


> The abuse of power thing goes back to Wasilla. Now she stepped in sh*t and has to hire a lawyer. She's going down.



I heard that one time she and a bunch of friends went out clubbing baby seals.


----------



## Jon

onthefence said:


> I heard that one time she and a bunch of friends went out clubbing baby seals.



I heard she owns this t-shirt:

T-Shirt Hell :: Shirts :: THIS SHIRT IS 100% ORGANIC - 65% BABY SEAL 25% PANDA 10% MANATEE


----------



## Chris

chapstic said:


> speaking of going down, i'm waiting for you to go down to your local contractor and get those solar shingles installed along with that wind turbine.  when you do, i do.  still waiting for you to walk the walk mr. kirk.



The IRS and my girlfriend's medical treatments come first. 

Thanks for thinking about me, though.


----------



## Missourian

Caligirl said:


> Here's one. Emmons is the librarian. She *was* fired, and this report shows that she got her job back, by deciding to support Palin after all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suggest you read the article. And, I'm sure there's more in the results tab. I'll keep looking.




I read the article, it said:

"Palin said she asked Emmons if she would support efforts to merge the library and museum operations. Emmons said she would, according to Palin."

Not a word about banning books.

It was within here purview to fire both the librarian and the Head of Public Safety,  they served at her discretion.  

That is not an abuse of power,  that IS her power as executive.



.


----------



## Chris

Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.

Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin&#8217;s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. &#8220;They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,&#8221; Ms. Kilkenny said.

The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to &#8220;resist all efforts at censorship,&#8221; Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.

In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were &#8220;rhetorical.&#8221;

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us/politics/03wasilla.html?em


----------



## chapstic

Kirk said:


> The IRS and my girlfriend's medical treatments come first.
> 
> Thanks for thinking about me, though.



mr. $20k a month, shouldn't be any problem. 

marry her and get her under your insurance?


----------



## Chris

chapstic said:


> mr. $20k a month, shouldn't be any problem.
> 
> marry her and get her under your insurance?



I don't have insurance. I can't afford it.

It is tough being a one income family.


----------



## Caligirl

The book banning was in the Time article. The 1997 article was the first that came up and points to her style of governing. Various sources cite her strong religiosity as a governing principle, to the point of banning books deemed religiously offensive, and firing the librarian if she does not support her. 

You *could *call her a reformer, or you could call her a *really *bad idea. 

Here's another article from 1996:



> The newly elected mayor of Wasilla has asked all of the city's top managers to resign in order to test their loyalty to her administration



ADNSearch.com | Search Results

If that's old news I apologize I really haven't followed the mudslinging but book banning gets my hackles up. Forced religion does too. 

At this point I am in the news archive search and there is a fee to retrieve the full article, I have no doubt this stuff will be handled in MSM tomorrow. 

I'll keep looking, this is like the fourth installment on the Lifetime network of  _"Sarah Palin: A woman is who is too big for one small Alaskan village."_


----------



## chapstic

Kirk said:


> I don't have insurance. I can't afford it.
> 
> It is tough being a one income family.



you don't make 20k a month then. your welcome by the way.


sorry to change topics of this thread.


----------



## CrimsonWhite

jsanders said:


> I heard she owns this t-shirt:
> 
> T-Shirt Hell :: Shirts :: THIS SHIRT IS 100% ORGANIC - 65% BABY SEAL 25% PANDA 10% MANATEE



I heard she owns a portion of the company that makes those shirts, but fired the guy who runs it, after she knocked up his daughter.


----------



## Caligirl

Missourian said:


> It was within here purview to fire both the librarian and the Head of Public Safety,  they served at her discretion.
> 
> That is not an abuse of power,  that IS her power as executive.



OK. And your responsibility as a voter is to (preferably research and) decide if her style of governance is appropriate for our country. 

It is bizarre to say the least to ask the entire slate of city managers to "resign to demonstrate loyalty."


----------



## Chris

chapstic said:


> you don't make 20k a month then. your welcome by the way.
> 
> 
> sorry to change topics of this thread.



You really don't know much about being a realtor. Sometimes you go months without pay. Thanks for your support though.


----------



## Chris

Caligirl said:


> OK. And your responsibility as a voter is to (preferably research and) decide if her style of governance is appropriate for our country.
> 
> It is bizarre to say the least to ask the entire slate of city managers to "resign to demonstrate loyalty."



Sounds like Nazi Germany!


----------



## Caligirl

Kirk said:


> This woman is a freak!




Mind if I tack one on?

Now, I don't mind this next story, because I don't particularly mind Jeremiah Wright. As stated elsewhere. Pastors are crazy people, and so I don't give their silliness too much thought. But it seems only balanced to inform that Sarah has a crazy pastor too named Ed Kalnins. 



> Kalnins has preached that critics of Bush will be banished to Hell, questioned if people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to Heaven, charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and Iraq were part of a war "contending for your faith;" and that Jesus "operated from that position of war mode."
> 
> During the 2004 election, Kalnins praised Bush's performance in debate with Sen. John Kerry, then offered a not-so-subtle message about his own preference: "I'm not going tell you who to vote for, but if you vote for this particular person, I question your salvation. I'm sorry." Kalnins said. "If every Christian will vote righteously, it would be a landslide every time."
> 
> Kalnins later bristled at the criticism Bush was facing for the government's handling of Hurricane Katrina: "I hate criticisms towards the president, because it's like criticisms towards the pastor -- it's almost like, it's not going to get you anywhere, you know, except for hell. That's what it'll get you."




In other words, not God Damn America, just God Damn Democrats. 


Palin's past pastor: Bush-foes Hell-bound: The Swamp


----------



## Missourian

Just to back up my point,  I remember when President Clinton fired every single U.S. Attorney (93 of them) without rhyme-nor-reason.  It was within his executive authority to do so, just as it was within Palin's.





.


----------



## Avatar4321

Kirk said:


> The abuse of power thing goes back to Wasilla. Now she stepped in sh*t and has to hire a lawyer. She's going down.



Well, I guess we all know who the left is going after when McCain wins. The Bush hatred syndrome will be transfered to Gov. Palin.


----------



## chapstic

Caligirl said:


> Mind if I tack one on?
> 
> Now, I don't mind this next story, because I don't particularly mind Jeremiah Wright. As stated elsewhere. Pastors are crazy people, and so I don't give their silliness too much thought. But it seems only balanced to inform that Sarah has a crazy pastor too named Ed Kalnins.
> [/url]



so you agree with black liberation theology?  or did you just turn a blind eye and have no idea what mr. wright stands for?


----------



## Caligirl

> A March 13 McClatchy Newspapers article -- headlined "Current situation is distinct from Clinton firings of U.S. attorneys" -- further noted that "[m]ass firings of U.S. attorneys are fairly common when a new president takes office, but not in a second-term administration." The article added that "Justice Department officials acknowledged it would be unusual for the president to oust his own appointees."



I agree it was in her purview, and suggest that it gives insight into the workings of her mind.  I suggested that the events (calls for book banning, firing, etc), along with demands for resignation as a show of loyalty from city staff, be filed wherever anyone deems appropriate in their decision making process for this election.


----------



## Caligirl

chapstic said:


> so you agree with black liberation theology?  or did you just turn a blind eye and have no idea what mr. wright stands for?



I wrote about this on another thread, you can probably find it and tackle it if you feel so inclined. 

What do you think about the God Damn Democrats remarks of pastor Kalnin? Me, I think it's all silliness. How about you?


----------



## Missourian

Caligirl said:


> OK. And your responsibility as a voter is to (preferably research and) decide if her style of governance is appropriate for our country.



Hard to argue with that.


----------



## Caligirl

Avatar4321 said:


> Well, I guess we all know who the left is going after when McCain wins. The Bush hatred syndrome will be transfered to Gov. Palin.



The left thought Bush was a bad idea.

Now 72% of the country disapprove of Bush. 

The left thinks Palin is a bad idea.


----------



## Missourian

Caligirl said:


> I agree it was in her purview, and suggest that it gives insight into the workings of her mind.  I suggested that the events (calls for book banning, firing, etc), along with demands for resignation as a show of loyalty from city staff, be filed wherever anyone deems appropriate in their decision making process for this election.




I respectfully submit that the insinuation of "book banning" was a hearsay comment from one of Palin's political rivals as quoted by the Time article.  The librarian didn't comment.  

And in the article you submitted, the disagreement was over a merger of the museum and the library, not banning books.





.


----------



## chapstic

Caligirl said:


> I wrote about this on another thread, you can probably find it and tackle it if you feel so inclined.
> 
> What do you think about the God Damn Democrats remarks of pastor Kalnin? Me, I think it's all silliness. How about you?



i'd rather hear "god damn demos/rebups/indes" then "god damn america".


----------



## Caligirl

Missourian said:


> I respectfully submit that the insinuation of "book banning" was a hearsay comment from one of Palin's political rivals as quoted by the Time article.  The librarian didn't comment.
> 
> And in the article you submitted, the disagreement was over a merger of the museum and the library, not banning books.
> 
> .



Agreed. There was at least one independent article mentioning another Wasilla resident who substantiated the story. It wasn't very meaty but I'll look for it again.

Edit: I can't find it again. Anyway, I'm sure it will be on the news.


----------



## Chris

Missourian said:


> I respectfully submit that the insinuation of "book banning" was a hearsay comment from one of Palin's political rivals as quoted by the Time article.  The librarian didn't comment.
> 
> And in the article you submitted, the disagreement was over a merger of the museum and the library, not banning books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



Nice try, but Palin admitted it herself if you read what I posted.


----------



## Chris

Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.

Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin&#8217;s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. &#8220;They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,&#8221; Ms. Kilkenny said.

The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to &#8220;resist all efforts at censorship,&#8221; Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.

In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were &#8220;rhetorical.&#8221;

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us...asilla.html?em


----------



## Missourian

Kirk said:


> Nice try, but Palin admitted it herself if you read what I posted.




Sorry Kirk, I tend to only skim your posts. Don't take this the wrong way, I admire your commitment to your ideology, but you posts are a little too dogmatic for me.




.


----------



## Chris

Missourian said:


> Just to back up my point,  I remember when President Clinton fired every single U.S. Attorney (93 of them) without rhyme-nor-reason.  It was within his executive authority to do so, just as it was within Palin's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



Bogus Republican talking point. All new presidents replace attorneys as a matter of routine. 

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10193.html


----------



## Missourian

Kirk said:


> Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.
> 
> Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palins first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her, Ms. Kilkenny said.
> 
> The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to resist all efforts at censorship, Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.
> 
> In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were rhetorical.
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us...asilla.html?em



Your link doesn't work.


----------



## Caligirl

Ah, it was Ms. Kilkenny. Thanks Kirk. I didn't think to look in this thread for the name.


----------



## Chris

Missourian said:


> Your link doesn't work.



Try this one....

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us/politics/03wasilla.html?em


----------



## Missourian

Missourian said:


> Your link doesn't work.




While I'm sure "Ms. Kilkenny's" word is beyond reproach,  I feel the NY Times does journalism a disservice by not requesting the minutes from the council meeting and not including the entire _Frontiersman_ quote from Palin instead of just the word "rhetorical".

But we all know the word of the NY Times is also beyond reproach. 




.


----------



## Missourian

All I can find so far is that Palin said  &#8220;Many issues were discussed, both rhetorical and realistic in nature.&#8221;  I'd like to see the whole article.


----------



## DiveCon

Kirk said:


> Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.
> 
> Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Ms. Palin&#8217;s first year in office, said Ms. Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at one meeting. &#8220;They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her,&#8221; Ms. Kilkenny said.
> 
> The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to &#8220;resist all efforts at censorship,&#8221; Ms. Kilkenny recalled. Ms. Palin fired Ms. Emmons shortly after taking office but changed course after residents made a strong show of support. Ms. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.
> 
> In 1996, Ms. Palin suggested to the local paper, The Frontiersman, that the conversations about banning books were &#8220;rhetorical.&#8221;
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/us/politics/03wasilla.html?em


so, she never actually banned or even attempted to ban any books


thus you are a complete moron


----------



## Ninja

Who cares, books are for pussies.


----------



## Silence

jsanders said:


> Barack Obama voted against funding our troops. What's worse? Banning books, or killing soldiers?



you claim you're an independent but EVERYTHING you say scream right wing conservative apologist.  How do you reconcile that js?  

I'd get it if you were outraged by the information coming out about Palin or even just a bit miffed but said, well you know, it sucks that I'm stuck with voting for her if I want to vote for McCain but that's how it is.  

Instead you brush off EVERY bit of shady information that has been revealed about her like you don't understand why anyone would care about this stuff.  

That's not anything like the independents I know.  They hate extremists on BOTH sides.


----------



## Missourian

Divecon is right, she never banned any books.  She never tried to ban any books. All we have is good old "Ms. Kilkenny's" recollection that removing a book was discussed.  Not what book specifically just a vague "some books that were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her."  For all we know, Palin was talking about removing  The Anarchist Cookbook.  Include the minutes of the meeting, it's the law, they're not hard to get your hands on.  These "news stories" are pretty slim on fact and are fat on supposition, hearsay and inuendo.


----------



## del

Kirk said:


> You really don't know much about being a realtor. Sometimes you go months without pay. Thanks for your support though.


not if you're any good at it you don't

eat more almonds


----------



## Red Dawn

Kirk said:


> When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to have books banned. When the librarian wouldn't go along, she tried to have her fired....
> 
> Library Garden: Banned Books




Was she one of those Cons who didn't like all the black magic imagery in the Harry Potter books?


----------



## Caligirl

Missourian said:


> Divecon is right, she never banned any books.  She never tried to ban any books. All we have is good old "Ms. Kilkenny's" recollection that removing a book was discussed.




No, Kilkenny is *one independent source *here. There are multiple sources that she wanted to ban the books. 



> Shortly after becoming mayor, former *city officials and Wasilla residents said,* Ms. Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.






> Shortly after becoming mayor, former city officials and Wasilla residents said, Palin approached the town librarian about the possibility of banning some books, though she never followed through and it was unclear which books or passages were in question.
> 
> Ann Kilkenny, a Democrat who said she attended every City Council meeting in Palin's first year in office, said Palin brought up the idea of banning some books at a council meeting. "They were somehow morally or socially objectionable to her," Kilkenny said.
> 
> The librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, pledged to "resist all efforts at censorship," Kilkenny recalled.
> 
> The mayor fired Emmons shortly after taking office but rescinded the termination after residents made a strong show of support. Emmons, who left her job and Wasilla a couple of years later, declined to comment for this article.





> While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed.



The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

She wanted to ban books, the librarian resisted, and she fired the librarian. 

No one said she banned the books, she wanted to ban the books and fired the librarian. It's a little nuts.


----------



## DiamondDave

Oh what news.. more hearsay complaints from the libtroll#2

A prior political rival with undocumented and unproven allegations about a typical liberal talking point...

We condemn me too because I fought with the school system about having certain reading materials taken out of middle school libraries.. .No.. Not Huck Finn or 1984.... but things with high sexual content and language issues such as Cosmo magazine and various books with the f-bomb all over the place in them.... hmmm, if the teachers are reprimanded for sexual talk to the students and use of the f-bomb, it probably also should not be readily available in a book in the middle school library... sometimes, in terms of children, it is wise to use censorship

What next??? Kirk starts posting the photoshopped pics of Palin as more 'proof' of some evil republican conspiracy??


----------



## Ravi

So she wants to ban books...why do you think all the fundies are excited? She's one of them.


----------



## Silence

DiamondDave said:


> Oh what news.. more hearsay complaints from the libtroll#2
> 
> A prior political rival with undocumented and unproven allegations about a typical liberal talking point...
> 
> We condemn me too because I fought with the school system about having certain reading materials taken out of middle school libraries.. .No.. Not Huck Finn or 1984.... but things with high sexual content and language issues such as Cosmo magazine and various books with the f-bomb all over the place in them.... hmmm, if the teachers are reprimanded for sexual talk to the students and use of the f-bomb, it probably also should not be readily available in a book in the middle school library... sometimes, in terms of children, it is wise to use censorship
> 
> What next??? Kirk starts posting the photoshopped pics of Palin as more 'proof' of some evil republican conspiracy??



I'm dumbfounded, really I am and that's not an easy thing to do to me.  

Let me see if I understand this correctly, every bit of information that we will be getting regarding Sarah Palin is to be disregarded OUTRIGHT because it's a left wing conspiracy to smear her and/or just made up stuff by those people whom she either beat in election OR better yet, exposed for corruption?  did I get that right?  



One thing I find funny though, do you think a child reading Cosmo is going to run out and start fucking?  or better, a child who reads a book with the "f bomb" in it is going to suddenly become a degenerate?   GMAB already.  

what's amazing to me is this IDEA that it's the Dems who want MORE control over the lives of Americans yet it's the Repubs who are continually ATTACKING our freedoms!  

this world is turned upside down that's for sure!


----------



## Missourian

And now we're right back where we start 


We don't have any evidence of a correlation between a discussion about removal of these un-named books from the library and the firing of the librarian.

Governor Palin stated the firing hinged on a merger between the museum and the library.

The librarian has made no statement.



No books were removed and no attempt was made to remove any books.  There was a discussion on the procedure if any that would need to be followed if it was deemed neccessary to remove a book.

Conveniently, the New York Times fail to pursue any leads on which books were discussed, if any.  And be sure, if we were talking "The Diary of Anne Frank" or James Joyce, the Times would have had that information in large print above the fold.

So really, we don't know anything except for there was a discussion.


----------



## Caligirl

DiamondDave said:


> We condemn me too because I fought with the school system about having certain reading materials taken out of middle school libraries.. .No.. Not Huck Finn or 1984.... but things with high sexual content and language issues such as Cosmo magazine and various books with the f-bomb all over the place in them.... hmmm, if the teachers are reprimanded for sexual talk to the students and use of the f-bomb, it probably also should not be readily available in a book in the middle school library... sometimes, in terms of children, it is wise to use censorship



Was this a *public *library? Did you fire the librarian when you were unsuccessful? 

Also, I have certain expectations from political candidates. I don't have the same expectations of my neighbors. Our school library pulls books for similar reasons you are discussing, not often but occasionally. 

The public library is a different story, it serves the town which includes adults and people of various faiths. 

It is hard to believe that every disturbing news item about this woman is supposed to be swept away and ignored. Do you truly believe that?


----------



## Ravi

I find it hard to believe that Cosmopolitan is in middle school libraries.


----------



## Caligirl

Missourian said:


> We don't have any evidence of a correlation between a discussion about removal of these un-named books from the library and the firing of the librarian..



I provided a direct quote for you on this. Previous page.

SHe was fired for the book thing, according to residents of Wasilla.


----------



## DiamondDave

Silence said:


> I'm dumbfounded, really I am and that's not an easy thing to do to me.
> 
> Let me see if I understand this correctly, every bit of information that we will be getting regarding Sarah Palin is to be disregarded OUTRIGHT because it's a left wing conspiracy to smear her and/or just made up stuff by those people whom she either beat in election OR better yet, exposed for corruption?  did I get that right?
> 
> 
> 
> One thing I find funny though, do you think a child reading Cosmo is going to run out and start fucking?  or better, a child who reads a book with the "f bomb" in it is going to suddenly become a degenerate?   GMAB already.
> 
> what's amazing to me is this IDEA that it's the Dems who want MORE control over the lives of Americans yet it's the Repubs who are continually ATTACKING our freedoms!
> 
> this world is turned upside down that's for sure!



Do I think that certain things are inappropriate for teens, pre-teens, and children?? you betcha... do I think young minds are impressionable?? You betcha... Do I think some things are more easily caved into because the cool 'naughty' things described in media, that parents usually don't allow around, are suddenly snuck to get or readily available for giggle fests at middle school? Yep....

Children have no 'freedom' or 'right' to such things... Children are under the control and discretion of the parents/legal guardians... and in terms of children, it is probably best they don't have info on how to give the best blowjob or the 10 things to do sexually to a man to get him off.. probably best they are not allowed access to 'the joy of sex' or 'hustler' in a school library, just for the name of a freedom that we hold dear as adults....

Leave it to a uber-lib to actually protect sexually explicit materials being readily available to hormone raging teens and pre-teens... leave it to a lib to want to have 'colorful language' that can not be said by a teacher to a child, protected because it is in print... hell, why not call for the right of teachers to use the f-bomb all the time in front of a bunch of 7th graders? That seems SO right


----------



## Missourian

Silence said:


> I'm dumbfounded, really I am and that's not an easy thing to do to me.
> 
> Let me see if I understand this correctly, every bit of information that we will be getting regarding Sarah Palin is to be disregarded OUTRIGHT because it's a left wing conspiracy to smear her and/or just made up stuff by those people whom she either beat in election OR better yet, exposed for corruption?  did I get that right?
> 
> 
> 
> this world is turned upside down that's for sure!



I know, next we'll be arguing what the definition of "is" is and it will be a *VAST* left wing conspiracy.

<Sorry, I couldn't resist>


----------



## DiamondDave

Ravi said:


> I find it hard to believe that Cosmopolitan is in middle school libraries.



We had cosmo and actually even some pretty raunchy things in middle school and high school libraries...

I don't hide talk about sex from my daughters, but that is my duty as parent to discuss beliefs about it and the 'rights and wrongs' behind what teens should or should not do (particularly my teen)... I do not hide hell, damn, and other language from my kids, but I certainly do not use the f-bomb at them or with them, as it is inappropriate....

but having certain materials readily available to kids without parental permission or supervision is not a good thing


----------



## Ravi

DiamondDave said:


> We had cosmo and actually even some pretty raunchy things in middle school and high school libraries...
> 
> I don't hide talk about sex from my daughters, but that is my duty as parent to discuss beliefs about it and the 'rights and wrongs' behind what teens should or should not do (particularly my teen)... I do not hide hell, damn, and other language from my kids, but I certainly do not use the f-bomb at them or with them, as it is inappropriate....
> 
> but having certain materials readily available to kids without parental permission or supervision is not a good thing


I dunno, I still can't believe a middle school would have Cosmo.


----------



## glockmail

More baseless loony left attacks.


----------



## dilloduck

Ravi said:


> I dunno, I still can't believe a middle school would have Cosmo.



Why not---do you think there is a reason they shouldn't have them ?


----------



## Missourian

I read the whole original posting from Anne Killkenny, in the comments section of the Washington Independent and I would call her neither independent nor unbiased.  She obviously has an axe to grind with Governor Palin.  I would reproduce it here but it is like War and Peace.

Go here and read it for yourself.

So now we have two of Governor Palin's political foes collaborating the others depiction of events.

*A suburban Anchorage homemaker and activist &#8212; who once did battle with the Alaska governor when Palin was mayor &#8212; recounts what she knows of Palin's history.*

http://www.crosscut.com/2008-election/17341/About+Sarah+Palin:+an+e-mail+from+Wasilla/

Next rumor.





.


----------



## Chris

Missourian said:


> And now we're right back where we start
> 
> 
> We don't have any evidence of a correlation between a discussion about removal of these un-named books from the library and the firing of the librarian.
> 
> Governor Palin stated the firing hinged on a merger between the museum and the library.
> 
> The librarian has made no statement.
> 
> 
> 
> No books were removed and no attempt was made to remove any books.  There was a discussion on the procedure if any that would need to be followed if it was deemed neccessary to remove a book.
> 
> Conveniently, the New York Times fail to pursue any leads on which books were discussed, if any.  And be sure, if we were talking "The Diary of Anne Frank" or James Joyce, the Times would have had that information in large print above the fold.
> 
> So really, we don't know anything except for there was a discussion.



Keep lying. It makes you look bad.


----------



## DiamondDave

Kirk said:


> Keep lying. It makes you look bad.



Hello pot, this is kettle calling... something about the color black


----------



## Jennifer.Bush

we need real issues.plz

is she planing to kills gays?

is she planing to put people of color in slavery?


----------



## AllieBaba

Kirk said:


> When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to have books banned. When the librarian wouldn't go along, she tried to have her fired....
> 
> Library Garden: Banned Books



Heaven's to Betsy! When any civilized person knows ONLY THE LIBRARY BOARD can ban books!

Who does she think she is?


----------



## editec

jsanders said:


> Blog.
> 
> Next.


 
Souce: Time (online)



> Stein says that as mayor, Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. *"She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them*. "The librarian was aghast." That woman, Mary Ellen Baker, couldn't be reached for comment, *but news reports from the time show that Palin had threatened to fire Baker for not giving "full support" to the mayor.*


----------



## Silence

DiamondDave said:


> Do I think that certain things are inappropriate for teens, pre-teens, and children?? you betcha... do I think young minds are impressionable?? You betcha... Do I think some things are more easily caved into because the cool 'naughty' things described in media, that parents usually don't allow around, are suddenly snuck to get or readily available for giggle fests at middle school? Yep....



and you make children sound like little idiots.  I'm not talking about 5 and 6 or even 10 year olds here.  I'm talking teens and even pre-teens 11-12 years old.  They are exposed to so much garbage just by watching the freakin NEWS so the idea that you can shield them is kind of cute, ina naive sorta way anyway.  My daughter is in middle school in fact and they don't have magazines in her library at school, not cosmo anyway.  They ahve discovery kids and national georgraphic though and OMG they have pictures of boobies in there!!  GASP!! Do I think the kids look at those pictures and laugh?  hell yes I do, that's part of growing up.  Didn't you sneak a peak at your dad's playboy growing up and get a giggle?  I'm a girl and I know I did.  




> Children have no 'freedom' or 'right' to such things... Children are under the control and discretion of the parents/legal guardians... and in terms of children, it is probably best they don't have info on how to give the best blowjob or the 10 things to do sexually to a man to get him off.. probably best they are not allowed access to 'the joy of sex' or 'hustler' in a school library, just for the name of a freedom that we hold dear as adults....



see that is the problem IMO with conservatives.  You think until your kids become 18 they aren't free willed human beings.  You HONESTLY do believe that they are under your control and they should behave at YOUR discrestion.  NEWSFLASH sweets, that's why Palin's daughter is knocked up!  why?  because mommy and daddy aren't there all the time to hold their hand and guide them and the JOB of ANY good parent is to recognize that children must be taught responsibility and self-control.  You don't achieve that by dictating to them what they MUST do, you achieve that by giving them options and rights within their own life and freedom to express themselves within the bounds that society has set for ALL people.  

I do have a question for you though, what the hell kind of school are you sending your kid to anyway?  seriously?    It's like you guys take the worst case sceneiro and add about a thousand pounds of hysteria and a pinch of paranoia and that's your reality.  It's ridiculous honestly.  



> Leave it to a uber-lib to actually protect sexually explicit materials being readily available to hormone raging teens and pre-teens... leave it to a lib to want to have 'colorful language' that can not be said by a teacher to a child, protected because it is in print... hell, why not call for the right of teachers to use the f-bomb all the time in front of a bunch of 7th graders? That seems SO right



yes, that's what I'm advocating, exactly.  They should have porn readily available in school libraries across this country.  Stop being a knee jerk right winger and actually HEAR (or READ) what I'm saying.  I'm saying that IF you've imparted your values to your children and IF you've given them a good and safe foundation NONE of those things will be able to knock them off track.  It's the children whose parents don't pay attention, or the parents who are so busy promoting their own life and success that seem to have children who go off the right path.  

Personally I see nothing wrong with dropping the f-bomb in front of a 7th grader when it's warranted.  Do you think they aren't saying it themselves in the halls between classes, in the lunch room, etc?  I think if teachers could interact with children on a level they can relate to they might be able to actually reach them more effectively.    Also the f'bomb never hurt anyone, it's just a word.  My own daughter drops it once in a while, no biggie to me.  Why? because I'm not a hypocrite.  I swear.  

I've never done drugs, I don't smoke and I don't sleep around.  I have the ability to impart my wisdom and reasoning on those subjects on why these things are harmful, hence why I don't do them.  She won't look at me and think fuck that shit because she KNOWS I don't do it myself.  

Stop treating children like they are morons and start treating them like they have brains, they are smarter than some of the adults running this country (and even on this message board it seems).


----------



## Missourian

editec said:


> Souce: Time (online)



This entire story is sourced from the comments section
of the Washinton Independent.  Quotes and all.  Thank you New York Times, for your indepth reporting.

The Washington Independent  The Reform Candidate?


----------



## DiamondDave

Silence said:


> and you make children sound like little idiots.  I'm not talking about 5 and 6 or even 10 year olds here.  I'm talking teens and even pre-teens 11-12 years old.  They are exposed to so much garbage just by watching the freakin NEWS so the idea that you can shield them is kind of cute, ina naive sorta way anyway.  My daughter is in middle school in fact and they don't have magazines in her library at school, not cosmo anyway.  They ahve discovery kids and national georgraphic though and OMG they have pictures of boobies in there!!  GASP!! Do I think the kids look at those pictures and laugh?  hell yes I do, that's part of growing up.  Didn't you sneak a peak at your dad's playboy growing up and get a giggle?  I'm a girl and I know I did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> see that is the problem IMO with conservatives.  You think until your kids become 18 they aren't free willed human beings.  You HONESTLY do believe that they are under your control and they should behave at YOUR discrestion.  NEWSFLASH sweets, that's why Palin's daughter is knocked up!  why?  because mommy and daddy aren't there all the time to hold their hand and guide them and the JOB of ANY good parent is to recognize that children must be taught responsibility and self-control.  You don't achieve that by dictating to them what they MUST do, you achieve that by giving them options and rights within their own life and freedom to express themselves within the bounds that society has set for ALL people.
> 
> I do have a question for you though, what the hell kind of school are you sending your kid to anyway?  seriously?    It's like you guys take the worst case sceneiro and add about a thousand pounds of hysteria and a pinch of paranoia and that's your reality.  It's ridiculous honestly.
> 
> 
> 
> yes, that's what I'm advocating, exactly.  They should have porn readily available in school libraries across this country.  Stop being a knee jerk right winger and actually HEAR (or READ) what I'm saying.  I'm saying that IF you've imparted your values to your children and IF you've given them a good and safe foundation NONE of those things will be able to knock them off track.  It's the children whose parents don't pay attention, or the parents who are so busy promoting their own life and success that seem to have children who go off the right path.
> 
> Personally I see nothing wrong with dropping the f-bomb in front of a 7th grader when it's warranted.  Do you think they aren't saying it themselves in the halls between classes, in the lunch room, etc?  I think if teachers could interact with children on a level they can relate to they might be able to actually reach them more effectively.    Also the f'bomb never hurt anyone, it's just a word.  My own daughter drops it once in a while, no biggie to me.  Why? because I'm not a hypocrite.  I swear.
> 
> I've never done drugs, I don't smoke and I don't sleep around.  I have the ability to impart my wisdom and reasoning on those subjects on why these things are harmful, hence why I don't do them.  She won't look at me and think fuck that shit because she KNOWS I don't do it myself.
> 
> Stop treating children like they are morons and start treating them like they have brains, they are smarter than some of the adults running this country (and even on this message board it seems).



They are not free willed and free human beings.. they are children... they do not have the freedom, nor should they have the freedom to just do as they choose... if they do rebel and go against the rules set for them by the parents, it is our duty to teach, punish, or whatever it takes to try and set them on the right path... when they are adult, that is their business

As for your notion that an f-bomb can be warranted to use to or at a 7th grader.... that says a LOT right there.... it is NOT proper, not warranted, and completely uncalled for at ALL times

Did we do things 'wrong'? Yep... Do kids do things wrong and sneak? Yep... does not mean it is best to have it readily there for them....

As for the school... it is a public school... 

Restricting kids and having them with distinct rules and boundaries, keeping them from easy access to improper things for kids, is not treating them like morons... My girls learn things first from me and their mom... and when they do sneak a peek or hear things or whatever, thru the various ways that kids get it, then ask questions and we discuss... but certain things are for adults and certain freedoms that adults have, kids don't and should not have


----------



## Silence

DiamondDave said:


> *They are not ree willed and free human beings.. they are children.*.. they do not have the freedom, nor should they have the freedom to just do as they choose... if they do rebel and go against the rules set for them by the parents, it is our duty to teach, punish, or whatever it takes to try and set them on the right path... when they are adult, that is their business



explain to me HOW, as adults, they are supposed to know HOW to make their own decisions, IF when children, they are led around by the nose and instructed what decisions to make?  You HAVE to give them some freedom to make their own decisions AND make their own mistakes, that is how people learn and grow into self-sufficient people.  

and can I just point out the irony that you don't think of children as free willed and free human beings but rather seem to think of them as property of their parents, free to do with as they see fit and yet you seem to have a problem with abortion.  When exactly do these little people get RIGHTS of their own?  free to think and feel as they see fit?  when YOU decide it's so?  



> As for your notion that an f-bomb can be warranted to use to or at a 7th grader.... that says a LOT right there.... it is NOT proper, not warranted, and completely uncalled for at ALL times



I think a loud SIT THE FUCK DOWN would work wonders in some classrooms quite honestly.  but that's my opinion.  



> Did we do things 'wrong'? Yep... Do kids do things wrong and sneak? Yep... does not mean it is best to have it readily there for them....



at least if you're the one making it available they can come to you and ask questions rather than remain ignorant with misinformation...but wait, that's the conservative way, nevermind.  



> As for the school... it is a public school...



and they have HUSTLER in the library?  really?  amazing.  



> Restricting kids and having them with distinct rules and boundaries, keeping them from easy access to improper things for kids, is not treating them like morons... My girls learn things first from me and their mom... and when they do sneak a peek or hear things or whatever, thru the various ways that kids get it, then ask questions and we discuss... but certain things are for adults and certain freedoms that adults have, kids don't and should not have



I'm not saying kids should be running the streets but if you're one of those parents who believes it's the music or movies/television or the video games that causes children to make poor choices then I have some nice swamp land to sell you.  Lack of parent involvement, lack of support, lack of guidance and lack of communication are what cause children to make poor choices.  Children can and will be exposed to things they shouldn't, hell they just need to watch the nightly news for that, you can't shield them from everything nor should you.  

I'm not passing judgement on your parenting cuz I'm sure your girls are just fine, I'm saying that history has shown that the more restrictions you place on a child the more the fight back.  you don't have to give them the run of the house but you should at least give them the respect of being a participant in their own lives.


----------



## AllieBaba

Silence said:


> explain to me HOW, as adults, they are supposed to know HOW to make their own decisions, IF when children, they are led around by the nose and instructed what decisions to make?  You HAVE to give them some freedom to make their own decisions AND make their own mistakes, that is how people learn and grow into self-sufficient people.
> 
> and can I just point out the irony that you don't think of children as free willed and free human beings but rather seem to think of them as property of their parents, free to do with as they see fit and yet you seem to have a problem with abortion.  When exactly do these little people get RIGHTS of their own?  free to think and feel as they see fit?  when YOU decide it's so?
> 
> 
> 
> I think a loud SIT THE FUCK DOWN would work wonders in some classrooms quite honestly.  but that's my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> at least if you're the one making it available they can come to you and ask questions rather than remain ignorant with misinformation...but wait, that's the conservative way, nevermind.
> 
> 
> 
> and they have HUSTLER in the library?  really?  amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not saying kids should be running the streets but if you're one of those parents who believes it's the music or movies/television or the video games that causes children to make poor choices then I have some nice swamp land to sell you.  Lack of parent involvement, lack of support, lack of guidance and lack of communication are what cause children to make poor choices.  Children can and will be exposed to things they shouldn't, hell they just need to watch the nightly news for that, you can't shield them from everything nor should you.
> 
> I'm not passing judgement on your parenting cuz I'm sure your girls are just fine, I'm saying that history has shown that the more restrictions you place on a child the more the fight back.  you don't have to give them the run of the house but you should at least give them the respect of being a participant in their own lives.



Not true. I hear there aren't many unplanned pregnancies in Iran.
Nor were there many in the Puritan colonies.


----------



## Silence

AllieBaba said:


> Not true. I hear there aren't many unplanned pregnancies in Iran.
> Nor were there many in the Puritan colonies.



 Iran?  

Puritan colonies?  

wow, you make your case brilliantly Allie


----------



## DiveCon

Red Dawn said:


> Was she one of those Cons who didn't like all the black magic imagery in the Harry Potter books?


did you actually READ the link
Kirk is a liar
the story he linked to says she never tried to ban any books


----------



## DiveCon

Caligirl said:


> No, Kilkenny is *one independent source *here. There are multiple sources that she wanted to ban the books.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan
> 
> She wanted to ban books, the librarian resisted, and she fired the librarian.
> 
> No one said she banned the books, she wanted to ban the books and fired the librarian. It's a little nuts.


yeah UNNAMED 
sorry, try harder
your attempts to SMEAR this woman is quite evident


----------



## AllieBaba

Silence said:


> Iran?
> 
> Puritan colonies?
> 
> wow, you make your case brilliantly Allie



Point being, your contention that repressing kids sexually makes them more likely to rebel and act out sexually is pure shit.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> So she wants to ban books...why do you think all the fundies are excited? She's one of them.


no, thats a LIE
Kirk is a LIAR


----------



## DiveCon

Silence said:


> I'm dumbfounded, really I am and that's not an easy thing to do to me.
> 
> Let me see if I understand this correctly, every bit of information that we will be getting regarding Sarah Palin is to be disregarded OUTRIGHT because it's a left wing conspiracy to smear her and/or just made up stuff by those people whom she either beat in election OR better yet, exposed for corruption?  did I get that right?
> 
> 
> 
> One thing I find funny though, do you think a child reading Cosmo is going to run out and start fucking?  or better, a child who reads a book with the "f bomb" in it is going to suddenly become a degenerate?   GMAB already.
> 
> what's amazing to me is this IDEA that it's the Dems who want MORE control over the lives of Americans yet it's the Repubs who are continually ATTACKING our freedoms!
> 
> this world is turned upside down that's for sure!


if your getting it from LYING leftwing sources, YES


----------



## DiveCon

editec said:


> Souce: Time (online)


yet not one book was banned


----------



## DiamondDave

silence

what you do not seem to grasp is exposure to things does not cause or MAKE them do things... it causes them to be sometimes desensitized and sometimes think it is comical and then easier to say OK to....

And believe you me... It is not OK to expose kids to different things, whether they find it or whether you show it to them yourself...

Certain things you give more attention to, as they get older and more understanding, such as the subject of sex.... but I am not going to give my children a copy of  'the joy of sex' because they are going to somewhere sometime see it anyway

And as for a "SIT THE FUCK DOWN" to kids in a classroom... that may well be your opinion, but it is not a good one.... you can deal with kids with a loud 'sit down' or -gasp- even a 'sit the hell down'.... but certain things are not appropriate for kids....

A child is going to fight back against parental authority at one time or another, PERIOD... whether you are an appeaser, whether you're an authoritarian, or whether you educate, explain, and restrict.... but when you cave in and just give in to it anyway or provide, it is giving the message like you really don't care or it is not all that important....

You can respect a child without exposing them to every last thing... Children do need boundaries.. some hard and absolutely firm... some that change with trust as it is EARNED by them (not just given for nothing)... teaching what is appropriate, right, wrong, forbidden, acceptable, etc is key... and yes, some things are forbidden...

And now for the biggie.. comparing the restriction and actual raising of children to abortion.. you basically made me throw up in my mouth a bit... abortion is the intent of harming, not teaching, not protecting, not helping... abortion is the intent of killing in the name of selfishness... being the parent, guardian, rule of law, restriction setter, punishment enforcer, educator, and being firm is not being done to harm a child. Rather the opposite. To make them better. To show them the path. To show them mistakes and bad decisions have their consequences. To show them there are rules in life to follow.

You also seem to mislabel restriction, rules, guidance, and not exposing them to things that they should not be exposed to, with misinformation.. I ASSURE YOU I DO NOT GIVE ANY MISINFORMATION TO EITHER OF MY DAUGHTERS... we talk and discuss and I answer questions all the time... but she knows what is NOT OK... I do not go with the "they're going to do it anyway" or the "if it feels good, just do it" mantra


----------



## rayboyusmc

> So, Palin fired people who were not in favor of her reform?



She was a lot like our former School Board Member here in Broward.  She fired anyone who disagreed with her.  She hired her friends --- Hmmm, maybe she did know Bush all along.

Not the best of management practices by any management standards.

From what is coming out, she is not quite the shining star the right would like you to believe she is.  Now they are attacking anyone who attacks her record.  Not attacking the facts, but as usual attacking the people.

Let's just see how this works out tonight.  If she can speak at all, she will make John look bad.


----------



## DiveCon

rayboyusmc said:


> She was a lot like our former School Board Member here in Broward.  She fired anyone who disagreed with her.  She hired her friends --- Hmmm, maybe she did know Bush all along.
> 
> Not the best of management practices by any management standards.
> 
> From what is coming out, she is not quite the shining star the right would like you to believe she is.  Now they are attacking anyone who attacks her record.  Not attacking the facts, but as usual attacking the people.
> 
> Let's just see how this works out tonight.  If she can speak at all, she will make John look bad.


thats how a lot of business run
you hire the people you know
now, do you have any proof that the people she hired were not good for the job?


----------



## greenpartyaz

DiamondDave said:


> They are not free willed and free human beings.. they are children... they do not have the freedom, nor should they have the freedom to just do as they choose... if they do rebel and go against the rules set for them by the parents, it is our duty to teach, punish, or whatever it takes to try and set them on the right path... when they are adult, that is their business
> 
> As for your notion that an f-bomb can be warranted to use to or at a 7th grader.... that says a LOT right there.... it is NOT proper, not warranted, and completely uncalled for at ALL times
> 
> Did we do things 'wrong'? Yep... Do kids do things wrong and sneak? Yep... does not mean it is best to have it readily there for them....
> 
> As for the school... it is a public school...
> 
> Restricting kids and having them with distinct rules and boundaries, keeping them from easy access to improper things for kids, is not treating them like morons... My girls learn things first from me and their mom... and when they do sneak a peek or hear things or whatever, thru the various ways that kids get it, then ask questions and we discuss... but certain things are for adults and certain freedoms that adults have, kids don't and should not have



Freedom to discover, explore, and make mistakes and learn.


----------



## strollingbones

i never support any kind of book banning.  Why be afraid of ideas on paper?


----------



## Modbert

strollingbones said:


> i never support any kind of book banning.  Why be afraid of ideas on paper?



Certain people are afraid that some ideas on paper will make people intelligent.

We can't have that in country, then people will realize what a screwjob they been getting for a long time (though more now then ever in the last eight years).

The day people finally decide to revolt in this country will be quite interesting.

(Note to any gov't agencies reading this. I'm not supporting such revolt, just saying that a massive number of angry people aren't going to sit around doing nothing.)

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."


----------



## DiveCon

strollingbones said:


> i never support any kind of book banning.  Why be afraid of ideas on paper?


good, cause Palin never did


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> good, cause Palin never did



But she wanted to.

That's the point.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> But she wanted to.
> 
> That's the point.


then post the proof that she wanted to and that she didnt just use that as a starting point to negotiate?


----------



## glockmail

rayboyusmc said:


> She was a lot like our former School Board Member here in Broward.  She fired anyone who disagreed with her.  She hired her friends --- Hmmm, maybe she did know Bush all along.
> 
> Not the best of management practices by any management standards.
> 
> From what is coming out, she is not quite the shining star the right would like you to believe she is.  Now they are attacking anyone who attacks her record.  Not attacking the facts, but as usual attacking the people.
> 
> Let's just see how this works out tonight.  If she can speak at all, she will make John look bad.


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> then post the proof that she wanted to and that she didnt just use that as a starting point to negotiate?



A starting point to negotiate? Negotiate what? 

Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> A starting point to negotiate? Negotiate what?
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


sorry kirk, thats a fail
asking about the procedure is not actually wanting to ban books


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> sorry kirk, thats a fail
> asking about the procedure is not actually wanting to ban books



In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.

Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship. Emmons, now Mary Ellen Baker, is on vacation from her current job in Fairbanks and did not return e-mail or telephone messages left for her Wednesday.

When the matter came up for the second time in October 1996, during a City Council meeting, Anne Kilkenny, a Wasilla housewife who often attends council meetings, was there.

Like many Alaskans, Kilkenny calls the governor by her first name.

"Sarah said to Mary Ellen, &#8217;What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?" Kilkenny said.

"I was shocked. Mary Ellen sat up straight and said something along the line of, &#8217;The books in the Wasilla Library collection were selected on the basis of national selection criteria for libraries of this size, and I would absolutely resist all efforts to ban books.&#8217;"

Palin didn&#8217;t mention specific books at that meeting, Kilkenny said.

Palin herself, questioned at the time, called her inquiries rhetorical and simply part of a policy discussion with a department head "about understanding and following administration agendas," according to the Frontiersman article.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.
> 
> Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship. Emmons, now Mary Ellen Baker, is on vacation from her current job in Fairbanks and did not return e-mail or telephone messages left for her Wednesday.
> 
> When the matter came up for the second time in October 1996, during a City Council meeting, Anne Kilkenny, a Wasilla housewife who often attends council meetings, was there.
> 
> Like many Alaskans, Kilkenny calls the governor by her first name.
> 
> "Sarah said to Mary Ellen, &#8217;What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?" Kilkenny said.
> 
> "I was shocked. Mary Ellen sat up straight and said something along the line of, &#8217;The books in the Wasilla Library collection were selected on the basis of national selection criteria for libraries of this size, and I would absolutely resist all efforts to ban books.&#8217;"
> 
> Palin didn&#8217;t mention specific books at that meeting, Kilkenny said.
> 
> Palin herself, questioned at the time, called her inquiries rhetorical and simply part of a policy discussion with a department head "about understanding and following administration agendas," according to the Frontiersman article.
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


posting the same exact thing doesnt change the fact that Palin NEVER banned any book nor did she try
i had read that story before you even posted it
you FAIL again


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> posting the same exact thing doesnt change the fact that Palin NEVER banned any book nor did she try
> i had read that story before you even posted it
> you FAIL again



She tried to, but ran into opposition from the librarian and the town, so she backed off. 

Just Palin asking about banning books is worrisome to me. Combined with the heavy handed way she has run her small town and the state, it is obvious she is a power freak. Hopefully, she will be indicted in October, and that will be the end of her.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> sorry kirk, thats a fail
> asking about the procedure is not actually wanting to ban books



Procedure about banning books, what kind of Library bans books?

If libraries will carry Mein Kampf, then I can't think of much else they wouldn't carry.

Except maybe porno mags or something like that but I doubt they have them in the first place.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Procedure about banning books, what kind of Library bans books?
> 
> If libraries will carry Mein Kampf, then I can't think of much else they wouldn't carry.
> 
> Except maybe porno mags or something like that but I doubt they have them in the first place.


from the rest of the reports on this its clear it was a point to begin negotiations for other issues

yeah, no one ever takes an extreme position when they want something far less


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> She tried to, but ran into opposition from the librarian and the town, so she backed off.
> 
> Just Palin asking about banning books is worrisome to me. Combined with the heavy handed way she has run her small town and the state, it is obvious she is a power freak. Hopefully, she will be indicted in October, and that will be the end of her.


this show how naive you are and why you come off looking like a total moron


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> this show how naive you are and why you come off looking like a total moron



All you ever post are insults.


----------



## Article 15

Why is was your name changed to Chris, Kirk?


----------



## Chris

Article 15 said:


> Why is was your name changed to Chris, Kirk?



Privacy reasons at work.


----------



## greenpartyaz

If this is true about Palin banning books, then she is a total extremist. That is one of the most un-American things you can do!


----------



## DiveCon

greenpartyaz said:


> If this is true about Palin banning books, then she is a total extremist. That is one of the most un-American things you can do!


its NOT true


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> All you ever post are insults.


you get what you deserve
you post moronic nonsense and keep repeating it even when shown that you are wrong, people will think and call you a moron


----------



## greenpartyaz

Mayor Palin: A Rough Record - TIME Here it is.


----------



## Article 15

Chris said:


> Privacy reasons at work.



Ah ... I was befuddled for a second there ...


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> its NOT true



Palin wanted to ban books, but the local librarian stood up to her. Palin asked her about it *three times *including in City Council meetings. Then Palin tried to fire the librarian, but the public rallied to her side.


----------



## DiveCon

greenpartyaz said:


> Mayor Palin: A Rough Record - TIME Here it is.


interesting story, it starts out well, but then it turns to a political opponant of Palins and lets them tell a very biased story


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> Palin wanted to ban books, but the local librarian stood up to her. Palin asked her about it *three times *including in City Council meetings. Then Palin tried to fire the librarian, but the public rallied to her side.


that has been debunked 6 ways from sunday "chris"


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> that has been debunked 6 ways from sunday "chris"



In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.

Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> interesting story, it starts out well, but then it turns to a political opponant of Palins and lets them tell a very biased story



Dive, I could understand asking one time about banning books as a procedure.

But three times?


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Dive, I could understand asking one time about banning books as a procedure.
> 
> But three times?


since she never actually requested that any book be banned i dont see the problem
and it would depend on what and why she was asking
none of which we know at the moment


----------



## Article 15

What I am trippin' on is what benign reason would she have for the inquiry?


----------



## Modbert

Article 15 said:


> What I am trippin' on is what benign reason would she have for the inquiry?



Exactly, even one time has me going huh?

Why would you want or even need to ask to ban books?


----------



## Article 15

Is anyone here in favor of banning books?  If so, which ones?


----------



## Modbert

Article 15 said:


> Is anyone here in favor of banning books?  If so, which ones?



In favor of banning books? Not really

Mein Kampf and the Turner Diaries are two books that I would want to never exist though.


----------



## Article 15

Modbert said:


> Exactly, even one time has me going huh?
> 
> Why would you want or even need to ask to ban books?



Ya' got me ...


----------



## Dr Grump

onthefence said:


> I heard that one time she and a bunch of friends went out clubbing baby seals.



I guess you are no longer on the fence...


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> What I am trippin' on is what benign reason would she have for the inquiry?


a begining point for negotiations
it happens a lot to staret out with an outragious requests, to have somewhere to go in the process without getting less than what you REALLY wanted
this is a well known tactic


----------



## jreeves

Chris said:


> Bogus Republican talking point.* All new presidents replace attorneys as a matter of routine. *
> http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10193.html



Oh so that's the reason the Democrats were up in arms when Bush fired all of his...I see


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> Is anyone here in favor of banning books?  If so, which ones?


it would depend on what the book was and thye age of the group that were able to access them

please tell me you wouldnt expect an adult book to be in a middle school, right?


----------



## jreeves

Chris said:


> Privacy reasons at work.



So he can spam....and maybe someone will take it serious.


----------



## DiveCon

jreeves said:


> Oh so that's the reason the Democrats were up in arms when Bush fired all of his...I see


 OH SNAP!!!!


----------



## DiveCon

jreeves said:


> So he can spam....and maybe someone will take it serious.


seriously, he likely shouldnt be posting on here from work
most places tend to frown on that sort of thing


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> a begining point for negotiations
> it happens a lot to staret out with an outragious requests, to have somewhere to go in the process without getting less than what you REALLY wanted
> this is a well known tactic



Negotiations with the librarian?  What were they negotiating?


----------



## Modbert

Article 15 said:


> Negotiations with the librarian?  What were they negotiating?



Perhaps moving the Bible or something like that into a better place in the library or something.

She'd probably want to ban any books on Global Warming, Anti-Religion,etc. That's if she wants to ban books I'm saying.

Though I think we can all agree if there is one book that should be banned, it's the turner diaries.


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> it would depend on what the book was and thye age of the group that were able to access them
> 
> please tell me you wouldnt expect an adult book to be in a middle school, right?



Oh wait ... I see what you are gettin' at now.  You are arguing that she was doing it in the best interest of the children.


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> Negotiations with the librarian?  What were they negotiating?


that hasnt been shown yet
and the librarian herself hasnt said anything
just this other woman that was a political opponant of Palins with an ax to grind
this is why these charges are so STUPID


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> Oh wait ... I see what you are gettin' at now. You are arguing that she was doing it in the best interest of the children.


nice way to avoid my actual question

your question was not a specific question it was general, thus my response was also general


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> that hasnt been shown yet
> and the librarian herself hasnt said anything
> just this other woman that was a political opponant of Palins with an ax to grind
> this is why these charges are so STUPID



So we don't know the truth then ...


----------



## Modbert

Article 15 said:


> Oh wait ... I see what you are gettin' at now.  You are arguing that she was doing it in the best interest of the children.



"For the record, prejudices can kill and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own  for the children, and the children yet unborn."

- Rod Sterling [Creator of the The Twilight Zone.]

Won't somebody think of the children!




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niQ73ZlDxuI]YouTube - George Carlin - Children[/ame]

George Carlin is my hero.


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> So we don't know the truth then ...


we DO know that Palin never actually tried to ban ANY book, this woman has admitted that
so that blows "chris" theory out of the water and makes him look like the moron he is


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> nice way to avoid my actual question
> 
> your question was not a specific question it was general, thus my response was also general



Fair 'nuff.

To answer your question, I say it's a case by case basis. 

For instance, if The Catcher in the Rye on a 5th grade reading list I could understand taking it off _that_ list.  But at the same time i would be against "banning" it from the school system.


----------



## Modbert

Article 15 said:


> Fair 'nuff.
> 
> To answer your question, I say it's a case by case basis.
> 
> For instance, if The Catcher in the Rye on a 5th grade reading list I could understand taking it off _that_ list.  But at the same time i would be against "banning" it from the school system.



Not only that but they wouldn't understand the significance or value of it.

Personally, I think Catcher in the Rye should be a requirement on any high school list of books to cover in the school year.


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> Fair 'nuff.
> 
> To answer your question, I say it's a case by case basis.
> 
> For instance, if The Catcher in the Rye on a 5th grade reading list I could understand taking it off _that_ list.  But at the same time i would be against "banning" it from the school system.


same here


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Not only that but they wouldn't understand the significance or value of it.
> 
> Personally, I think Catcher in the Rye should be a requirement on any high school list of books to cover in the school year.


another one i can agree with


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> another one i can agree with



As a high school student over the past four years, I can tell you I've read some pretty BS books.

It's always more british lit, and 1600's.

I think a couple other books that all high school students should be required to read or at the very least added to a list that should be chosen from:

1984 - George Orwell

Animal Farm - George Orwell (though some do have this already)

Catcher in the Rye - J.D Salinger (same with this one)

Fahrenheit 451 - Ray Bradbury

To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee

Lord of the Flies - William Golding (some schools have this)

Lolita - Vladmir Nabokov

Catch 22 - Joseph Heller

It - Stephen King

The Green Mile - Stephen King

A Clockwork Orange - Anthony Burgess

And I thought the Great Gatsby was a great book. That's something more for college though as I know most of the kids in my English class (and this was the relatively smart class) didn't understand several parts of the book.


----------



## Article 15

I'd put Harrison Bergeron on any high school's required reading list.


----------



## Modbert

Article 15 said:


> I'd put Harrison Bergeron on any high school's required reading list.



Harrison Bergeron! I haven't read that in so long.

I would surely add that to the list.


----------



## editec

High school reading list?

Don't forget _The Scarlet Letter_


----------



## Modbert

editec said:


> High school reading list?
> 
> Don't forget _The Scarlet Letter_



I read that book last year. Honestly, I thought it was a fine book but it has some problems with relating and staying relevant for today.

I thought the whole idea of The Scarlet Letter and concept was interesting though.

I also found the ending lacking.

I love to read books, and I try to read over 50+ a year. (Read around 70 or so last year) and If I were going to pick a High School Reading List I'd also try to focus on books that teenagers can relate to or least seems relevant.


----------



## strollingbones

DiveCon said:


> sorry kirk, thats a fail
> asking about the procedure is not actually wanting to ban books



o i beg to disagree, why ask about the procedure then?  If you ask professionals the way to do something...it does show a clear intent.
I do not trust book banners...there is no negoiciation to this...its very simple to me....no book banning ...period....of any kind ...for any reason.....i dont care if we got 2 mommies 2 daddies....or seil heil or what the hell aryans read nows...i do not support banning any of it.  

we have seen the results of this type of actions before.  I know we know what spines are for this time,....no book banning of any type.


----------



## DiveCon

strollingbones said:


> o i beg to disagree, why ask about the procedure then?  If you ask professionals the way to do something...it does show a clear intent.
> I do not trust book banners...there is no negoiciation to this...its very simple to me....no book banning ...period....of any kind ...for any reason.....i dont care if we got 2 mommies 2 daddies....or seil heil or what the hell aryans read nows...i do not support banning any of it.
> 
> we have seen the results of this type of actions before.  I know we know what spines are for this time,....no book banning of any type.


did you not read the rest of the thread before posting that?
since i already COVERED that


----------



## Chris

strollingbones said:


> o i beg to disagree, why ask about the procedure then?  If you ask professionals the way to do something...it does show a clear intent.
> I do not trust book banners...there is no negoiciation to this...its very simple to me....no book banning ...period....of any kind ...for any reason.....i dont care if we got 2 mommies 2 daddies....or seil heil or what the hell aryans read nows...i do not support banning any of it.
> 
> we have seen the results of this type of actions before.  I know we know what spines are for this time,....no book banning of any type.



Amen, brother.


----------



## Glori.B

strollingbones said:


> o i beg to disagree, why ask about the procedure then?  If you ask professionals the way to do something...it does show a clear intent.
> I do not trust book banners...




maybe she wanted to know how to respond to any inquiries by the fringe elements of her constituency...?  how else is she supposed to know about the library procedures of alaska if she doesn't inquire about them when she first enters the governor's office?  the fact is she didn't actually remove any books from the library or even say that she intended to...i haven't read anything to convince me that sarah palin has the political agenda of fanatical book banning.


----------



## Chris

Glori.B said:


> maybe she wanted to know how to respond to any inquiries by the fringe elements of her constituency...?  how else is she supposed to know about the library procedures of alaska if she doesn't inquire about them when she first enters the governor's office?  the fact is she didn't actually remove any books from the library or even say that she intended to...i haven't read anything to convince me that sarah palin has the political agenda of fanatical book banning.



She fired the librarian who stood up to her, but then backed off when the community came to the librarian's defense. The fact that she asked about banning books *three times *is all I need to know. She is not someone who should be vice president.


----------



## Glori.B

Chris said:


> She fired the librarian who stood up to her, but then backed off when the community came to the librarian's defense. The fact that she asked about banning books *three times *is all I need to know. She is not someone who should be vice president.



got a link for those "facts" ?


----------



## Chris

Glori.B said:


> got a link for those "facts" ?



Oh, for Christ's sake, read the first part of this thread.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> Oh, for Christ's sake, read the first part of this thread.


the problem there is your links never actually BACK your position
because no where does it say she ever fired her


----------



## Glori.B

Chris said:


> Oh, for Christ's sake, read the first part of this thread.



i did already.   

i think you're trying scare people into thinking sarah plain has an agenda of banning books and i think that's sad.


----------



## bush lover

The reason I support Gov. Palin for President is because she will continue the successful policies of our current President Bush. I wish he could run again but the Democrat Party put in term limits. Gov. Palin also opposes MASTURBATION as A SIN against God. She will carry on our President's high moral values, even if Senator McCain's spouse makes a living from selling alcohol.


----------



## DiveCon

bush lover said:


> The reason I support Gov. Palin for President is because she will continue the successful policies of our current President Bush. I wish he could run again but the Democrat Party put in term limits. Gov. Palin also opposes MASTURBATION as A SIN against God. She will carry on our President's high moral values, even if Senator McCain's spouse makes a living from selling alcohol.


you realize, no one believes your shtick


----------



## glockmail

DiveCon said:


> you realize, no one believes your shtick


 It is funny though.


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> the problem there is your links never actually BACK your position
> because no where does it say she ever fired her



Do you really have to *lie* about what I said? I said she *tried* to fire her, but the public supported the librarian, and Palin backed off.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> *She fired the librarian who stood up to her*, but then backed off when the community came to the librarian's defense. The fact that she asked about banning books *three times *is all I need to know. She is not someone who should be vice president.


 



Chris said:


> Do you really have to *lie* about what I said? I said she *tried* to fire her, but the public supported the librarian, and Palin backed off.


 who's lying?


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> who's lying?



You are.

"Four days before the exchange at the City Council, Emmons got a letter from Palin asking for her resignation."

I don't know about you, but when my boss asks for my resignation, I've been fired.

Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> You are.
> 
> "Four days before the exchange at the City Council, Emmons got a letter from Palin asking for her resignation."
> 
> I don't know about you, but when my boss asks for my resignation, I've been fired.
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


your credibility is shot
you said she fired them, she DIDNT
then you claim you never said that she fired them, you did.
you are a liar and i quoted your post where you said it

now you continue to lie by claiming exactly what you earlier claimed you didnt say

now, here is the next paragraph that totally shows what a complete MORON and LIAR you are



> Palin told the Daily News back then the letters were just a test of loyalty as she took on the mayor&#8217;s job, which she&#8217;d won from three-term mayor John Stein in a hard-fought election. Stein had hired many of the department heads. Both Emmons and Stambaugh had publicly supported him against Palin.


----------



## ignatov

DiamondDave said:


> I fought with the school system about having ... books with the f-bomb all over the place in them....



Catcher in the Rye?


----------



## frazzledgear

Chris said:


> When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to have books banned. When the librarian wouldn't go along, she tried to have her fired....
> 
> Library Garden: Banned Books



Wrong.  In fact she INQUIRED of the librarian if it were possible to remove books city residents considered offensive.  She was told it was not possible -and that was the end of it.  She had no list of books demanding they be removed -she asked the librarian a question only.  She did threaten to fire the librarian at a later date -but it was over an administrative issue and not about books.

How about I give you a site that has an ever growing list of the smears constantly going around about Palin -and can tell you whether there is any basis to them and whether they are true or not.  They are numbered.  So in the future if you want to help spread a smear about her, you can just head up a up a new thread entitled "Rumor Number 36" or whatever, ok?

Palin Rumors | Explorations


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> your credibility is shot
> you said she fired them, she DIDNT
> then you claim you never said that she fired them, you did.
> you are a liar and i quoted your post where you said it
> 
> now you continue to lie by claiming exactly what you earlier claimed you didnt say
> 
> now, here is the next paragraph that totally shows what a complete MORON and LIAR you are



Insults are not convincing arguments.

We will just have to disagree.

Palin asked the librarian three times about banning books, and then asked for her resignation when she did not go along. The only reason she was not fired is because of outrage from the community.


----------



## Luissa

jsanders said:


> So, Palin fired people who were not in favor of her reform? That's how reform works. It's the same reason she dismissed Commissioner Monegan. If you aren't doing your job, you lose it. Sarah obviously felt these people were not performing their jobs to her standards.
> 
> As for banning books, yeah, that's a bit crazy. But, as you see, it didn't happen.


Why do you say it didn't happen because that is what you believe and what Palin told you. Another reason why she fired the Police Chief is because he wanted to close the bars at 2am and she wanted to keep them open . Guess you she got money for during her campaign, the bar owners. Talk about reform. I have a friend from Palin's hometown and she said she would never vote for her. That should tell you something!


----------



## Chris

frazzledgear said:


> Wrong.  In fact she INQUIRED of the librarian if it were possible to remove books city residents considered offensive.  She was told it was not possible -and that was the end of it.  She had no list of books demanding they be removed -she asked the librarian a question only.  She did threaten to fire the librarian at a later date -but it was over an administrative issue and not about books.
> 
> How about I give you a site that has an ever growing list of the smears constantly going around about Palin -and can tell you whether there is any basis to them and whether they are true or not.  They are numbered.  So in the future if you want to help spread a smear about her, you can just head up a up a new thread entitled "Rumor Number 36" or whatever, ok?
> 
> Palin Rumors | Explorations



Palin asked the librarian three times about banning books and when the librarian stood up to her, Palin asked for her resignation. The only reason the librarian was not fired was because of outrage from the community.


----------



## Glori.B

Chris said:


> She fired the librarian who stood up to her





Chris said:


> Do you really have to *lie* about what I said? I said she *tried* to fire her




i know you really meeean well, kirk...


----------



## Chris

Glori.B said:


> i know you really meeean well, kirk...



Palin asked the librarian three times about banning books and when the librarian stood up to her, Palin asked for her resignation. The only reason the librarian was not fired was because of outrage from the community.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> Palin asked the librarian three times about banning books and when the librarian stood up to her, Palin asked for her resignation. The only reason the librarian was not fired was because of outrage from the community.


you have been measured, and you come up SHORT


----------



## Glori.B

Chris said:


> Palin asked the librarian three times about banning books and when the librarian stood up to her, Palin asked for her resignation. The only reason the librarian was not fired was because of outrage from the community.



i read it was twice..once to the librarian as a matter of procedure only, and then again to an administrator just to reiterate for the record with another witness.


----------



## Chris

Glori.B said:


> i read it was twice..once to the librarian as a matter of procedure only, and then again to an administrator just to reiterate for the record with another witness.



In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.

Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


so?
asking for the procedure to do so, and actually doing it are TWO different things
now stop lying


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> so?
> asking for the procedure to do so, and actually doing it are TWO different things
> now stop lying



Thanks for the attacks.

That way I know I'm on the right track.


----------



## Anguille

Chris said:


> In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com



Thanks for the link.
"WASILLA -- Back in 1996, when she first became mayor, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian if she would be all right with censoring library books should she be asked to do so.

According to news coverage at the time, the librarian said she would definitely not be all right with it. A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The censorship issue was not mentioned as a reason for the firing. The letter just said the new mayor felt Emmons didnt fully support her and had to go.

Emmons had been city librarian for seven years and was well liked. After a wave of public support for her, Palin relented and let Emmons keep her job."


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> Thanks for the link.
> "WASILLA -- Back in 1996, when she first became mayor, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian if she would be all right with censoring library books should she be asked to do so.
> 
> According to news coverage at the time, the librarian said she would definitely not be all right with it. A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The censorship issue was not mentioned as a reason for the firing. The letter just said the new mayor felt Emmons didnt fully support her and had to go.
> 
> Emmons had been city librarian for seven years and was well liked. After a wave of public support for her, Palin relented and let Emmons keep her job."


you realize that if you read the story, this is all coming from a second hand political opponant to Palin

and with all the lies "chris" has been spewing on here, he is a liar and not worthy of your support


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> you realize that if you read the story, this is all coming from a second hand political opponant to Palin
> 
> and with all the lies "chris" has been spewing on here, he is a liar and not worthy of your support



No, actually it comes from a conservative newspaper, the Boston Herald, which is quoting the hometown paper, The Frontiersman. Keep trying though.


----------



## Anguille

DiveCon said:


> you realize that if you read the story, this is all coming from a second hand political opponant to Palin
> 
> and with all the lies "chris" has been spewing on here, he is a liar and not worthy of your support



The Boston Herald, while not a terribly intellectual newspaper, is, however, a reliable one.


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> The Boston Herald, while not a terribly intellectual newspaper, is, however, a reliable one.


um, while its not as slanted as the globe, most people up here refer to it as bird cage liner


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> No, actually it comes from a conservative newspaper, the Boston Herald, which is quoting the hometown paper, The Frontiersman. Keep trying though.


see, this is what shows how moronic you are
READ the damned story, the source for the original story uses KilKenny(a political opponent of Palin's) not the actual librarian


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> see, this is what shows how moronic you are
> READ the damned story, the source for the original story uses KilKenny(a political opponent of Palin's) not the actual librarian



Thanks for making this fun....

"In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."

"Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."

Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> Thanks for making this fun....
> 
> "In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."
> 
> "Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


you are a fucking moron

thats NOT what was being discussed, this is why you are a waste of time

that part is ALL they have and its from a news report 12 years ago
the one that was doing the talking in the story after that TINY LITTLE segment is Kilkenny


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> you are a fucking moron
> 
> thats NOT what was being discussed, this is why you are a waste of time
> 
> that part is ALL they have and its from a news report 12 years ago
> the one that was doing the talking in the story after that TINY LITTLE segment is Kilkenny



In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."

"Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15


----------



## frazzledgear

Chris said:


> Insults are not convincing arguments.
> 
> We will just have to disagree.
> 
> Palin asked the librarian three times about banning books, and then asked for her resignation when she did not go along. The only reason she was not fired is because of outrage from the community.



Might want to check that rumor site above.  She had no list of books she wanted banned, she did not repeatedly badger the librarian about removing books SHE somehow found offensive.  She asked the librarian ONE time only if it were possible to remove books city residents found offensive - and probably as a result of a question posed to her by someone else and not on her own behalf since the question wasn't about removing books SHE personally found offensive.  On some of the rumor mills, they are stating that she confronted the librarian with a long list of books she was DEMANDING be removed -including books that weren't published until after she had left that office. 

But hey, since when did facts ever get in the way of a good smear campaign, right?


----------



## Chris

frazzledgear said:


> Might want to check that rumor site above.  She had no list of books she wanted banned, she did not repeatedly badger the librarian about removing books SHE somehow found offensive.  She asked the librarian ONE time only if it were possible to remove books city residents found offensive - and probably as a result of a question posed to her by someone else and not on her own behalf since the question wasn't about removing books SHE personally found offensive.  On some of the rumor mills, they are stating that she confronted the librarian with a long list of books she was DEMANDING be removed -including books that weren't published until after she had left that office.
> 
> But hey, since when did facts ever get in the way of a good smear campaign, right?



"In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."

"Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> "In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."
> 
> "Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


only a moron keep posting the same debunked nonsense over and over


----------



## Chris

DiveCon said:


> only a moron keep posting the same debunked nonsense over and over



"In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."

"Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> "In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."
> 
> "Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


thank you for admitting that you are a moron, admitting it is the first step to recovery


----------



## frazzledgear

Chris said:


> In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."
> 
> "Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com



Yeah, yeah and the San Fransisco newspaper reported that Palin actually fired the librarian for refusing to remove the "list" of books.  

Just because you can quote some newspaper relying solely on someone with a grudge against the woman -still doesn't make it "fact", sorry.  The San Fran paper got it wrong too.  Maybe you guys quoting all these newspaper articles missed it -but all those newspaper printing up all these rumors as if "fact" -ended up printing retractions to every one of them.  Granted some were pretty darn slow about it and waited 3-4 days after printing up a rumor smear -but they retracted it. 

And maybe they had to because the person who made this accusation was Ann Kinney, a Democrat who claims she attended every single City council meeting.  (She didn't sit on the council and she isn't the librarian in question either.)  Kinney CLAIMED that Palin brought up the issue of banning books from the public library that she (Palin) thought were objectionable at one city council meeting.  Problem with this story was the fact that every city council member said it never happened and that it was never brought up at any City Council meeting by anyone, including Palin.  And the librarian herself said Palin had asked her ONE TIME if it was possible to remove books city residents (not herself) found objectionable and was told no it wasn't.  And the librarian says she never mentioned it again.  The threat to fire the librarian was with regard to an unrelated issue at a later date.

Numerous newspaper have had to retract this story -probably because it didn't happen the way they wrote it up in the first place.  And Ann Kinney nothing but a partisan slob trying to start some crap.  Too bad she wasn't able to bribe anyone to back it up though, huh?   Not even any other Democrat on that city council.


----------



## jschuck12001

Chris said:


> When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to have books banned. When the librarian wouldn't go along, she tried to have her fired....
> 
> Library Garden: Banned Books



Let me guess which books they were

1. Economics 101
2. Birth Control and Women


I bet she didnt like these 2 books very much.


----------



## Chris

jschuck12001 said:


> Let me guess which books they were
> 
> 1. Economics 101
> 2. Birth Control and Women
> 
> 
> I bet she didnt like these 2 books very much.



Good one!


----------



## frazzledgear

Anguille said:


> The Boston Herald, while not a terribly intellectual newspaper, is, however, a reliable one.



Yeah, must be why the Boston Herald ran an apology on their front page after a reporter accused the Patriots of illegally taping the St. Louis Rams run through right before the Super Bowl a few years ago.  They would never report a rumor as a real story, right?  

The person who FIRST spread this particular Palin smear is a commentator on the blog of Jessamyn West who used the name "Andrew Aucoin".  West has kept the comment up and points out in her main post that there appears to be no truth to the claim made by this commentator, and no further documentation or support for this has turned up.

It was after THAT post on this blog that Newsweek printed its own slightly different versions of this.  Newsweek ran with a story in which former Wasilla mayor Stein claimed that Palin "continued to inject her personal religious beliefs" into her policy -and made the claim that Palin had asked the librarian how to go about banning books for inappropriate language.  And how the librarian was AGHAST.  Naturally Newsweek decided to use that claim after noting the librarian could not be reached for comment.  (She was later available though and claims Palin only inquired if it were possible to remove any books if city residents found them objectionable and was told "no" and she never mentioned it again.)  Newsweek borrowed from Time which had mentioned in a different article about people Palin had gotten rid of or replaced, that Palin had once threatened to fire the librarian.  Instead of using the council minutes which would have shown it was over an administrative issue -Newsweek repeated Time's claim the threat was made to the librarian for not giving Palin her "full support".  The way it was written, Newsweek was strongly implying that this "full support" was over not banning books.  In reality, it was over an administrative issue and Palin had asked the librarian for her full support in getting that administrative issue under control -or else she might need to find another job.  

Ann Kinney, a Democrat but not a city council member -turned up AFTER the Newsweek story claiming she had attended every single city council meeting and that Palin had once brought up the subject of banning books at the public library at one of those meetings -although no one has been able to pin her down about when that was.  But no council minutes backs this up and no council member will back up Kinney on this one -not even the Democrat members.  From there this story went wild, especially online with people adding all sorts of "extras" of their own.  And other newspapers started repeating the various versions they found online so all sorts of versions ended up in newspapers too.  Some (like the San Fran paper) claimed Palin HAD fired the librarian.  Some claimed that Palin in fact got certain books banned.  And the best yet -some online sites claim to have the list of books Palin wanted banned and put that "list" up on their site.  The original "list" that Palin supposedly presented to the librarian happens to be TITLE FOR TITLE straight off the list of "Books Banned At One Time or Another in the U.S."   But further modifications have since been added to that list  -including several books that weren't even published until after Palin was no longer mayor.    

And interesting note here that Newsweek seemed to have overlooked when printing their story.  Stein isn't just any old former mayor of Wasilla.  Stein is the three-term Democrat incumbent that Palin handily beat when she ran for election and got him thrown out of office.  So does he have a grudge here?  LOL  Obama's online official campaign site is doing their part to keep this smear alive as well.

THIS is how to get a smear campaign going, how to inject some "juice" to get people up in arms over a non-existent issue, how to make a candidate appear to be a foaming-at-the-mouth whacko when none of it even exists at all.  And those intent on doing it, will not be stopped by anything silly like "facts".  Instead they say "we just have to agree to disagree" about whether it happened.  No I don't have to.  This smear mongering at its worst.


----------



## DiveCon

frazzledgear said:


> Yeah, must be why the Boston Herald ran an apology on their front page after a reporter accused the Patriots of illegally taping the St. Louis Rams run through right before the Super Bowl a few years ago.  They would never report a rumor as a real story, right?
> 
> The person who FIRST spread this particular Palin smear is a commentator on the blog of Jessamyn West who used the name "Andrew Aucoin".  West has kept the comment up and points out in her main post that there appears to be no truth to the claim made by this commentator, and no further documentation or support for this has turned up.
> 
> It was after THAT post on this blog that Newsweek printed its own slightly different versions of this.  Newsweek ran with a story in which former Wasilla mayor Stein claimed that Palin "continued to inject her personal religious beliefs" into her policy -and made the claim that Palin had asked the librarian how to go about banning books for inappropriate language.  And how the librarian was AGHAST.  Naturally Newsweek decided to use that claim after noting the librarian could not be reached for comment.  (She was later available though and claims Palin only inquired if it were possible to remove any books if city residents found them objectionable and was told "no" and she never mentioned it again.)  Newsweek borrowed from Time which had mentioned in a different article about people Palin had gotten rid of or replaced, that Palin had once threatened to fire the librarian.  Instead of using the council minutes which would have shown it was over an administrative issue -Newsweek repeated Time's claim the threat was made to the librarian for not giving Palin her "full support".  The way it was written, Newsweek was strongly implying that this "full support" was over not banning books.  In reality, it was over an administrative issue and Palin had asked the librarian for her full support in getting that administrative issue under control -or else she might need to find another job.
> 
> Ann Kinney, a Democrat but not a city council member -turned up AFTER the Newsweek story claiming she had attended every single city council meeting and that Palin had once brought up the subject of banning books at the public library at one of those meetings -although no one has been able to pin her down about when that was.  But no council minutes backs this up and no council member will back up Kinney on this one -not even the Democrat members.  From there this story went wild, especially online with people adding all sorts of "extras" of their own.  And other newspapers started repeating the various versions they found online so all sorts of versions ended up in newspapers too.  Some (like the San Fran paper) claimed Palin HAD fired the librarian.  Some claimed that Palin in fact got certain books banned.  And the best yet -some online sites claim to have the list of books Palin wanted banned and put that "list" up on their site.  The original "list" that Palin supposedly presented to the librarian happens to be TITLE FOR TITLE straight off the list of "Books Banned At One Time or Another in the U.S."   But further modifications have since been added to that list  -including several books that weren't even published until after Palin was no longer mayor.
> 
> And interesting note here that Newsweek seemed to have overlooked when printing their story.  Stein isn't just any old former mayor of Wasilla.  Stein is the three-term Democrat incumbent that Palin handily beat when she ran for election and got him thrown out of office.  So does he have a grudge here?  LOL  Obama's online official campaign site is doing their part to keep this smear alive as well.
> 
> THIS is how to get a smear campaign going, how to inject some "juice" to get people up in arms over a non-existent issue, how to make a candidate appear to be a foaming-at-the-mouth whacko when none of it even exists at all.  And those intent on doing it, will not be stopped by anything silly like "facts".  Instead they say "we just have to agree to disagree" about whether it happened.  No I don't have to.  This smear mongering at its worst.


this wont stop chris, he will just continue to post this lie over and over
same for all the other lies he keeps posting


----------



## frazzledgear

Chris said:


> "In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."
> 
> "Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com




Did you happen to note how many different versions there are of this just online?  Not even counting the many different versions that have appeared in print?  And you sit there and see all those different versions and tell yourself "yup, yup" or what?  LOL  You just happened to pick out your favorite version is all.

Since Emmons has actually been unavailable since this all started -isn't it amazing that someone keeps embellishing the original story, constantly adding ever more outrageous details?  The original story simply said that Palin had ONCE asked Emmons whether it was possible to remove books city residents might object to and was told no.  That was the 4 or 5 versions ago now.  Now Emmons supposedly went to the city's NEWSPAPER and claimed she was being REPEATEDLY pressured to ban books and gave her VOW to the people of that city that she would fight and resist any censorship?  Get real.  If that had actually happened, that newspaper would have run with that story RIGHT THEN and be able to back up that silly claim today with a filed article about it.  But it hasn't -and it won't.

Any article claiming to be quoting Emmons directly is a lie -because she isn't and hasn't given any interviews.  She's unavailable and on vacation -and at this point it wouldn't surprise me if she suddenly turns up dead so she can't ever contradict any of this bs either.  In all the other articles Emmons is only being quoted by one of two Democrats and is never directly quoted -because she isn't available, remember?  One of whom has a very clear agenda from the start and the other a housewife who recently made her own agenda crystal clear.  She admits she despises Palin.  But we can discount Kilkinney or Kinney or whatever version of her name an article uses.  Kinney claimed that Palin brought up banning books at a council meeting and Kinney had been present at that council meeting.  But council minutes are open to the public, they have been reviewed - and it just never happened.  And no council member will back up this story.  So Kinney is just a liar.  And originally she NEVER said Emmons told her a darn thing -so any story where she claims otherwise NOW is bs.

The other Democrat always quoting Emmons about what Emmons supposedly told him  - is former mayor Stein.  The three term Democrat Palin got thrown out of office when she beat him in a landslide.  Gee, no grudge there, right?   No other person in ANY version of this story is EVER quoted as saying Emmons told them a darn thing about any of it.  But how can that be when according to your quotes above this was a RAGING issue in Wasilla, the entire town not only knew about it but DEMANDED that Emmons keep her job and Emmons valiantly vowed to the people of Wasilla that she would fight against this attempt at censorship!  Too funny.  Almost looking forward to further embellishments because the more carried away this story gets -the more obvious its total crap.    

Just a couple of other points. 

1.  No books were removed from the Wasilla public library according to June Pinnell-Stephens, chairwoman of the Alaska Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee -chairwoman since 1984.  

2.  Pinnell-Stephens also said she never had any communication with Emmons about any pressure or requests to have books removed from the Wasilla library by ANY government official.  Since Emmons was director of the Alaska Library Association at that time, then Pinnell-Stephens is the person who would have been contacted if Emmons had either felt she was being pressured by a government official to have books removed from a public library -or believed her job was at risk or being threatened for refusing to do so.  Oh sure, Emmons goes to a newspaper that inexplicably does not back that up but doesn't go to Pinnell-Stephens who would actually be her next step and could actually do something about it?  Give me a break.

3.  As for the letter Emmons received -she got the same one that Police Chief Stambaugh, Public Works Director Jack Felton and Finance Director Duane Dvorak all got as well and at the very same time.  Every director/department head received a request for their resignation letter right after she took office -which is not at all unusual whenever a new government executive takes office since they have the right to replace these department heads with people of their choice.   Every President does it too and doesn't keep the people the last guy appointed.  Palin said it was a loyalty test since two of those directors had openly campaigned for her opponent.  Another director had his job entirely eliminated by Palin so she didn't ask for his resignation -just informed him his position no longer existed.  She requested resignation letters from them all again just two months later and both times she kept on Emmons.  And not by any demand from the townspeople.  Emmons finally retired without being asked two months after Palin started her second term.

If you lack critical thinking skills -then I can't help you with this one.  But the fact that so many wildly different versions of this bs story exist, that they keep getting more and more exaggerated about what Emmons supposedly told someone else she said and did -but has given NO interview to ANY media or news source about it herself - is what tipped me off there was something wrong here in the first place.  It should have for you too.  The embellishments are being added for a reason -can you figure out what it is?  I suspect the only way you would even be suspicious of this fairytale and why ever more outrageous "details" keep being added would be if this had been about Biden or Obama instead of Palin.  I'm assuming you are just too partisan to be able to question this crap and WANT to believe it and will take any version that crosses your path.  Which is actually a compliment because the only other option is you are one gullible and dumb bubba.


----------



## Chris

"In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose."

"Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship."

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15


----------



## glockmail

Chris said:


> Good one!


 Why don't you two get a room?


----------



## Chris

glockmail said:


> Why don't you two get a room?



Because you and Ninja got there ahead of us!


----------



## glockmail

Chris said:


> Because you and Ninja got there ahead of us!


 Actually isn't it the LIBERALS  like you who promote and participate in that shit?


----------



## Anguille

frazzledgear said:


> Did you happen to note how many different versions there are of this just online?  Not even counting the many different versions that have appeared in print?  And you sit there and see all those different versions and tell yourself "yup, yup" or what?  LOL  You just happened to pick out your favorite version is all.
> 
> Since Emmons has actually been unavailable since this all started -isn't it amazing that someone keeps embellishing the original story, constantly adding ever more outrageous details?  The original story simply said that Palin had ONCE asked Emmons whether it was possible to remove books city residents might object to and was told no.  That was the 4 or 5 versions ago now.  Now Emmons supposedly went to the city's NEWSPAPER and claimed she was being REPEATEDLY pressured to ban books and gave her VOW to the people of that city that she would fight and resist any censorship?  Get real.  If that had actually happened, that newspaper would have run with that story RIGHT THEN and be able to back up that silly claim today with a filed article about it.  But it hasn't -and it won't.
> 
> Any article claiming to be quoting Emmons directly is a lie -because she isn't and hasn't given any interviews.  She's unavailable and on vacation -and at this point it wouldn't surprise me if she suddenly turns up dead so she can't ever contradict any of this bs either.  In all the other articles Emmons is only being quoted by one of two Democrats and is never directly quoted -because she isn't available, remember?  One of whom has a very clear agenda from the start and the other a housewife who recently made her own agenda crystal clear.  She admits she despises Palin.  But we can discount Kilkinney or Kinney or whatever version of her name an article uses.  Kinney claimed that Palin brought up banning books at a council meeting and Kinney had been present at that council meeting.  But council minutes are open to the public, they have been reviewed - and it just never happened.  And no council member will back up this story.  So Kinney is just a liar.  And originally she NEVER said Emmons told her a darn thing -so any story where she claims otherwise NOW is bs.
> 
> The other Democrat always quoting Emmons about what Emmons supposedly told him  - is former mayor Stein.  The three term Democrat Palin got thrown out of office when she beat him in a landslide.  Gee, no grudge there, right?   No other person in ANY version of this story is EVER quoted as saying Emmons told them a darn thing about any of it.  But how can that be when according to your quotes above this was a RAGING issue in Wasilla, the entire town not only knew about it but DEMANDED that Emmons keep her job and Emmons valiantly vowed to the people of Wasilla that she would fight against this attempt at censorship!  Too funny.  Almost looking forward to further embellishments because the more carried away this story gets -the more obvious its total crap.
> 
> Just a couple of other points.
> 
> 1.  No books were removed from the Wasilla public library according to June Pinnell-Stephens, chairwoman of the Alaska Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee -chairwoman since 1984.
> 
> 2.  Pinnell-Stephens also said she never had any communication with Emmons about any pressure or requests to have books removed from the Wasilla library by ANY government official.  Since Emmons was director of the Alaska Library Association at that time, then Pinnell-Stephens is the person who would have been contacted if Emmons had either felt she was being pressured by a government official to have books removed from a public library -or believed her job was at risk or being threatened for refusing to do so.  Oh sure, Emmons goes to a newspaper that inexplicably does not back that up but doesn't go to Pinnell-Stephens who would actually be her next step and could actually do something about it?  Give me a break.
> 
> 3.  As for the letter Emmons received -she got the same one that Police Chief Stambaugh, Public Works Director Jack Felton and Finance Director Duane Dvorak all got as well and at the very same time.  Every director/department head received a request for their resignation letter right after she took office -which is not at all unusual whenever a new government executive takes office since they have the right to replace these department heads with people of their choice.   Every President does it too and doesn't keep the people the last guy appointed.  Palin said it was a loyalty test since two of those directors had openly campaigned for her opponent.  Another director had his job entirely eliminated by Palin so she didn't ask for his resignation -just informed him his position no longer existed.  She requested resignation letters from them all again just two months later and both times she kept on Emmons.  And not by any demand from the townspeople.  Emmons finally retired without being asked two months after Palin started her second term.
> 
> If you lack critical thinking skills -then I can't help you with this one.  But the fact that so many wildly different versions of this bs story exist, that they keep getting more and more exaggerated about what Emmons supposedly told someone else she said and did -but has given NO interview to ANY media or news source about it herself - is what tipped me off there was something wrong here in the first place.  It should have for you too.  The embellishments are being added for a reason -can you figure out what it is?  I suspect the only way you would even be suspicious of this fairytale and why ever more outrageous "details" keep being added would be if this had been about Biden or Obama instead of Palin.  I'm assuming you are just too partisan to be able to question this crap and WANT to believe it and will take any version that crosses your path.  Which is actually a compliment because the only other option is you are one gullible and dumb bubba.



What, are you writing a novel?

Pssst  you've still got a bit of foam on your mouth.


----------



## Chris

glockmail said:


> Actually isn't it the LIBERALS  like you who promote and participate in that shit?



Tell that to Ed Schrock, Jeff Gannon, and Larry Craig.


----------



## glockmail

Chris said:


> Tell that to Ed Schrock, Jeff Gannon, and Larry Craig.


 They *promote *that shit?


----------



## strollingbones

so many rumor and half truths....

book banning...

being muslim...not being....mispoken words....hammered to death...beaten like the proverbial dead horse.


----------



## Anguille

strollingbones said:


> so many rumor and half truths....
> 
> book banning...
> 
> being muslim...not being....mispoken words....hammered to death...beaten like the proverbial dead horse.


----------



## Alison 451

Chris said:


> When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she tried to have books banned. When the librarian wouldn't go along, she tried to have her fired....



I heard about this.  Thank you for posting the article.  

I think if the religious right wingers have their way, this type of censorship could become a real issue.


----------



## Anguille

Alison 451 said:


> I heard about this.  Thank you for posting the article.
> 
> I think if the religious right wingers have their way, this type of censorship could become a real issue.



I agree. The mere fact that she inquired as to the procedure of how book banning is accomplished, is warning enough. That combined with her stance on other issues of personal freedoms.


----------



## Ravi

Anguille said:


> I agree. The mere fact that she inquired as to the procedure of how book banning is accomplished, is warning enough. That combined with her stance on other issues of personal freedoms.


Probably not that big of a deal. I understood she only wanted to ban a book on reproductive biology.


----------



## del

Anguille said:


> I agree. The mere fact that she inquired as to the procedure of how book banning is accomplished, is warning enough. That combined with her stance on other issues of personal freedoms.



this is what factcheck.org has to say, I found it interesting

FactCheck.org: Sliming Palin

especially this bit:
So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken &#8220;from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board&#8221;? I_*f 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 &#8220;Books banned at one time or another in the United States.&#8221; emphasis added


----------



## Anguille

del said:


> this is what factcheck.org has to say, I found it interesting
> 
> FactCheck.org: Sliming Palin
> 
> especially this bit:
> So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken &#8220;from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board&#8221;? I_*f 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 &#8220;Books banned at one time or another in the United States.&#8221; emphasis added



I don't think anyone one is refuting that she inquired as to the procedure for banning books. That she asked raises enough of a red flag for me.


----------



## del

Anguille said:


> I don't think anyone one is refuting that she inquired as to the procedure for banning books. That she asked raises enough of a red flag for me.



okay, it really doesn't bother me. Of course, I'm a Cossack.


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> I don't think anyone one is refuting that she inquired as to the procedure for banning books. That she asked raises enough of a red flag for me.


so, even though it is a proven lie, you will still keep pushing it, like that moron chris?


----------



## Alison 451

DiveCon said:


> so, even though it is a proven lie, you will still keep pushing it, like that moron chris?




Why did you just give me negative rep?


----------



## glockmail

Alison 451 said:


> Why did you just give me negative rep?


 My giess is for the cheerleading and lies. I'm thinking of it myself.


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> so, even though it is a proven lie, you will still keep pushing it, like that moron chris?


Has it been proven a lie that she asked? I thought that was actually established fact.


----------



## Alison 451

glockmail said:


> My giess is for the cheerleading and lies. I'm thinking of it myself.



It's okay I just gave it back to him.  

You're thinking of giving me negative rep too?

In my experience, people who go around spreading negativity are usually not worthwhile in the first place. 

Thinking for yourself is highly recommended.  

Maybe you could do better than DiverCon and actually articulate what was so offensive about what I actually posted?


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> Has it been proven a lie that she asked? I thought that was actually established fact.



she asked about the procedure; she never mentioned specific books as some have said.


----------



## Anguille

DiveCon said:


> so, even though it is a proven lie, you will still keep pushing it, like that moron chris?



Keep on neg repping me, D-Con, till you're blue in the face.
Doesn't matter to me nor does it alter what has been reported in reputable newspapers - that Palin made a request for information on the procedure for banning books in a public library.


----------



## glockmail

Alison 451 said:


> It's okay I just gave it back to him.
> 
> You're thinking of giving me negative rep too?
> 
> In my experience, people who go around spreading negativity are usually not worthwhile in the first place.
> 
> Thinking for yourself is highly recommended.
> 
> Maybe you could do better than DiverCon and actually articulate what was so offensive about what I actually posted?


All you've done so far is spout of liberal talking points, and brought no meat to the table.


----------



## Ravi

del said:


> she asked about the procedure; she never mentioned specific books as some have said.


That's what I thought. So why jump all over Angie for having that opinion? Not you, of course, but the one who did.


----------



## Anguille

Ravi said:


> That's what I thought. So why jump all over Angie for having that opinion? Not you, of course, but the one who did.



eel fevah?


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> That's what I thought. So why jump all over Angie for having that opinion? Not you, of course, but the one who did.


 
beats me. I barely understand why I do some things; I'm not even gonna guess about other people.


----------



## Ravi

Anguille said:


> eel fevah?


Don't feel bad, I got neg repped for my reproductive biology joke.


----------



## Ravi

del said:


> I barely understand why I do some things



Your posts certainly reflect that.


----------



## jillian

glockmail said:


> All you've done so far is spout of liberal talking points, and brought no meat to the table.



puleeze....


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> Your posts certainly reflect that.



i'm nothing if not an open book


----------



## del

Anguille said:


> eel fevah?



_Catch it!!_


----------



## jillian

del said:


> okay, it really doesn't bother me. Of course, I'm a Cossack.



It bothers the hell out of me. But then again, my grandfather was a bolshevik. 

das vedonya.


----------



## DiveCon

Alison 451 said:


> Why did you just give me negative rep?


because you agreed with a lie


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> because you agreed with a lie



So I suppose you would neg rep most of the Congress present who voted yes to invade Iraq on the basis that Iraq had WMDs?


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> Keep on neg repping me, D-Con, till you're blue in the face.
> Doesn't matter to me nor does it alter what has been reported in reputable newspapers - that Palin made a request for information on the procedure for banning books in a public library.


those "reputable" newspapers are rags
there is no such thing anymore
we have so few journalists anymore that i dont trust any of them
and factcheck.org just proved that


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> So I suppose you would neg rep most of the Congress present who voted yes to invade Iraq on the basis that Iraq had WMDs?


that wasnt a lie
it was bad intel
and the bad part was on the amount, we DID find smaller amounts and programs for producing
'inspite of what the morons in the media are willing to report'


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> because you agreed with a lie


Wow, thought control...right here at USMB!!!


----------



## jillian

DiveCon said:


> that wasnt a lie
> it was bad intel
> and the bad part was on the amount, we DID find smaller amounts and programs for producing
> 'inspite of what the morons in the media are willing to report'



when you intentionally present the bad intel...know it's bad intel... and continue to use the bad intel... 

well.. when does it become a lie?


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> that wasnt a lie
> it was bad intel
> and the bad part was on the amount, we DID find smaller amounts and programs for producing
> 'inspite of what the morons in the media are willing to report'



Smaller amounts and programs for producing are not Weapons of *MASS DESTRUCTION.*

WMDs are the type of weapons that could kill a large number of people at any moment.

Bad Intel = Lie, people following bad intel = Following the lie.


----------



## DiveCon

jillian said:


> when you intentionally present the bad intel...know it's bad intel... and continue to use the bad intel...
> 
> well.. when does it become a lie?


when you actually KNOW its bad intel, when they didnt know 
you libs are morons and continue to show it


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Smaller amounts and programs for producing are not Weapons of *MASS DESTRUCTION.*
> 
> WMDs are the type of weapons that could kill a large number of people at any moment.
> 
> Bad Intel = Lie, people following bad intel = Following the lie.


a lie is when you say something you KNOW to be untrue
at that time no one KNEW it wasnt


----------



## del

jillian said:


> It bothers the hell out of me. But then again, my grandfather was a bolshevik.
> 
> das vedonya.



spacebo, tovarich


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> a lie is when you say something you KNOW to be untrue
> at that time no one KNEW it wasnt



So if it was bad intel that was only followed.

Therefore the War in Iraq was a mistake..


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> So if it was bad intel that was only followed.
> 
> Therefore the War in Iraq was a mistake..


i could agree with that, had WMD been the only reason, since it wasn't i don't agree that it was a mistake
in fact, i still believe it should have been done in 91 when we had 500,000 troops already there and had the Iraqi army on the run
leaving Saddam in power back then cost the lives of more innocent Iraqi's than have died in this liberation


----------



## Luissa

DiveCon said:


> i could agree with that, had WMD been the only reason, since it wasn't i don't agree that it was a mistake
> in fact, i still believe it should have been done in 91 when we had 500,000 troops already there and had the Iraqi army on the run
> leaving Saddam in power back then cost the lives of more innocent Iraqi's than have died in this liberation


I actually agree with you there!


----------



## Anguille

Ravi said:


> Don't feel bad, I got neg repped for my reproductive biology joke.



I got some sympathy pos rep so it's all good.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> i could agree with that, had WMD been the only reason, since it wasn't i don't agree that it was a mistake
> in fact, i still believe it should have been done in 91 when we had 500,000 troops already there and had the Iraqi army on the run
> leaving Saddam in power back then cost the lives of more innocent Iraqi's than have died in this liberation



Well it could of been done in 91 but we'd be ignoring what rules the UN set. We actually drove Saddam all the way back to Baghdad.

So what other reasons did we "invade" Iraq then. And don't tell me it was to "free the Iraqi people from Tyranny" or some BS like that.


----------



## Anguille

ravi said:


> wow, Thought Control...right Here At Usmb!!!



Doil!


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> Wow, thought control...right here at USMB!!!


how so, they posted their thought, i responded with mine
no one controled their or my thoughts


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> i could agree with that, had WMD been the only reason, since it wasn't i don't agree that it was a mistake
> in fact, i still believe it should have been done in 91 when we had 500,000 troops already there and had the Iraqi army on the run
> leaving Saddam in power back then cost the lives of more innocent Iraqi's than have died in this liberation



Back in the olden days we adhered to U.N. parameters ...


----------



## Ravi

Anguille said:


> I got some sympathy pos rep so it's all good.


Me, too. In fact I think I broke my rep receiving record today.


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> Back in the olden days we adhered to U.N. parameters ...


and we never tried to get those parameters changed
i think we could have


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> and we never tried to get those parameters changed
> i think we could have



Dive, mind answering my last post?


----------



## jillian

DiveCon said:


> when you actually KNOW its bad intel, when they didnt know
> you libs are morons and continue to show it



I'd say there's an argument to be made for people who keep believing they weren't lied to despite all evidence to the contrary. I'd also surmise that at this point, you're pretty well in a minority, but neither here nor there.


----------



## jillian

Modbert said:


> Well it could of been done in 91 but we'd be ignoring what rules the UN set. We actually drove Saddam all the way back to Baghdad.
> 
> So what other reasons did we "invade" Iraq then. And don't tell me it was to "free the Iraqi people from Tyranny" or some BS like that.



Actually, it couldn't have been done in 1991, Daddy Bush actually listened to his State Department which TOLD HIM even then that if Saddam was deposed, there would be a power vacuum and there would be civil war. I'd also mention the fact that they NEEDED Saddam Hussein to balance Iran, since we also knew that Iran would get stronger in a power vacuum.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Well it could of been done in 91 but we'd be ignoring what rules the UN set. We actually drove Saddam all the way back to Baghdad.
> 
> So what other reasons did we "invade" Iraq then. And don't tell me it was to "free the Iraqi people from Tyranny" or some BS like that.


read the 2003 SOTU


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> read the 2003 SOTU



So your not going to tell me. Quite fine.

Thanks for playing though.


----------



## DiveCon

jillian said:


> Actually, it couldn't have been done in 1991, Daddy Bush actually listened to his State Department which TOLD HIM even then that if Saddam was deposed, there would be a power vacuum and there would be civil war. I'd also mention the fact that they NEEDED Saddam Hussein to balance Iran, since we also knew that Iran would get stronger in a power vacuum.


by not doing it then, a lot more people have died


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> So your not going to tell me. Quite fine.
> 
> Thanks for playing though.


i didnt know you were blocked from google
i thought telling you WHERE to find it was enough
but here
it starts about mid way down the page

President Delivers "State of the Union"


----------



## Modbert

jillian said:


> Actually, it couldn't have been done in 1991, Daddy Bush actually listened to his State Department which TOLD HIM even then that if Saddam was deposed, there would be a power vacuum and there would be civil war. I'd also mention the fact that they NEEDED Saddam Hussein to balance Iran, since we also knew that Iran would get stronger in a power vacuum.



All very true points.

Just makes you think:

Though not so much has changed since Iraq is in a civil war currently or on the onset of one.

Oh and Iran has gotten stronger because of the power vacuum. You see Iran getting welcomes and hugs. You see our troops getting bullets and suicide bombers.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> i didnt know you were blocked from google
> i thought telling you WHERE to find it was enough
> but here
> it starts about mid way down the page
> 
> President Delivers "State of the Union"





> Our nation and the world must learn the lessons of the Korean Peninsula and not allow an even greater threat to rise up in Iraq. A brutal dictator, with a history of reckless aggression, with ties to terrorism, with great potential wealth, will not be permitted to dominate a vital region and threaten the United States. (Applause.)



I want certain points though, not to read this piece of garbage. I could barely stand watching it.

So you mean the whole Saddam/Osama connection that doesn't exist either? That connection?



> The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax -- enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
> 
> The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin -- enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.
> 
> Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.
> 
> U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.







> May He guide us now. And may God continue to bless the United States of America. (Applause.)



No matter who uses this line, I find it funny. God loves us more then everyone else, hurrah! Oh wait, I thought God loved all his children equally?


----------



## Alison 451

Alison 451 said:


> I heard about this.  Thank you for posting the article.
> 
> I think if the religious right wingers have their way, this type of censorship could become a real issue.



To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.

No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen. 

I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive.  Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.

Nice to meet you too, though, really.


----------



## Ravi

Alison 451 said:


> To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.
> 
> No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen.
> 
> I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive.  Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.
> 
> Nice to meet you too, though, really.


Don't mind them, they try to run anyone with a smidgen of sense off the boards.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> I want certain points though, not to read this piece of garbage. I could barely stand watching it.
> 
> So you mean the whole Saddam/Osama connection that doesn't exist either? That connection?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No matter who uses this line, I find it funny. God loves us more then everyone else, hurrah! Oh wait, I thought God loved all his children equally?


yeah, WMD was PART of it
but not ALL over it, you are being disingenuous to only post that part while ignoring the rest

as to that last bit, please show me where he said anything of the sort that YOU said, i can read what he said, and it wasnt even close to claiming we are loved any more than anyone else
unless you totally dont understand the concept


----------



## DiveCon

Alison 451 said:


> To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.
> 
> No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen.
> 
> I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive. Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.
> 
> Nice to meet you too, though, really.


 


Ravi said:


> Don't mind them, they try to run anyone with a smidgen of sense off the boards.


 more lies
i havent tried to "run" anyone off these boards
if you cant handle it, then maybe you need to rethink your stands
and i dont find countering lies as censorship, you both need to learn the meaning of the word


----------



## DiveCon

Alison 451 said:


> To Glockenspiel and Divertercon - this was my one post on this subject.
> 
> No "lies", no "agreeing with lies", no "cheerleading" -- just a thanks for posting the Time Magazine article that I had heard about, but not seen.
> 
> I happen to find the idea of censorship highly offensive.  Someone else pointed me to this thread when I brought up the subject this morning and I still have not had time to read everything.
> 
> Nice to meet you too, though, really.


btw, fuck you with your "religious right wingers" bullshit


----------



## Alison 451

Ravi said:


> Don't mind them, they try to run anyone with a smidgen of sense off the boards.



Thank you Ravi.  

I mean really, what is the sense of giving negative points for that post?


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> yeah, WMD was PART of it
> but not ALL over it, you are being disingenuous to only post that part while ignoring the rest
> 
> as to that last bit, please show me where he said anything of the sort that YOU said, i can read what he said, and it wasnt even close to claiming we are loved any more than anyone else
> unless you totally dont understand the concept



Dive, what were the other reasons?

Your not listing any, your giving me a giant Republican spin speech by Dubya himself saying go look for yourself.

"God Bless America"

Not God Bless Mankind, not God bless everyone, no, God bless America only. Which implies to me that Bush wants God to love and bless us more then all other children not in the USA.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuOBf-39t64]YouTube - George Carlin -God bless America[/ame]


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> more lies
> i havent tried to "run" anyone off these boards
> if you cant handle it, then maybe you need to rethink your stands
> and i dont find countering lies as censorship, you both need to learn the meaning of the word


I'm still waiting for you to admit that Palin did ask the question about banning books.


----------



## Article 15

1441


----------



## Alison 451

DiveCon said:


> btw, fuck you with your "religious right wingers" bullshit



Okay!  Who were all those people who were firming up that Republican base last week?  Was that an athiest convention in Saint Paul?  Sure, religious people aren't right wingers at all.  I see you have a real grasp of the truth there divertercon, fuck YOU very much.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> I'm still waiting for you to admit that Palin did ask the question about banning books.


uh, already done many posts ago, moron
she asked about the procedures, never asked for a book to be banned


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> 1441


huh?


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> uh, already done many posts ago, moron
> she asked about the procedures, never asked for a book to be banned


Then why exactly did you neg rep Anguille because she didn't like that Palin even asked?


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> huh?



UN Res 1441 ... Robert was looking for other justifications for invading Iraq ...


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> UN Res 1441 ... Robert was looking for other justifications for invading Iraq ...


ah, oh, there was a slew of them, 667 and 668 was as well, wasnt it?

also firing on US planes in the no fly zones
violations of the cease-fire agreement
the human rights issues for the Iraqi's

and after we liberated them, we found the violations on the Oil for Food program


----------



## Article 15

DiveCon said:


> ah, oh, there was a slew of them, 667 and 668 was as well, wasnt it?
> 
> also firing on US planes in the no fly zones
> violations of the cease-fire agreement
> the human rights issues for the Iraqi's
> 
> and after we liberated them, we found the violations on the Oil for Food program



Ayup ...

But WMD was the bait that got the American public hooked ...

Personally, I don't think that the administration could have sold the war without it ...


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> ah, oh, there was a slew of them, 667 and 668 was as well, wasnt it?
> 
> also firing on US planes in the no fly zones
> violations of the cease-fire agreement
> the human rights issues for the Iraqi's
> 
> and after we liberated them, we found the violations on the Oil for Food program



Firing on US planes in the no fly zones, link to that? I'm not saying it's false but I'd like to see a link.

Violation of the cease-fire agreement and the human rights issues for the Iraqi eh? I'm sorry, but remind me where the United States are the world police?

How come we're not invading China instead of giving them the olympics if you want to see Human rights issues for the reason being to invade Iraq.

And violations for the Oil for Food program. Don't tell me you were honestly surprised. 

Say you take 100% of all aid given to countries,etc. How much of that aid you actually thinks get to the citizens in countries like Iraq, certain middle eastern countries, or African countries?


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Firing on US planes in the no fly zones, link to that? I'm not saying it's false but I'd like to see a link.
> 
> Violation of the cease-fire agreement and the human rights issues for the Iraqi eh? I'm sorry, but remind me where the United States are the world police?
> 
> How come we're not invading China instead of giving them the olympics if you want to see Human rights issues for the reason being to invade Iraq.
> 
> And violations for the Oil for Food program. Don't tell me you were honestly surprised.
> 
> Say you take 100% of all aid given to countries,etc. How much of that aid you actually thinks get to the citizens in countries like Iraq, certain middle eastern countries, or African countries?


 well, i'm not going to hunt for links to the firing on US and UK planes, that one should be a common knowledge thing

never said we were the world police, and that is why we're not invading China, but with Iraq, we had the cease-fire agreements

as to O4F, no, im not surprised, the fact that Saddam was running the WMD "inspectors" like the keystone cops means i would not put anything past Saddams attempts


on the note of "inspectors" their missions was not to FIND WMD, theirs was to confirm what was already KNOWN to have existed, was destroyed and documented
Saddam didnt allow them to do that


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> well, i'm not going to hunt for links to the firing on US and UK planes, that one should be a common knowledge thing
> 
> never said we were the world police, and that is why we're not invading China, but with Iraq, we had the cease-fire agreements
> 
> as to O4F, no, im not surprised, the fact that Saddam was running the WMD "inspectors" like the keystone cops means i would not put anything past Saddams attempts
> 
> 
> on the note of "inspectors" their missions was not to FIND WMD, theirs was to confirm what was already KNOWN to have existed, was destroyed and documented
> Saddam didnt allow them to do that



Well I haven't read about the US/UK planes being fired in a no fly zone in awhile. Here's one thing I found on the subject:

Middle East Report Online: No-Fly Zones: Rhetoric and Real Intentions , by Sarah Graham-Brown.

You can't use the point of Human rights as a reason we invaded Iraq. That's all I'm saying on that issue because we aren't invading even 1/4 of the countries that currently have their human rights abused.

Two of the biggest reasons we went into Iraq were:

1.) Saddam had massive amount of WMDs and was going to use them on the US.

2.) Saddam was connected to Osama Bin Laden with the attack on 9/11. (Which also turned out to be a falsehood.)
--

The top two reasons why we were going into Iraq were those two, the American people were lied to and now 4,000+ lives have been lost due to those lies.


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Well I haven't read about the US/UK planes being fired in a no fly zone in awhile. Here's one thing I found on the subject:
> 
> Middle East Report Online: No-Fly Zones: Rhetoric and Real Intentions , by Sarah Graham-Brown.
> 
> You can't use the point of Human rights as a reason we invaded Iraq. That's all I'm saying on that issue because we aren't invading even 1/4 of the countries that currently have their human rights abused.
> 
> Two of the biggest reasons we went into Iraq were:
> 
> 1.) Saddam had massive amount of WMDs and was going to use them on the US.
> 
> 2.) Saddam was connected to Osama Bin Laden with the attack on 9/11. (Which also turned out to be a falsehood.)
> --
> 
> The top two reasons why we were going into Iraq were those two, the American people were lied to and now 4,000+ lives have been lost due to those lies.


actually, that secoind one was not a lie
look into the O4F thing a little closer
seems he was using that to put funds into al qaeda front companies
we have no data proving any connection to 9/11, but there were connections


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

The "Palin tried to Ban Books" is yet another of the lies spread by the Left which now sits in the 'debunked' pile...  Turns out the list of books she supposedly tried to ban included books which were yet to be published...

But isn't it wild how the thread was hijacked with tired complaints spewing the same tired lies that the US liberation of Iraq was illegal?  

It's very much akin to the denials by Hussein's campaign that he was 'NEVER a Muslim...' have disappeared since the proof that this is a lie, proven by the numerous documents wherein his Mother lists him as a Muslim and interviews by those that knew him, teachers and faily friends that stated emphatically that he was a Muslim.


----------



## Modbert

PubliusInfinitu said:


> The "Palin tried to Ban Books" is yet another of the lies spread by the Left which now sits in the 'debunked' pile...  Turns out the list of books she supposedly tried to ban included books which were yet to be published...
> 
> But isn't it wild how the thread was hijacked with tired complaints spewing the same tired lies that the US liberation of Iraq was illegal?
> 
> It's very much akin to the denials by Hussein's campaign that he was 'NEVER a Muslim...' have disappeared since the proof that this is a lie, proven by the numerous documents wherein his Mother lists him as a Muslim and interviews by those that knew him, teachers and faily friends that stated emphatically that he was a Muslim.



Actually the Iraq thing started out with me making a sarcastic comment to Dive about neg repping people who "believe lies."

And then it has come to this. Personally, I'm ready to go back to the original topic anytime Dive is ready.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> actually, that secoind one was not a lie
> look into the O4F thing a little closer
> seems he was using that to put funds into al qaeda front companies
> we have no data proving any connection to 9/11, but there were connections



Perhaps you are referring to this?

Hot Air  Blog Archive  Saddam supported at least two al-Qaeda groups: Pentagon Update: What it means

Saddam and Osama basically ran in the same groups. That doesn't mean that Saddam was directly supporting Osama. If anything, Osama hated Saddam.

Though I found this, quite interesting.

Brother Socrates and Kids: The War in Iraq


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Actually the Iraq thing started out with me making a sarcastic comment to Dive about neg repping people who "believe lies."
> 
> And then it has come to this. Personally, I'm ready to go back to the original topic anytime Dive is ready.


so, are you ready to admit Palin never tried to ban a single book?
and that the OP of this thread is nothing but politically motivated lies?


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Perhaps you are referring to this?
> 
> Hot Air  Blog Archive  Saddam supported at least two al-Qaeda groups: Pentagon Update: What it means
> 
> Saddam and Osama basically ran in the same groups. That doesn't mean that Saddam was directly supporting Osama. If anything, Osama hated Saddam.
> 
> Though I found this, quite interesting.
> 
> Brother Socrates and Kids: The War in Iraq


um, you used the blog of a 14 year old as proof?


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> um, you used the blog of a 14 year old as proof?



Not proof, just a interesting find.

Hence the words though I found this, quite interesting.

Don't jump all over it foaming from the mouth just quite yet.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

They don't want to discuss their discredited lies...  The left lacks intellectual honesty.  That's why they spent 70 years trying to turn "fascism" into a 'rightwing' ideology and why they're presently trying to convince the world that Mao and Stalin were a couple of Right wingers that snuck in and screwed up yet another Left wing experiment...


----------



## DiveCon

Modbert said:


> Not proof, just a interesting find.
> 
> Hence the words though I found this, quite interesting.
> 
> Don't jump all over it foaming from the mouth just quite yet.


i dont foam at the mouth 
lol
but i did find it interesting
totally wrong, but interesting


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> so, are you ready to admit Palin never tried to ban a single book?
> and that the OP of this thread is nothing but politically motivated lies?



Am I willing to admit that Palin never tried to ban a single book? No.

Unless you are a mind reader and know every single detail of Sarah Palin's life then we don't know if she has ever tried to ban a single book or wanted to.

I don't believe the OP of this thread is nothing but politically motivated lies.

If the OP of this thread is wrong, then the OP is wrong. However, I don't believe that you can just toss aside certain things so easily without examining it closely.

I've seen the evidence/proof that this is nothing but a lie. If that is the fact, then this is a lie. Plain and simple.


----------



## Modbert

DiveCon said:


> i dont foam at the mouth
> lol
> but i did find it interesting
> totally wrong, but interesting



My entire point in posting that link was me sharing something I found interesting. Soo yeah, my point has been made there.


----------



## Modbert

PubliusInfinitu said:


> They don't want to discuss their discredited lies...  The left lacks intellectual honesty.  That's why they spent 70 years trying to turn "fascism" into a 'rightwing' ideology and why they're presently trying to convince the world that Mao and Stalin were a couple of Right wingers that snuck in and screwed up yet another Left wing experiment...



I know I posted this before but all this talk about left and right. 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luQhAc6RNqI]YouTube - Johnny Cash : the one on the right was the one on the left[/ame]


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Modbert said:


> I know I posted this before but all this talk about left and right.
> 
> YouTube - Johnny Cash : the one on the right was the one on the left




Yes...  I'm familiar with it; been a Cash fan for 40 years.  He was speaking of politicians; not ideologies.  I'm not aware of the US Constitutional Conservatives, AKA: Classic Liberals as having any such problems, but I'll entertain the discussion if someone feels otherwise.


----------



## Modbert

PubliusInfinitu said:


> Yes...  I'm familiar with it; been a Cash fan for 40 years.  He was speaking of politicians; not ideologies.  I'm not aware of the US Constitutional Conservatives, AKA: Classic Liberals as having any such problems, but I'll entertain the discussion if someone feels otherwise.



Cash fan for 40 years? Long time, good for you.

I know which he was speaking of, but I figured it'd just be a good video to post no less.


----------



## Ravi

PubliusInfinitu said:


> Turns out the list of books she supposedly tried to ban included books which were yet to be published...


What books?


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> What books?


it was claimed she tried to ban the Harry Potter books, 2 years before the first one was even published
LOL


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> it was claimed she tried to ban the Harry Potter books, 2 years before the first one was even published
> LOL


By one of you guys? 

That's scary, if true. What a freaking wingnut she is.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> By one of you guys?
> 
> That's scary, if true. What a freaking wingnut she is.


no, by one of YOUR guys

since he books hadnt even been published, it is impossible to attempt to ban something that isnt published


----------



## glockmail

Ravi said:


> By one of you guys?
> 
> That's scary, if true. What a freaking wingnut she is.


 Wow you're dumb. Try re-reading what you responded to.


----------



## Chris

In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.

Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship.

Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com


----------



## Anguille

Ravi said:


> By one of you guys?
> 
> That's scary, if true. What a freaking wingnut she is.



They are trying to distract attention from the fact that Palin asked about the procedure for banning books by claiming that some rumor went around about the actual books she wanted banned and that these books were as yet unpublished Harry Potter books. They think that making a big fuss about this supposed rumor will detract credibility about the other incidences, where she asked the librarian about banning procedures.


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> They are trying to distract attention from the fact that Palin asked about the procedure for banning books by claiming that some rumor went around about the actual books she wanted banned and that these books were as yet unpublished Harry Potter books. They think that making a big fuss about this supposed rumor will detract credibility about the other incidences, where she asked the librarian about banning procedures.


oh please

the list of lies that have been thrown at Palin is enormous, this is just another of that massively failed attempts at smear


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> By one of you guys?
> 
> That's scary, if true. What a freaking wingnut she is.



no, by one of you guys. what freaking wingnuts they are.


----------



## del

Chris said:


> In December 1996, Emmons told her hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, that Palin three times asked her -- starting before she was sworn in -- about possibly removing objectionable books from the library if the need arose.
> 
> Emmons told the Frontiersman she flatly refused to consider any kind of censorship.
> 
> Palin asked Wasilla librarian about censoring books - BostonHerald.com



kirk, post it some more, please.


----------



## del

Anguille said:


> They are trying to distract attention from the fact that Palin asked about the procedure for banning books by claiming that some rumor went around about the actual books she wanted banned and that these books were as yet unpublished Harry Potter books. They think that making a big fuss about this supposed rumor will detract credibility about the other incidences, where she asked the librarian about banning procedures.



it's not a rumor


----------



## DiveCon

del said:


> it's not a rumor


well, yes it is, but not the way Anguille thinks
the rumor(LIE) is that Palin was trying to ban books that hadnt even been published


----------



## glockmail

All the crap y'all have brought up on Palin, none of it has proved true. Meanwhile McCain is up by 15 points, so please keep it up.


----------



## strollingbones

abuse of power.....dont give someone who abuses a little power....more...


----------



## strollingbones

glockmail said:


> All the crap y'all have brought up on Palin, none of it has proved true. Meanwhile McCain is up by 15 points, so please keep it up.



i didnt think polls matter...who is ahead in electoral votes?


----------



## Charles_Main

DiveCon said:


> oh please
> 
> the list of lies that have been thrown at Palin is enormous, this is just another of that massively failed attempts at smear




Yep you can smell the fear and desperation coming from the Dems and Libs now.

They are totally losing it.


----------



## DiveCon

strollingbones said:


> abuse of power.....dont give someone who abuses a little power....more...


did she abuse her power?
that has yet to be proven, and quite frankly, i doubt it ever will be


----------



## glockmail

strollingbones said:


> i didnt think polls matter...who is ahead in electoral votes?


 I never said they didn't. Don't know- what's the latest tally?


----------



## DiveCon

strollingbones said:


> i didnt think polls matter...who is ahead in electoral votes?


no one is
they dont get decided till Nov 5th this year


----------



## Charles_Main

The projections show Obama with a slight lead in electoral Votes. Problem for Obama is only a couple of weeks ago he had a HUGE lead. McCain is closing the gap fast, and if Obama keeps focusing on Palin and Claiming she is not qualified. When she clearly has more executive experience than He does, He will only keep losing ground. 

Who ever is advising Obama should be fired forth wit. They have taken a sure winner and turned him into a major underdog with nothing but sheer stupidity.


----------



## DiveCon

Charles_Main said:


> The projections show Obama with a slight lead in electoral Votes. Problem for Obama is only a couple of weeks ago he had a HUGE lead. McCain is closing the gap fast, and if Obama keeps focusing on Palin and Claiming she is not qualified. When she clearly has more executive experience than He does, He will only keep losing ground.
> 
> Who ever is advising Obama should be fired forth wit. They have taken a sure winner and turned him into a major underdog with nothing but sheer stupidity.


um, wait, didnt he claim it was HIM that was running the campaign


----------



## del

strollingbones said:


> i didnt think polls matter...who is ahead in electoral votes?



so far it's a scoreless tie.


----------



## Ravi

glockmail said:


> Wow you're dumb. Try re-reading what you responded to.


I suggest you do that. The one I asked the question of was PubicInfinity, he's the one that claimed she asked about banning upcoming books. He appears to be one of you. Asking about banning upcoming Harry Potter books is retarded in the extreme.


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> I suggest you do that. The one I asked the question of was PubicInfinity, he's the one that claimed she asked about banning upcoming books. He appears to be one of you. Asking about banning upcoming Harry Potter books is retarded in the extreme.



she never asked about banning any particular book, just about the process to ban _a_ book. None of the Harry Potter books existed at the time.

_"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._

but you knew that...
FactCheck.org: Sliming Palin


----------



## Ravi

del said:


> she never asked about banning any particular book, just about the process to ban _a_ book. None of the Harry Potter books existed at the time.
> 
> _"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._
> 
> but you knew that...
> FactCheck.org: Sliming Palin


No, I didn't, but thanks. You should reign in your idiots. 

She asked about banning books, but apparently she wasn't talking about Harry Potter books.

Maybe PubicInfinity can answer the question I asked him.


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> No, I didn't, but thanks. You should reign in your idiots.
> 
> She asked about banning books, but apparently she wasn't talking about Harry Potter books.
> 
> Maybe PubicInfinity can answer the question I asked him.



I don't own any idiots.


----------



## Anguille

del said:


> it's not a rumor



The list is rumor. That she asked how to ban books is not.


----------



## Ravi

del said:


> I don't own any idiots.


Are you sure? I can think of a couple that you own.


----------



## Anguille

DiveCon said:


> well, yes it is, but not the way Anguille thinks
> the rumor(LIE) is that Palin was trying to ban books that hadnt even been published



clueless!


----------



## Anguille

Ravi said:


> No, I didn't, but thanks. You should reign in your idiots.
> 
> She asked about banning books, but apparently she wasn't talking about Harry Potter books.
> 
> Maybe PubicInfinity can answer the question I asked him.



*rein* in the idiots

Sorry, I usually consider it bad form to correct people's mistakes but as a fellow equestrian I feel compelled to bring this to your attention.


----------



## del

Anguille said:


> The list is rumor. That she asked how to ban books is not.



I believe that's what I meant.


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> Are you sure? I can think of a couple that you own.



no, those are long term rentals

it's better taxwise


----------



## Ravi

Anguille said:


> *rein* in the idiots
> 
> Sorry, I usually consider it bad form to correct people's mistakes but as a fellow equestrian I feel compelled to bring this to your attention.


----------



## del

Anguille said:


> *rein* in the idiots
> 
> Sorry, I usually consider it bad form to correct people's mistakes but as a fellow equestrian I feel compelled to bring this to your attention.



you rain supreme


----------



## Anguille

del said:


> I believe that's what I meant.



I know you did, but it's also what I meant. Perhaps my post wasn't clear.


----------



## Anguille

del said:


> you rain supreme



_blush_


----------



## glockmail

Charles_Main said:


> The projections show Obama with a slight lead in electoral Votes. Problem for Obama is only a couple of weeks ago he had a HUGE lead. McCain is closing the gap fast, and if Obama keeps focusing on Palin and Claiming she is not qualified. When she clearly has more executive experience than He does, He will only keep losing ground.
> 
> Who ever is advising Obama should be fired forth wit. They have taken a sure winner and turned him into a major underdog with nothing but sheer stupidity.


I think George Soros is advising him, and since he's also the money man, can't be fired!


----------



## MalibuMan

go to w w w .factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html]FactCheck.org: Sliming Palin[/url]

This is a non partism web site.

Check it out.


----------



## AllieBaba

BTW, the "Palin tried to ban books" was completely debunked last night on CNN; along with a variety of most of the other rumors that are being spread by the wackos. For example, that she ever wanted Creationism on the curriculum in any school.


----------



## strollingbones

AllieBaba said:


> BTW, the "Palin tried to ban books" was completely debunked last night on CNN; along with a variety of most of the other rumors that are being spread by the wackos. For example, that she ever wanted Creationism on the curriculum in any school.




suddenly cnn becomes a valid source?????


----------



## del

strollingbones said:


> suddenly cnn becomes a valid source?????



when wasn't it? their commentary leans left, but their news presentation has always pretty much down the middle.

oh, and factcheck.org agrees with cnn.


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> No, I didn't, but thanks. You should reign in your idiots.
> 
> She asked about banning books, but apparently she wasn't talking about Harry Potter books.
> 
> Maybe PubicInfinity can answer the question I asked him.


um, its YOUR idiots that are spreading the rumor, maybe you should control YOUR own idiots


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> clueless!


yes, you are


----------



## DiveCon

del said:


> I believe that's what I meant.


it is what you said, so i dont know what these peoples problem is


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> I know you did, but it's also what I meant. Perhaps my post wasn't clear.


it wasnt


----------



## DiveCon

strollingbones said:


> suddenly cnn becomes a valid source?????


when they are supporting the facts, yes
they want to at least give some semblance of neutrality


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> um, its YOUR idiots that are spreading the rumor, maybe you should control YOUR own idiots


don't worry about it, I've given up on expecting you to follow a thread.


----------



## Anguille

Ravi said:


> don't worry about it, I've given up on expecting you to follow a thread.



You should see the PMs I get from D-Con!!!!


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> You should see the PMs I get from D-Con!!!!


i havent sent you a single PM you liar


----------



## DiveCon

Ravi said:


> don't worry about it, I've given up on expecting you to follow a thread.


hey asshole, you are the one not following it


----------



## Ravi

DiveCon said:


> hey asshole, you are the one not following it


Wrong, read it again.


----------



## Anguille

DiveCon said:


> i havent sent you a single PM you liar



doil!


----------



## DiveCon

Anguille said:


> doil!


admins can verify that if need be


----------



## Anguille

I scared!!!


----------



## Article 15

Bah! Jesus tap dancin' Christ, people!



It is a FACT that Sarah Palin asked the Wasilla librarian about banning books.

It is a FACT that she later tried to fire the librarian but the public rallied around the librarian and she kept her job.

The "list" of books is obviously bogus and it was nearly instantly discredited.  Personally, I think it was conjured up by some rigthie in an effort to make the issue seem absurd or even made up.  That the forum pube brought it up further cements my theory in my mind.

The issue here is that she did IN FACT ask about banning books.  Not taking them off a school's reading list as was discussed earlier but actually banning books from a town's public library.  I don't think it was an innocent question.  This goes right along with her ridiculous position on abortion, gay rights, etc ... she's a hard right, bible thumping, social conservative.  It's no wonder that she energized the base.


----------



## DiveCon

Article 15 said:


> Bah! Jesus tap dancin' Christ, people!
> 
> 
> 
> It is a FACT that Sarah Palin asked the Wasilla librarian about banning books.
> 
> It is a FACT that she later tried to fire the librarian but the public rallied around the librarian and she kept her job.
> 
> The "list" of books is obviously bogus and it was nearly instantly discredited. Personally, I think it was conjured up by some rigthie in an effort to make the issue seem absurd or even made up. That the forum pube brought it up further cements my theory in my mind.


 
and that is what we on the right have been saying, but these morons on your side keep getting it wrong





> The issue here is that she did IN FACT ask about banning books. Not taking them off a school's reading list as was discussed earlier but actually banning books from a town's public library. I don't think it was an innocent question. This goes right along with her ridiculous position on abortion, gay rights, etc ... she's a hard right, bible thumping, social conservative. It's no wonder that she energized the base.


 
not really, she asked about the procedure should a constituent ASK HER


----------



## Chris

Article 15 said:


> Bah! Jesus tap dancin' Christ, people!
> 
> 
> 
> It is a FACT that Sarah Palin asked the Wasilla librarian about banning books.
> 
> It is a FACT that she later tried to fire the librarian but the public rallied around the librarian and she kept her job.
> 
> The "list" of books is obviously bogus and it was nearly instantly discredited.  Personally, I think it was conjured up by some rigthie in an effort to make the issue seem absurd or even made up.  That the forum pube brought it up further cements my theory in my mind.
> 
> The issue here is that she did IN FACT ask about banning books.  Not taking them off a school's reading list as was discussed earlier but actually banning books from a town's public library.  I don't think it was an innocent question.  This goes right along with her ridiculous position on abortion, gay rights, etc ... she's a hard right, bible thumping, social conservative.  It's no wonder that she energized the base.



Bingo!


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> Bingo!


LOL
what part?


----------



## Chris

Article 15 said:


> Bah! Jesus tap dancin' Christ, people!
> 
> 
> 
> It is a FACT that Sarah Palin asked the Wasilla librarian about banning books.
> 
> It is a FACT that she later tried to fire the librarian but the public rallied around the librarian and she kept her job.
> 
> The "list" of books is obviously bogus and it was nearly instantly discredited.  Personally, I think it was conjured up by some rigthie in an effort to make the issue seem absurd or even made up.  That the forum pube brought it up further cements my theory in my mind.
> 
> The issue here is that she did IN FACT ask about banning books.  Not taking them off a school's reading list as was discussed earlier but actually banning books from a town's public library.  I don't think it was an innocent question.  This goes right along with her ridiculous position on abortion, gay rights, etc ... she's a hard right, bible thumping, social conservative.  It's no wonder that she energized the base.



All of it.


----------



## del

Article 15 said:


> Bah! Jesus tap dancin' Christ, people!
> 
> 
> 
> It is a FACT that Sarah Palin asked the Wasilla librarian about banning books.
> 
> It is a FACT that she later tried to fire the librarian but the public rallied around the librarian and she kept her job.
> 
> The "list" of books is obviously bogus and it was nearly instantly discredited.  Personally, I think it was conjured up by some rigthie in an effort to make the issue seem absurd or even made up.  That the forum pube brought it up further cements my theory in my mind.
> 
> The issue here is that she did IN FACT ask about banning books.  Not taking them off a school's reading list as was discussed earlier but actually banning books from a town's public library.  I don't think it was an innocent question.  This goes right along with her ridiculous position on abortion, gay rights, etc ... she's a hard right, bible thumping, social conservative.  It's no wonder that she energized the base.



wow, she asked a question!!

you're right, that's a sure sign of fascism.


----------



## AllieBaba

OMG! She asked questions about banning books?
Heaven's to Betsy, she IS the anti-Christ.

I believe we have had discussions here about book banning...I guess every person who asked a question or offered up information in THAT thread is pro-book banning, as well.

What a tempest in a teapot. You guys are out of material, that's all this is.


----------



## Sunni Man

Good for Palin!!!

Some books need to be banned.


----------



## del

Sunni Man said:


> Good for Palin!!!
> 
> Some books need to be banned.



no, they just don't need to be read.


----------



## del

DiveCon said:


> LOL
> what part?



he's got I59

he only needs 4 more numbers......


----------



## Sunni Man

No, they don't need to be published in the first place!


----------



## AllieBaba

Sunni Man said:


> Good for Palin!!!
> 
> Some books need to be banned.



She didn't ban any.
She cut the $$ being spent on the library and it caused a rift, which she remedied by firing the librarian, I do believe.

They pow wowed and she re-instated the librarian in all her glory.

Librarians _can_ be a persnickety bunch, I must say.


----------



## dilloduck

del said:


> he's got I59
> 
> he only needs 4 more numbers......



3 if it's a diagonal !


----------



## del

Sunni Man said:


> No, they don't need to be published in the first place!



sorry, I can't agree with that. Don't like it, don't read it.
pretty simple


----------



## del

dilloduck said:


> 3 if it's a diagonal !



I'll defer to your expertise.


----------



## dilloduck

del said:


> I'll defer to your expertise.



the credit is all yours my friend ! 

I just a pedantic fit .


----------



## Ravi

AllieBaba said:


> OMG! She asked questions about banning books?
> Heaven's to Betsy, she IS the anti-Christ.
> 
> I believe we have had discussions here about book banning...I guess every person who asked a question or offered up information in THAT thread is pro-book banning, as well.
> 
> What a tempest in a teapot. You guys are out of material, that's all this is.


Not the anti-Christ, just suspicious. Why ask a question about circumventing freedom of speech, really? Maybe I was wrong about her being George Bush in a skirt. Maybe she's worse.


----------



## del

Ravi said:


> Not the anti-Christ, just suspicious. Why ask a question about circumventing freedom of speech, really? Maybe I was wrong about her being George Bush in a skirt. Maybe she's worse.



it's hard to imagine anything worse than george in a skirt, but i'll work on it.


----------



## Anguille

del said:


> it's hard to imagine anything worse than george in a skirt, but i'll work on it.


----------



## del

Anguille said:


>



ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGHHHH

the mortgage lady!!!!!!!!!!!! run, run, run.


----------

