Wow. I must say I figured one reason they named her for VP was that her record was so short that it must be squeaky clean. I suppose it turned out not to be thus. Still, hard to see how a good old-fashioned book banning wouldn’t play wonderfully to the Republican base.
I think the library “censorship” debates are mostly a tempest in a teapot. Unless libraries are going to carry every book ever written, then they have to make choices. The issue is generally when people want to make different decisions then you yourself would make. I think the best thing is to carry books that the community needs and/or wants and leave your political views (right and left) at home.
I don’t want a publicly funded library to provide the resources to offer that book to the community. That means shelf space, cataloging, checkout support.
I do agree with this, and what Bricker said, as well. I don’t think that books that are already in a library ought to be removed due to content. However, budgeting and space restraints being what they are, decisions have to be made, and it seems logical that there might disagreements about how to make those decisions.
That being said, as I said above, I would be very interested to know what books were under discussion, or whether it was more of a case of a different overarching philosophy, and not a book-burning kind of situation.
Public libraries are supported by every citizen’s tax money and should have something to represent every potential patron. Housing only those things that reflect the majority view is a rather dangerous policy.
When I was a kid there were no books to be found about gays other than one by Jerry Falwell telling why it was the worst kind of sin. For a long time the exact same library I went to as a child wouldn’t carry novels by Frank Yerby (one of the bestselling novelists of the 1950s) after it was learned by many of his readers that he was black. To take away such books is to say to the minority “you don’t matter” and is historically, intrinsically, primo facie censorship and disenfranchisement; the government is telling you what you are not allowed to read. (I’m a librarian and I make it a point to buy all new books by Ann Coulter and other authors I personally loathe because I know they will be checked out; the same’s true with every decent libarian.)
And of course, the correct way to deal with decisions about the library is to…FIRE THE LIBRARIAN! She’s obviously the reason the town is going to Hell in a handbasket. :rolleyes:
Has there been one thing said about space constraints? The Salon article says specifically it was language. (Why would a new mayor even notice space constraints at a public library unless it was brought to her attention?)
I don’t know what library purchasing guidelines are, and we have no evidence that the specific titles in question were consistent with those guidelines, since (oddly) no one seems to recall the exact titles.
If she tried to ban any of those books from a public library (as opposed to a school libarary) I’d certainly be opposed to it.
Did she? It seems to me you’re listing these and then saying,“Well, that’s what people like her do.” Not exactly strong evidence for the claim.
Nonsense. The Supreme Court has decided that some text-only work can be obscene. They get to define what the Constitution means - not you.
That’s unfortunate, since it’s useful data for placing this incident on the gamut from mere imprudence to total wackaloonery.
Even the former is bad enough, of course.
I am uncomfortable with this position; what specifically is it about the proposed book that leads you to adopt this position, as opposed to other books about behavior you disagree with morally, many of which, I take it, you would have no qualms with keeping in the library?
Who do you want deciding which books shoud be allowed and which shouldn’t? What if I become the Mayor of Roseville, Minnesota and I decide that I don’t want to provide any kind of shelf space or access to any kind of Fundamentalist Christian literature? Is it your position, that I, as Mayor, should have absolute and final autonomous authority to order anything I deem “too Jesus-y” to be removed from the Roseville Public Library? Is it perfectly acceptable for me to fire any library administrators who fail to comply?
Do you honestly and weawy and twuwy believe in your heart of hearts that a library in a town of 8,000 people has books the Supreme Court would rule as obscene through theMiller Test? C’mon now, be honest… do you really and truly think that was the case?
And, as a matter of curiosity, if it is revealed that she wanted, say, SLAUGHTERHOUSE 5 banned because it contains the word motherfucker, would you still vote for her?
Really, Bricker, you know damned well it wasn’t NAMBLA propaganda or meth lab instructionals. Palin specified language, not subject matter.
Looking through that Salon article, this woman seems really scary. Demanding resignations from long time, small town public servants to “prove loyalty?” What kind of insane, control freak bullshit is that? I’ve been calling her Quayle in a dress, but she’s more like an even crazier and dumber Gee Dubya.
Well, there’s always space constraints! My point was the same as some others…that you can’t buy every book ever written. I don’t know what kinds of policies most libraries have in terms of deciding what to buy, and I agree with you that offensive language doesn’t sound like a valid criteria.
Scariest to me is the line “You know in your heart when someone is supportive of you” when justifying firing the police chief.
Why’d you destroy this man’s 30 year career in law enforcement?
A hunch he didn’t like me.
Straight up Jim Jones shit.
Who do you think should be making that decision? For my money, it oughta be the expert, the librarian; the mayor should only step in if the librarian is egregiously flouting professional standards.
Daniel
Cite that “that book” or anything even remotely like it exists and can be found on the shelf of a single publicly funded library anywhere in the United States.
I agree with that, but libraries usually have boards that the librarians answer to. I don’t think policy is set by the librarians alone (although I’m not a librarian, and others in the thread are, so maybe they will set me straight). I’m of course assuming that the mayor is not on the board, and I’m also assuming that most mayors don’t get involved in that kind of stuff. Maybe it’s different in small towns, though
A purchasing guideline is just what it sounds like. There are plenty of books in the world, but many of them are of poor quality. Even quite good books may not meet the needs of a particular library’s patrons. This is why any library is going to have a formal policy covering what kinds of books it’s going to include in its collection.
Any book that’s in a library, whether it was purchased with library funds or was a donated item, is only there because a librarian approved it. Mistakes are sometimes made because a librarian can’t read every book before it goes on the shelves (many decisions are made based on book reviews alone, or even just popular demand), but some thought went into the selection of every single book.
I’d be pretty sure that Ms. Emmons knows more about selecting books for the Wasilla library than Palin does. She certainly has a lot more experience in that area, and the people of the town seem to have been happy with her as a librarian. Given that we don’t know what the books were (and from the quotes in this thread it seems no one can name them because Palin never specified), I’m inclined to trust Emmons’s judgment over Palin’s.
If the books in question were there only through some gross violation of the collection policy – and I see no reason to suspect that this was the case – Emmons probably would have pulled them herself. Librarians do get rid of books when they need to, usually for being inaccurate, outdated, of no interest to local patrons, or in poor physical condition. But any decent librarian is going to be very hesitant to toss something for “offensive language”. Unlike certain library patrons I’ve encountered, library books don’t shout offensive words out for anyone to hear. You’re only going to encounter offensive language in a library book if you’re reading it. With *very * few exceptions, the best way to deal with a library book you don’t like is to close it and give it back to the library.
What’s more offensive, banning books or teaching creationism?
As long as Mrs. Palin will admit that creationism
was 1 - founded from a fairy tale, 2 - written only by men
over thousands of years and, 3- is not a step to finding
answers…
maybe she’ll ban the right book - that
freaking waste of paper bible, all versions.
It meets all her criteria: has homosexuality, slavery,
cruelty to women, child labor and violence-- just to start.