Pretty sure that the meme was “idiot = idiot… and some of the shit he says is pretty funny too.”
While the “list of books Palin tried to ban” is bullshit, the rest of the book banning story is true. Snopes even says so: Books Banned by Sarah Palin | Snopes.com
The" rest of the story", according to Snopes being only that Palin raised it as (what she claim was) a rhetorical question, as “What would you do IF I asked you to remove some books?”. Big deal.
Exactly. Any mayor who doesn’t know that she doesn’t have the authority to even ask that is a god damn moron. Bringing it up in a city council meeting so it’s all on the record is even stupider.
Just because Palin didn’t try to get any books banned (because someone probably told her she can’t legally do that) doesn’t mean she didn’t want to. And her actions and words very clearly show she did.
That actually is a pretty big deal, especially since she tried to fire the librarian for saying she would refuse to ban books.
Excuse me? What did I distort? The claim is that Obama said that there are 57 states. He did not.
Well, it’s interesting as there is no recording of what she said, thus you don;t know how she said it. And, certainly, it’s a reasonable question to ask a dept head, much like asking the Chief of Police “What would you do if I asked you to fix a speeding ticket?”, it’s a question designed to test ethics.
And, yes, Librarians every single day “ban” books. They decide what books will be bought and what books will be withdrawn from circulation. Many Librarys have “banned” the Anarchist Cookbook, “STeal this Book” and others. It’s entirely and completely legal for a city to decide what books will be on their shelves.
No, that;s part of the lie.
-
The Dept head wasn’t “The Librarian”. She was an appointed politician who headed that dept. She served at the pleasure of the Mayor. Wasila did indeed have a Head Librarian who was a Civil Servant.
-
She was told she would be fired as she refused a order to combine her dept and the museum dept. Nothing about banning books.
-
When she agreed to comply with that directive she kept her job. Although perhaps she spent a day being “fired” she lost no pay, benefits or seniority.
Like I said, the stupid crap that continually comes spewing from Palins mouth is enough to condemn her in the minds of anyone with more than room-temp intelligence. There’s absolutely no need to make shit up about her, the truth is far worse.
Palin contrived an excuse to try to fire her after she said she wouldn’t ban some book on evolution that Palin was concerned about. Palin didn’t say that was the reason. She made up something else. That’s her MO. But the librarian certainly felt that’s why she was fired, and only a public backlash made Palin back down and give her her job back. This is that library adminstrator’s version of events, and she has a lot more credibility than Palin.
On one hand we have a ‘they’re out to get me’ version of events which has no proof, and fails internal consistency by the fact the book wasn’t banned for the firing to be reversed.
On the other hand, there was a mayor who stated she was firing an employee due to insubordination, then and dropped the firing once that employee decided to comply with the mayors order. A sequence of events which documentation supports and is internally consistent since the employee had to comply with the stated reasons of their termination in order to keep their job.
Under the sort of logic you’re presenting, paranoid nutjob ravings with no proof are more credible than documented facts. Which means, using your standard, Obama really is a commie Muslim Kenyan out to destroy America.
I look forward to your refutation and attempt to show that leftwing paranoid nutjobs with no proof are credible while clearly those right wing paranoid nutjobs with no proof are just kooks.
There was a third party witness who recounted what Palin said right there in the Snopes article that you first brought up. So there most certainly is a recording of what she said… in a public forum… where she asked a librarian what they would do if she asked them to remove books.
As you can see from the Wasilla Public Library Collection Development Policy, any answer other than “Fuck off” should be considered polite:
Responsibility for selection of books and library materials is and shall be vested in the library director. However, the library director may delegate to such members of the staff as are qualified by reason of training, the authority to interpret and guide the application of policy in making day-to-day selections. Unusual problems will be referred to the library director for resolution.
Palin had no power to even make such a request and asking a procedural question about “What happens when someone challenges a book”, like Palin claims it was, wouldn’t need to be done in a public forum.
Now tell the one where Walmart “bans” Rolex watches or Brooks Brothers suits from their store shelves. Even it is not within the scope or budget of Walmart to offer such things for sale.
Come on, we’ve been over this before. Libraries have limited budgets and have to use those limited budgets on the items they think will get the most and/or are most useful to the community. Not purchasing some crappy treatise by a raving looney is not “banning” a book. It’s “collection developnment” and it has a long history in library science.
Palin overstepped her bounds during librarygate, the facts are very clear on that. You can play the “what did she really mean” game all you want, but it doesn’t change the reality of what happened.
Also, we discussed Palin’s proclivity for book banning back in 2008. Cites were found that show Palin did ask the Library Director about banning books.
Also, it’s 14 years later and the library and museum have still not been combined. If you’ll recall, the Library Director’s refusal to combine the departments was Palin’s stated reasoning for firing her. Yet, even after the librarian resigned in 1999, the departments were never combined (Palin would remain mayor until 2002).
Sure, and no-where did I say Palin didn’t utter those words, but you have never heard a tape recording of those words being spoken by Palin so you don’t know in what intonation or even context they were used.
Umm, yes, but the Library Director reports directly to the Mayor. The Library Director (and the Cjief of Police, etc) all are political appointees, serving at the discresion of the Mayor. Thus, Palin very much had the authority to do so.
http://www.codepublishing.com/ak/wasilla.html
And although there is a difference between not buy a book and pulling one from circulation, the net result remains the same. Anyway, Librarys have pulled those two books I mentioned from circulation.
Umm, that section was adopted in 2008. Thus it’s clear it was changed recently.
We went over this in the original thread. While Palin may have had the right to fire the librarian, she was not a “political appointee.” And firing a librarian over a personality clash (as it was proved Palin did), was what the kids would call a “dick move.”
That policy is pretty standard collection development boilerplate. I repeat, it is the standard. If you want to assert that the Wasilla library operated differently than the vast majority of libraries in this country, it’s on you to prove it.
And with that, I think it’s time to draw the curtain on this library issue.