Sarah Palin inquired about removing books from Wasilla library as mayor

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Ah, well I watched the YouTube.  The only thing new here is the list of two particular books that her church opposed.  Yeah, for everyone that already knows this story, nothing to see here.

Just because the reporting is new doesn't mean the story hasn't been broken already  

what were the two books?

One was Pastor I am Gay, I forget the other one

LOL!  EXCELLENT!

It's "Pastor, I am Gay", and seems to be about ministering to gay people.

I highly highly doubt there was any list of books.

[Person Man]

MCCAIN PALIN 2008!!! FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED GRATUITOUS AMOUNTS OF CENSORSHIP!!!

[J. J.]

MCCAIN PALIN 2008!!! FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED GRATUITOUS AMOUNTS OF CENSORSHIP!!!

"Sweet Sarah Palin is once again being attacked by those mean Democrats."

[elcorazon]

lol at librarians being "political appointments"

[opebo]

One was Pastor I am Gay, I forget the other one

LOL!  EXCELLENT!

We can see from this posting that you hate gays, jmfcst, contrary to your claims about 'hating the sin, not the sinner'.  From the title of this book we might just as well assume that it is a tome advising 'Pastors' how to assist homosexuals in pretending not to be homosexual, all in the name of the Lord.  Why would you you object to this?  How are pastors to know how to browbeat the gays unless they are educated in the most effective methods?

But in small towns of ~7,000 people, it's not usually appropriate to fire your local librarian who has been on payroll for 7 years.  I mean, my Mom has been the librarian in our town of 3,000 people, I don't think she'd be easily replaced and that's not even in Alaska.

I think librarians are in huge oversupply compared to the demand for their services.   Like most jobs.

Hence the extremely low salaries.

However I think the mere fact that Palin was the sort of mayor that 'upset the applecart' and got people fired is enough to condemn her, regardless of her fascism.

[Brittain33]

Did you see my quote?  I never said Palin wanted those books banned.  I only said her ex-church opposed those two books.

The story indicated that her ex-church and "other conservative Christians" "focused" on the books, not that they ever requested them banned. 

So basically, we have nobody asking for books to be banned.  We have Palin asking a hypothetical question about the book banning policy.  Whole bunch of nothing.

It's shocking that she even broached the topic. Nobody asks "rhetorically" or "hypothetically" if books can be banned, at least not in that setting.

It's like Dick Cheney stopping by the CIA to ask if they have intelligence linking Saddam Hussein to Al Qaeda, and then asking why not. I suppose it can be viewed as an innocent question and not pressure phrased as a question, because questions never work that way.

[Brittain33]

First, there was no rebuffing.  Palin asked a general question, and received a general answer.  One site lists this. 

http://librariansagainstpalin.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/politico-9208/

Second, the firing wasn't immediate, it took place a month later.

http://librariansagainstpalin.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/rough-timeline/

This is from an anti Palin site, BTW.

J.J., no offense, but while I am sure you are convinced this adds up to nothing, that requires a very strong suspension of disbelief, particularly considering that Palin ran for mayor in the first place as someone bringing the culture war to Wasilla town politics for the first time.

[J. J.]

lol at librarians being "political appointments"

Yes, it is, like the police chief.  Sorry, but that is how it is in Alaska.  Town employees are political appointees.

J.J., no offense, but while I am sure you are convinced this adds up to nothing, that requires a very strong suspension of disbelief, particularly considering that Palin ran for mayor in the first place as someone bringing the culture war to Wasilla town politics for the first time.

You know, even the anti-Palin site says that she never tried to ban any books, even after that librarian left.  Sorry, she asked a reasonable question about policy, didn't say, "Well, you're fired," when she got the answer.  I'm not even sure that she wanted another answer.

[Brittain33]

You know, even the anti-Palin site says that she never tried to ban any books, even after that librarian left.  Sorry, she asked a reasonable question about policy, didn't say, "Well, you're fired," when she got the answer.  I'm not even sure that she wanted another answer.

Like I said, you've convinced yourself. Occam's razor works differently, and it won't be considered if you start from the proposition that she'd never want to ban books and then adjust your interpretation of events to fit.

The fact that her firing the librarian turned out to be a massively unpopular move in the town may have played a role in her moving on from the issue, wouldn't one think?

[Brittain33]

I haven't checked, but were any of the people (or is it just one person) arguing that Sarah Palin never, ever intended anything by the question and subsequent firing, also arguing on a different thread yesterday that Barack Obama wants to teach 5-year-olds all about sex and STDs?

[J. J.]

You know, even the anti-Palin site says that she never tried to ban any books, even after that librarian left.  Sorry, she asked a reasonable question about policy, didn't say, "Well, you're fired," when she got the answer.  I'm not even sure that she wanted another answer.

Like I said, you've convinced yourself. Occam's razor works differently, and it won't be considered if you start from the proposition that she'd never want to ban books and then adjust your interpretation of events to fit.

The fact that her firing the librarian turned out to be a massively unpopular move in the town may have played a role in her moving on from the issue, wouldn't one think?

Well, she had asked for the resignation of the police chief and the librarian prior to the request.  That doesn't fit the Occam's Razor analogy.  I'm trying to see when she fired the police chief, but it looks like it was the same time:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/510219.html

Now, sorry.  I'm looking for evidence that she wanted to ban books, and so far, there is none.  Are you now suggesting that police chief was somehow involved in the issue.

Occam's Razor suggest that the dual removals, on the same day were for the same purposes.  Palin felt it was time for a change and she changed he mind in regard to the librarian who said she was opposed to banning books.  She didn't about the police chief.

[elcorazon]

you see, J.J., the odd part of the story is that she felt that the LIBRARIAN didn't seem to be giving her her full support and it was time for a change.  The LIBRARIAN was an issue in her ability to govern the city of Wasilla. 

That's odd.  I don't doubt she had the power to do it and that she didn't need any sort of "cause", so effectively when your boss is a politician, you are a political appointee.

Most mayors don't come in and fire all the office staff... even the police chief, although there you are at least getting closer to the type of person perceived to be political.

Don't forget that in Wasilla even Mayor hadn't really been that POLITICAL until sweet Sarah decided to make it so.

Anyway, I have no smoking gun, but I believe that in her heart she'd have liked to have gotten some books removed.  She's probably too smart to have taken it that far because she understands the blowback.  Anyway, it's clear to me that she either had an axe to grind with the librarian due to the book banning issue (or however you want to phrase it) or she just wanted to axe the librarian because of a lack of support of her candidacy.  Sort of a vindictive firing.  Otherwise no real explanation makes sense.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

One was Pastor I am Gay, I forget the other one

LOL!  EXCELLENT!

We can see from this posting that you hate gays, jmfcst, contrary to your claims about 'hating the sin, not the sinner'. 

idiot, it has been known for over a week that there was no list, I was laughing at the book the smear artists chose since it tries to paint Palin as hating gays.

[J. J.]

you see, J.J., the odd part of the story is that she felt that the LIBRARIAN didn't seem to be giving her her full support and it was time for a change.  The LIBRARIAN was an issue in her ability to govern the city of Wasilla. 

That's odd.  I don't doubt she had the power to do it and that she didn't need any sort of "cause", so effectively when your boss is a politician, you are a political appointee.

Most mayors don't come in and fire all the office staff... even the police chief, although there you are at least getting closer to the type of person perceived to be political.

They sure as hell do in Phila!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh, I'm so sorry that she took the office and made it real.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There might have been a lack of support, but I'm well aware in those cases where I'm attached to the regime of the day, when it falls, I'm out.  That isn't a problem.  I have no doubt that, whomever is elected, the White House will have new staff in January 2009.

Now, if you can channel Sarah Palin, good for you, but if not, this would be like me posting, Obama hates small town Pennsylvanians, because of his comments.

[elcorazon]

the current Librarian of Congress was appointed by Reagan, remained in office thru the Bush, Clinton and second Bush administrations, more than 20 years, so far.  He is the 3rd librarian of Congress in the last 54 years.  Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter all felt the current Librarian needn't be replaced when they took office, in addition to Bush Clinton and Bush, of course.

[jamestroll]

At least Hillary's scandals would be amusing.. unlike our current candidates..

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

At least Hillary's scandals would be amusing.. unlike our current candidates..

Yes, like why does Chelsea look exactly like Webster Hubbel?

[J. J.]

the current Librarian of Congress was appointed by Reagan, remained in office thru the Bush, Clinton and second Bush administrations, more than 20 years, so far.  He is the 3rd librarian of Congress in the last 54 years.  Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter all felt the current Librarian needn't be replaced when they took office, in addition to Bush Clinton and Bush, of course.

The librarian of Congress has a vastly different role than one in a town.  In that regard, I would note that the Senate Parliamentarian, Robert Dove, was replaced with a change in leadership.

[elcorazon]

the current Librarian of Congress was appointed by Reagan, remained in office thru the Bush, Clinton and second Bush administrations, more than 20 years, so far.  He is the 3rd librarian of Congress in the last 54 years.  Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter all felt the current Librarian needn't be replaced when they took office, in addition to Bush Clinton and Bush, of course.

The librarian of Congress has a vastly different role than one in a town.  In that regard, I would note that the Senate Parliamentarian, Robert Dove, was replaced with a change in leadership.

I tried to find info on this in Philly, but googling led to no results and that was the best I could do.

Explain to me what it is about the librarian in a town that makes it a role that needs to be politicized, or at least subject to the whims of the political power of the town.  I ask, not to be rude or a know it all, but because I sincerely am surprised by this and would like to be educated on this matter.

[JSojourner]

Palin didn't ask for any books to be removed. She inquired what the library policy was, if one requested books to be removed, as a hypothetical. That is a question I might ask.

Because she wanted to defend the books and the library from book banning nutters?

Torie, your problem is you're just too decent a person.  You know the reason she inquired was because either she, or her Reverend, wanted the books banned.

Still, I am heartened that none of the usual Talibagelical targets were on the list. 

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Palin didn't ask for any books to be removed. She inquired what the library policy was, if one requested books to be removed, as a hypothetical. That is a question I might ask.

Because she wanted to defend the books and the library from book banning nutters?

Torie, your problem is you're just too decent a person.  You know the reason she inquired was because either she, or her Reverend, wanted the books banned.

Still, I am heartened that none of the usual Talibagelical targets were on the list. 

The list of books she wanted banned is a fake.

[J. J.]

the current Librarian of Congress was appointed by Reagan, remained in office thru the Bush, Clinton and second Bush administrations, more than 20 years, so far.  He is the 3rd librarian of Congress in the last 54 years.  Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter all felt the current Librarian needn't be replaced when they took office, in addition to Bush Clinton and Bush, of course.

The librarian of Congress has a vastly different role than one in a town.  In that regard, I would note that the Senate Parliamentarian, Robert Dove, was replaced with a change in leadership.

I tried to find info on this in Philly, but googling led to no results and that was the best I could do.

Explain to me what it is about the librarian in a town that makes it a role that needs to be politicized, or at least subject to the whims of the political power of the town.  I ask, not to be rude or a know it all, but because I sincerely am surprised by this and would like to be educated on this matter.

Our department heads are changed, certainly our police commissioners change, with changes in administrations.  Specter actually lost the mayor's race in the mid sixties because he wouldn't promise to keep Frank Rizzo.

My, admittedly poor, understanding of Alaska municipal law is that there employees are subject to removal by the mayor.  The mayor decides that she would prefer her own people, and puts them in.  Any number of administrative positions are like this.

It can be access to certain books, budgetary issues, staffing issues or even feeling that the replacement will be better suited for the administration.

The Chief sued and lost because the courts said it was permitted.

[elcorazon]

the current Librarian of Congress was appointed by Reagan, remained in office thru the Bush, Clinton and second Bush administrations, more than 20 years, so far.  He is the 3rd librarian of Congress in the last 54 years.  Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Carter all felt the current Librarian needn't be replaced when they took office, in addition to Bush Clinton and Bush, of course.

The librarian of Congress has a vastly different role than one in a town.  In that regard, I would note that the Senate Parliamentarian, Robert Dove, was replaced with a change in leadership.

I tried to find info on this in Philly, but googling led to no results and that was the best I could do.

Explain to me what it is about the librarian in a town that makes it a role that needs to be politicized, or at least subject to the whims of the political power of the town.  I ask, not to be rude or a know it all, but because I sincerely am surprised by this and would like to be educated on this matter.

Our department heads are changed, certainly our police commissioners change, with changes in administrations.  Specter actually lost the mayor's race in the mid sixties because he wouldn't promise to keep Frank Rizzo.

My, admittedly poor, understanding of Alaska municipal law is that there employees are subject to removal by the mayor.  The mayor decides that she would prefer her own people, and puts them in.  Any number of administrative positions are like this.

It can be access to certain books, budgetary issues, staffing issues or even feeling that the replacement will be better suited for the administration.

The Chief sued and lost because the courts said it was permitted.

and this applies to librarians because...  I'm not saying you're wrong. In all likelihood, you are correct that it is a political appointment.  My question is why this would need to be the case for a librarian.

And I kinda think we're talking 2 different things.  My wife used to work for the SEC.  She was NOT a political appointment.  The Commissioners were, but the underlings, even including heads of the satellite offices were not.  Of course the commissioners could fire people, and the commissioners were political appointments.  But the policies of the Commission are something each administration has it's own take on.  I guess I just fail to see why something like a librarian would be perceived as needing to be politicized.

I'm not asking legally whether a mayor can hire and fire.  I'm asking why a mayor would regularly get involved in this decision.

It reminds me more of the whole Prosecutor scandal in the Bush Administration.  It's possible the firings were legal.  The issue was whether the firings really ought to have happened.

[J. J.]

and this applies to librarians because...  I'm not saying you're wrong. In all likelihood, you are correct that it is a political appointment.  My question is why this would need to be the case for a librarian.

Because they use the resources of the town.  Again, from what I understand, the mayor, by statute has the authority to run the town.  As mayor, Palin wanted to use this authority, perhaps to shake things up or remold it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In a town that size, the librarian is, effectively, one of the "commissioners."  She's directly responsible to the mayor.

[elcorazon]

and this applies to librarians because...  I'm not saying you're wrong. In all likelihood, you are correct that it is a political appointment.  My question is why this would need to be the case for a librarian.

Because they use the resources of the town.  Again, from what I understand, the mayor, by statute has the authority to run the town.  As mayor, Palin wanted to use this authority, perhaps to shake things up or remold it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In a town that size, the librarian is, effectively, one of the "commissioners."  She's directly responsible to the mayor.

I get the structure.  I just don't get the need to fire someone with that sort of job, particularly in a town that size.  Makes no sense to me.  but whatever, you won't change your mind and you probably won't ever come up with facts that will satisfy my own doubts, so we will remain at loggerheads.