Wasn't going to extend this exchange about Palin's book banning inquiries further. But again, you're making my point and you're doing it because you're smart -- and too "careful" -- not to. Your last comment reflects exactly the thought process that is keeping the Democrats from fighting fire with readily available and wholly legitimate fire.

The fact that there are always "some Americans" willing to ban something is NOT a reason to stop making the point. It is exactly the reason to make the point.

I give you the gymnasium scene from Field of Dreams. All those people showed up precisely because somebody wanted to ban books. In Iowa. Middle America. Farmers. Salt of the earth. They showed up sympathetic to the smallminded and noisy ringleader, bolstered by a mob mentality. The whole point of the scene is that the crass, selfish ringleader gets called out -- and when challenged to vote on it, the 'Muricans in that gym actually think about what's at stake, and they side with the good. "All right, America! I'm proud of you, I'm with you! We gotta go." Yes, it's just a movie. There is a reason, however, why this movie and this scene touched nerves and is remembered still.

I promise, this isn't personal. But there's obviously a gestalt involved here. Winning this election is NOT about only doing things that are immune from criticism because there might be a small but vocal minority of people willing to advocate repressive actions. The Rovian mentality is dependent upon shouting down all who oppose them. Don't live in fear of that. Banning books is a BAD thing that America does not expect elected public officials to try to do as their first elected act. Period. Who could honestly -- and I emphasize the word honestly because, while that concept may not matter to Rove and his minions, it actually does matter to some of the voters -- argue otherwise?

To decline to address the issue because there have always been people willing to blow off the idea that banning books is wrong is, to put it simply, to surrender. And surrender is, historically and fundamentally, not necessary. It's just easier, and it facilitates whining at those who won but does nothing to keep them from winning.

Let the Republicans say that book banning is an American tradition they want to preserve. Let the Republicans say Palin asked about it but didn't follow through (which, by the way, is exactly the Field of Dreams scenario -- Palin didn't not try to do it, she just got shut down). Let them explain why that is a desirable trait in the proposed Vice President of the United States of America.

Walter Cronkite.

The first thing Sarah Palin does once being elected to an actual elected "executive" position is (drum roll) inquire about banning books. THE FIRST THING!

It matters zero that she may not have had a "list". It matters only a little bit more than zero that she didn't end up doing it because she had to reinstate the librarian due to public outcry.

What matters is this person, who is nominated out of nowhere to be Vice President of the United States of America, has the audacity to stand up before the RNC, belittle "community activists" and explain that her job as Mayor of Podunksville involved "actual responsibilities" -- when her first instinct and idea of how to use an elected position is to try to ban books.

Now there's someone with a firm grip on how America is supposed to work. Let's make that person Vice President.

Good thing the Democrats don't want to pursue this. Good thing Joe Biden congratulated Palin on Meet the Press for the "good line" she used at the convention instead of questioning her fitness to hold the office of Vice President because it's not a position we usually offer to fascists who use their first public executive office to try to become executive book burners.

Self interest is what motivates the media? Why didn't we figure this out before?

OK, here's what we do: let's take up a collection, pass the hat, and we can all offer Brian Ross a nice honorarium and a speaking engagement, and he can tell us what government officials told him in 2001 that there was bentonite in the anthrax that probably meant it came from Iraq.

It's pay for play. Now we understand.

But truth has a well known liberal bias, doesn't it? That was Colbert, wasn't it? He's the last man standing.