Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
You are joking, correct? The linked You Tube video includes an interview of Bess. However, it also includes interviews of several other individuals, clips from local newspaper, etc. for it sources. No where in the clip does it "affirm that the source is Bess." In fact, the video is primarily about the firing of Emmons, not Bess' book being targeted.
What was the subject of my original post? That the source of Bess' booking being listed as being banned was Bess himself.
What phrase did I object to? That which said he finds himself in the spotlight. That would imply evidence outside himself, indicating his book was listed to be banned.
The fact of the matter is no books were banned or listed. The source of Bess' assertion that his book was to be banned is Bess.
I've even explicitly mention that attacking Palin on inquiring about books being banned is legitimate. What is not legitimate is saying that Bess' book was banned, or that it was on a list to be banned, or implying there is a source for the latter outside of Bess himself.
What is absurd is this tacit defense of these actions. The facts are facts: Palin asked the librarian on three occasions about banning books and then fired the librarian for not being sufficiently loyal to her.
Then stick with that and drop the stupid Bess tangent.
That, in itself, is terrifying and completely indefensible.
-- sitka0230
While I don't like it, it is also not terrifying. Local communities always have issues with what the libraries stock, that is because the local government usually pays for it. Sometimes people don't like paying for what they don't like.
"While I don't like it, it is also not terrifying. Local communities always have issues with what the libraries stock, that is because the local government usually pays for it. Sometimes people don't like paying for what they don't like."
Agreed, it's not necessarily terrifying on a local level (unless you happen to be a local). And not necessarily liking what you're paying for is part of the price of our way of life.
However, having somebody with a woefully uneducated, fundamentalist book-burning mindset with an elevated potential of becoming an appointed president of the united states...
THAT is terrifying
It would seem that the allegations in the article could be proven with a little foot work. More than a few people would be interested in the depth of her religious devotion and her devotion to America. Would she support legislation that might be considered by a majority as detrimental to America if similar support was offered to support her moral agenda.
When you look at the lynching post cards, you see the Moral Majority staring back at you, broad hats, bull whips, vests and gold watches, smirking as a bundle of castrated rags swings in the wind or burns in the street. They knew what was right and they did not need a court of law nor need to consider the victim's rights. It was God's plan, they were chosen.
...the McCain/Palin ticket uses fear of any real change to further its case with the public. Ironically, the people they scare the most are those who advocate an open-minded, reasoned approach to the business of running a country in the 21st century. It's not just his Halloween smile or her blithe ignorance. Those, while admittedly disconcerting, are surface matters. Behind those, we glimpse a willingness to court the forces of hatred and a disdain for compromise or respect toward any other viewpoint. This bit of Palin's past history exemplifies the truly frightening narrowness with which she approaches public life--and should tell us something about a candidate who would expose a country in dire need of cooperation to such a person.
The point is Palin tried to ban books. This is not only unconstitutional it is UN American. If McCain/Palin won and she became president, Plain would attempt turn this country into a religious dictatorship. Palin has all the characteristics of the "nasty" antis people who protested outside clinics in the 90s.
When politics are involved I would like writers to add fact checks...
I just don't see any of that here . This man has had differences of opinion with Gov. Palins Church . His story will surely be slanted . Can you find a witness to the request to ban the book ?
I live in NJ and would be happy if our former Governor Jim Mcgreevey's book were never to be graced by the eyes of a school aged child .Not because he is gay but that he tells of having sex with strangers a the rest stops on the NJ Turnpike (and other such things) (yes while serving as Governor). You could say I want to ban a gay mans book but I'm just hoping kids don't read it and think gay men are dirty .
Well I guess I went off topic a little.
The point is that I wish for some fact checks to be added to stories in the future .
Thank you .
They view life as an ongoing struggle to the finish between good and evil. Their mind-set is that you do not do business with evil -- you destroy it. Talking with the enemy is not part of their plan.
That's it. There it is, right there - the basis of the entire problem. There are people in every group, whatever the religion or lack of it, with that attitude, and it's the attitude, not the belief, that causes ugliness, strife, and cruelty. The problem isn't religion, it's utopianism. The idea that there's an absolute good and the world must be judged by it, and there can be no worth of any kind to be found on the other side. It's monism as well, worship of The One, whatever that one is. A vastly dangerous mindset in the wrong circumstance, perhaps in all circumstances.
A terrible day has arrived when this country is within reach of being ruled (yes, ruled) by someone with no grasp or acceptance of diversity of thought. Bush lives in a box in his head, of course, but he tries to pretend he believes in the Constitution. Anybody think this one is going to bother with pretending? Hands?
Didn't think so. I would say god help us, but since we haven't made any effort to help ourselves...
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
