Palin wanted to ban library books

Palin continued to inject religious beliefs into her policy at times. "She asked the library how she could go about banning books," he says, because some voters thought they had inappropriate language in them. "The librarian was aghast."



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Palin's family make the US look like a bit too Jerry Springer

Form an outsider that finds your shit country quite amusing!

We should be looking deeper

Our emotions are not a tool for making decision or placing judgment. Can we just look at the facts and then make a decision? Look for the answers to the questions yourself. It's not about a woman or any woman running the country. The question should be who is the woman and is her character, ethics and values in line with what is CLEARLY most important to run my country, in case the president is not able to. Sen. Hilary would have made a great VP had she not crossed the "emotional" line and starting acting out of desperation. We know of her and a lot of her values are in line with mine [democrat or not]. Gov. Palin sounds like a descendant of Hitler’s from what I’ve heard and read about her. She has close family connections/ relatives who are closet skin heads. She wants to control/ keep information from people. Not allowing people to be educated on any subject is communistic [controlling] by nature. Over exerting your power more than once without real correction is unacceptable. Let's not sound like a cult; the lady can do no wrong and all is well with our souls because she is a woman running for VP? Nor is it a direction we really want to continue. The country is headed/ in the worst position with itself and around the world. We don’t own our own communications anymore and if we keep doing what we have done, expecting a different result is insanity... just crazy. I thought we were to leave things in better position than when we got them, at least a little for everyone. We’re in debt up to our ears to China and others, Rupert Murdock has control/ ownership of our communications and the oil company’s are making over 300% profit while most company’s are loosing profits and closing down. The financial infrastructure is crumbling and you all are telling me that Gov. Palin could be our next president? And that is OK? I guess the Bush’s haven’t burned us enough [S&L scandal and state of our country]? It’s like a bad dream that continues on but WE CAN wake up!

Why is this thread still aliiive?

dont email threads end after references to Nazis and Hitler!

But sir!

You seem to not comprehend the power of Google on this online world. Think PageRank...
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F


The only control or ownership that Rupert Murdoch has would be over Fox. That's it.

NBC is part of NBC Universal. What are some other properties involved there? Sci-Fi Channel, MSNBC, USA Network, NBC Universal Sports, CNBC, Telemundo, Hulu, and iVillage among others. NBC Universal is partly owned by Vivendi which is a competitor to Mr. Murdoch as well as General Electric. To the best of my knowledge, Murdoch is not invested in either.

ABC is owned by Disney. It is hard enough to oust any Disney family influence so I do not understand such to have any cognizable control by Murdoch.

CBS is a property of National Amusements which is a privately held media company concentrated in the Redstone clan.

The CW is a joint venture of CBS and Warner Brothers.

What does Murdoch have at least some control over? Fox, Fox News Channel, MyNetworkTV, FX, half of SpeedChannel, FSN, TV Guide Channel, and more.

To say that we have monolithic control over television content let alone other such communications means is willfully ignorant.
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F

Network news

I watch Univision and Telemundo (and TV Azteca but not its US one Azteca America) much more than I do most US network news.

I thought Rupert was Stewie's bear.


First you suggest that we not make emotional decisions, then you compare Governor Palin to a murderous dictator.

Why should anyone take you seriously.

Governor Palin does not have any relatives that are 'closet skinheads'
She does not want to control or keep information from people.
She is not 'communisitic, and frankly your post degrades from there.

Use authoratative sources, and choose the persons you feel will best serve our country. That is what we all can do. Librarians can certainly help you gather factual, authoratative information. Good librarians will help you see all sides of the issues so you can make your own choice.


The majority of the people are not always right, therefore the leaders we vote in must uphold the constitution at all costs. Also, Palin was abusing her power by threatening this librarian's job, and this should be a concern of all Americans. This is a practice we have seen throughout history in dictatorships.

Librarians Against Palin

It has been reported in multiple news agencies, as well as direct quotes from the Wasilla librarian in 1996, that Sarah Palin attempted to censor books from the public library during her tenure as Mayor. At the same time that the librarian balked at her request, Palin drew up a letter of termination for the librarian - which was withdrawn after a public outcry and a threat of recall.

Please see htttp:// for references to the news article, commentary & discussion.

From the link you posted the

From the link you posted the following were retrieved:

From a link to the WSJ: "Ms. Palin didn't ask Ms. Emmons to remove any particular books."

From a post attributed to School Library Journal: "It doesn’t appear, however, that any books were actually banned, says Pinnell-Stephens, who documents book challenges in the state but couldn’t find any evidence in her files and doesn’t remember any conversations with Baker about the subject." ( Pinnell-Stephens is head of the AK Lib. Assn Intellectual Freedom Committee and entrusted with maintaining records of challenged books).

In a post attributed to the Anchorage Daily News: "Were any books censored banned? June Pinell-Stephens, chairwoman of the Alaska Library Association’s Intellectual Freedom Committee since 1984, checked her files Wednesday and came up empty-handed."

The owner of the blog notes that he or she does not know what books Governor Palin attempted to have banned. The truth of the matter is that the Governor Palin never asked to have any books banned, so a list of such titles does not, and cannot exist.

You state that Governor Palin 'Drew up a letter of termination" for the librarian when indeed that is simply not true.

Governor Palin, when assuming office as the Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska asked for the resignation of several previously appointed staff that serve at the pleasure of the mayor.

Another posting attributed to the Alaska Sitka Sentinel notes: "Wasilla’s New Mayor Asks Officials to Quit"

This is not at all an uncommon practice. In fact Gavin Newsom may of San Francisco asked all City department heads, as well as all mayorial appointed city commissioners, and senior staffers in his inner circle to hand in their resignations.

The mayor of Fall River, MA asked for resignations upon his election in January 2008.

Pittsburgh Mayor Ravenstahl asked 10 directors and authority chiefs to resign. The article notes "Mr. Ravenstahl said part of the consideration was simply to get his own people in place, an opportunity delayed given the tragic way in which he came to power."

You have provided no authoratative evidence that Governor Palin, when Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska asked to have any books removed from the public library. Your assertion that her request for resignations of department heads was somehow improper, and unusual is refuted by the recent examples of three Democratic mayors having made identical requests. It is evident that such requests are commonplace when executive administrations change.

Your allegations against Governor Palin are baseless and as a librarian you should be ashamed of yourself for posting such without verifying the facts.

There may indeed be reasons why you dislike the Republican Party's choice of their vice-presidential candidate, but to willfully post unfounded accusations rather than specific truthful postitions of Governor Pailin with which you disagree denegrates the profession of Librarianship. You are no credit to the profession.

Censorship is unacceptable

I am a librarian and as a public servant it is crucial that the public have open and uncensored access to information. Period. End of story. There is no instance in a free society in which government officials should use their clout to remove materials they deem inappropriate. Librarians are for the people and fight endlessly for the right of the public to have information at their disposal. Whether a book is inappropriate or not cannot be judged by anyone. Free access to all

"Don't join the book burners. Don't think you are going to conceal faults by concealing evidence that they ever existed. Don't be afraid to go into your library and read every book. -Dwight D. Eisenhower ( A Real President)


A Nazi is a Nazi, no matter what political moniker they wear. And a book banner is a Nazi.


That comparison is an absurd oversimplification that insults millions of people.

Book banning and Nazis

The comment was indeed an oversimplification, though I'm not sure you would find a more detailed answer any less insulting. While all Nazis are book-banners, it does not necessarily follow that all book-banners are Nazis. Book banning is characteristic of any totalitarian government that limits personal freedoms--this includes communist governments, fascist military dictorships that are not necessarily Nazi (Saddam Hussein's government, for example), and other absolutist governments controlled by religious extremists--like some modern Muslim states (e.g., Afghanistan under the Taliban) and some medieval Christian states (like those that burned the Talmud in the 13th century). So those millions of insulted people may not necessarily be Nazis. They might only be extremists of some other kind who want to limit personal freedoms.

Book banning alone

Book banning alone was not the indescribable atrocity of the Nazi regime.

Even if we agree that book banning is abhorent, it is certainly not the most vile act of the Nazis.

I am not concerned about insulting Nazis, but to suggest that book banning is remotely comparable to the true atrocities - the murders, the genocide, the torture, the unspeakable violation of human rights, of the Nazis is simply insulting to those who lost their lives, their dignity, their future, and their families at the hands of a government led by a madman.

I would gladly burn all of my books to save one innocent life.

Book burning is symptomatic of those who would burn people

They burned writings during the witchhunts too.

There is nothing that cannot be found offensive by someone, somewhere.


So is the idea that certain materials need to be banned because a small group claims they are "offensive".

There is nothing that cannot be found offensive by someone, somewhere.

What century are we in?

I don’t care if someone is a Republican or Democrat, the suggestion of banning books to suit each town is wrong! It would mean depending on where you live that if you are in a conservative community ban all liberal books & vice versa. Every citizen should have the right to read & learn from a variety of literature. My mother-in-law reminds me when she lived in Germany during WW2 that it was so heart wrenching to watch people burn books that the government did not seem suitable for Germans. I want to make it clear that I am using this as someone’s experience & not at all suggesting that Ms. Palin is a Nazi . However, government officials should not decide what citizens should be allowed to read.

Palin's problem

Palin's problem is that she wants to "remove" the public choice. She wants a diverse population to conform to her narrow standard. It's a public library not her private collection. She's just like any other politician. Where's the "freedom" she talks so much about? What about the freedom to choose? I'm not just talking about books. What about reproductive rights? You're so fond of freedom until you disagree with the choice. Typical.

What a leap

You went from library books to reproductive rights. Is that a euphamism for abortion?
Reproductive rights are all about choice, you know like her daughter could have chosen not to have sex, but she didn't make that particular choice - she chose the other option, so now they chose not to murder the child.

Seems like Governor Palin and her family are making all sorts of choices, just not the ones you like.

You want a leap?

Since you tout Palin's choices, what about opposing sex education, opposing contraception, wanting abstinence only taught - how well has that worked out in her own family?
More failed, unrealistic, policies - she wants to impose on all.
Do you believe her daughter or the boyfriend really have a choice now? I don't - it's a shotgun wedding.

Reproductive rights.

I think the public has a right to give her crap about her advocacy of abstinence only views for children when she wasn't parent enough to make it work in her own family. The least she should do is admit that her views aren't necessarily valid for everyone and stay off her high horse when its dead on it's feet.

I'm sorry

It may be best to take a break and cool off. Play the issue, not the person. If that is something that can be mastered even at the blog known as Slugger O'Toole (they cover politics in Northern Ireland), I think it should be a simple matter to do so here in the US.

I agree with Matt that to go from book banning to discussing abortion is one heckuva conceptual leap. There are other sites, such as DailyKos or Democratic Underground, that would be more appropriate places for such. I do not ever want to push people away but it is very difficult using the site when one encounters such venomous, hate-filled, mean-spirited, and frankly evil utterances that are way out there in terms of incivility.

Please take a break, relax, and not get your blood pressure too high. Life is far too short for such bile.
Stephen Michael Kellat, Host, LISTen
PGP KeyID: 899C131F

I don't think it's a conceptual leap

I agree with Matt that to go from book banning to discussing abortion is one heckuva conceptual leap.

From everything I've seen, banning both are part and parcel of the same mindset. And Matt did not open a discussion about abortion, he pointed out that that this anti-rights advocate supported both book banning and control over the choices other women make.

Control over what information you may have access to, and how to run your own life, in other words.

There is nothing that cannot be found offensive by someone, somewhere.

Killing Puppies

I am pretty sure that Palin also wants to kill puppies. Palin hates everything that liberals love. Especially puppies, kittens, and books.

SHe is so hot

I am not even in to women and find her insanely hot!

Palin had some interesting

Palin had some interesting responses to the Eagle Forum when she was running for governor in 2006.

Will you support the right of parents to opt out their children from curricula, books, classes, or surveys, which parents consider privacy-invading or offensive to their religion or conscience?

Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught.

I'm fine with parents removing their children from books. I'm less okay with the state removing books from children.

"Yes. Parents should have

"Yes. Parents should have the ultimate control over what their children are taught." was her response. The rest was me.

Paper Tiger

Sarah Palin appears to have some ethics problems in dealing with employees. She seems to think government employees are her personal staff, and that municipal or state workers should do whatever she wants them to do. In fact, elected officers have relatively little power, and although she may want to kick around government employees, she is limited in what she can do to them or order them to do. She cannot tell government employees to disregard the laws, disobey the rules, or act unethically. And that covers an awful lot of territory.

The librarian does not have to jump when she says to jump. The chief of the Alaskan state police don't have to do everything she says or obey her whims. State acquisition and property disposal laws don't change simply because she wants them to change now. State and municipal employment regulations don't change, simply because she has a new office and title.

As governor she can threaten and can take some retribution, but that is open to other political pressure and this can really backfire on her, as it obviously is doing now. She can fire appointed officials, such as town's department heads, but not their career employees. The first time she comes against a federal employee union may be quite a shock to her.

I have seen this happen often (think of the Dilbert cartoons), and usually it happens to control freaks who want to advance in order to be able to order other people around. They often find when they get to the top, that they really have nothing to offer.

R. Lee Hadden (These are my own opinions!)

Do you know the facts or just jump to conclusions

I don't see any ethics problems - well other than those she reported and for which others were investigated and fined when she was on the Oil and Gas Conservation Board, from which she resigned because she felt there was a lack of ethics by the other members.

She rightly feels municipal and state workers who she supervises and whom legislation and regulation make at will employees of the mayor or governor can be subject to discipline by the person to whom they report. She is free to fire the head of the state police, and she was free to fire the police chief and librarian. The Court upheld her right to fire the Chief, and while no lawsuit was filed the residents petitioned for reinstatement of the librarian and Palin re-hired the librarian.

You can spin it any way you want, but there are no ethical lapses. There seems to be a panic thatwe may elect a conservative woman and mother - a woman just like many moms across the country with her own family's day to day problems - a woman who is not a lawyer nor beholden to special interests, someone who is very far outside the beltway, someone who dropped a dime of fellow Republicans when they acted unethically, someone who has executive experience - albeit in a small town and the largest state - but more than the opposing ticket. A smokescreen is being thrown up and it is unfortunate that many will fail to recognize it for what it is, a desperate grasping at straws attempt to discredit a woman who has performed ethically and conscientiously to the best of her ability personally, professionally, and politically.

Syndicate content