Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Firstly, that's quite a big claim you're making.Also, if you actually read any article properly, you'd realise that no lie is ever actually spread - the press provide information from various sources and always clarify it as being alleged if it isn't confirmed. If they were to clearly spread lies, they'd be sued faster than I can impregnate a Palin.
And that's saying something for "Thirty-Second-Cal".
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Firstly, that's quite a big claim you're making.Also, if you actually read any article properly, you'd realise that no lie is ever actually spread - the press provide information from various sources and always clarify it as being alleged if it isn't confirmed. If they were to clearly spread lies, they'd be sued faster than I can impregnate a Palin.
I was watching CNN while working out. There was this lady who was saying all this trash about Sarah Palin. She was very agree and what she was saying unbelievable. There is no way that Sarah Palin could be as bad as this woman was saying. Sarah Palin would have to been the span of Satan. This woman had to be lying, and I don't know why.
That's not a very good justification about the comment that "the press is spreading so many lies about Sarah Palin."
Was the lady a reporter, a commentator, a pundit, or an off-the-street citizen? Commentators and pundits are not necessarily reporters. Paul Begala, Amy Holmes, Ed Rollins etc. are not independent, nor should one be surprised at that.
There's been some things spread that are obviously absurd via some outlets. But The National Inquirer and the Daily Kos aren't the beacons of independent journalism. And I don't think anyone considers them "The Press."
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
That's not a very good justification about the comment that "the press is spreading so many lies about Sarah Palin."Was the lady a reporter, a commentator, a pundit, or an off-the-street citizen? Commentators and pundits are not necessarily reporters. Paul Begala, Amy Holmes, Ed Rollins etc. are not independent, nor should one be surprised at that.
There's been some things spread that are obviously absurd via some outlets. But The National Inquirer and the Daily Kos aren't the beacons of independent journalism. And I don't think anyone considers them "The Press."
However, you didn't answer my question. So, I will reword it. Why have I been hearing so many lies, on the news, about Sarah Palin?
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonAnswering your question first requires you validate the question. Which "news," which "press," which "lies." There can be no commentary on why if there is no what in the first place.
However, you didn't answer my question. So, I will reword it. Why have I been hearing so many lies, on the news, about Sarah Palin?
Originally posted by Strangelove
the fact remains she tried to ban books according to her own personal philosophy and when the librarian (rightly) refused, she tried to have her fired.The fact that she failed isn't a point in her favor.
No, the fact remains that she asked if it could happen/would be allowed.
She never "tried to ban books", she just asked about it.
And she never fired her. She asked her to resign (according to her as a "test of loyalty"😉 but when she didn't, she wasn't forced out of her job.
Yeah, I'll give you that she wanted to see about the POSSIBILITY of removing certain books, and she wanted to see if the lady would budge on the position or run away, but she didn't and Palin never persued it farther.
It's not the same as "she tried to ban books and tried to have her fired".
Quoted from the story you just posted:
Back in 1996, when she first became mayor, Sarah Palin asked the city librarian if she would be all right with censoring library books should she be asked to do so."Never persued it further"? Don't try to bullshit me.According to news coverage at the time, the librarian said she would definitely not be all right with it. A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The censorship issue was not mentioned as a reason for the firing. The letter just said the new mayor felt Emmons didn't fully support her and had to go.
Emmons had been city librarian for seven years and was well liked. After a wave of public support for her, Palin relented and let Emmons keep her job.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Unfortunately, they are real. Have you ever been to OK? What about Alabama?
Never been to the USA yet, whats "OK" an abbreviation for a town or something?
Not much interested in politics, but this has become interesting for various reasons.
Did they pick Palin because the other party didn´t pick Hilary, so as to say " we trust women you don´t ", or is she that good. She certainly looks and sounds the job, not the sort of person I´d want to mess with.
Originally posted by BicnarokOklahoma. It's a state.
Never been to the USA yet, whats "OK" an abbreviation for a town or something?Not much interested in politics, but this has become interesting for various reasons.
Did they pick Palin because the other party didn´t pick Hilary, so as to say " we trust women you don´t ", or is she that good. She certainly looks and sounds the job, not the sort of person I´d want to mess with.
Originally posted by sithsaber408
No, the fact remains that she asked if it could happen/would be allowed.She never "tried to ban books", she just asked about it.
And she never fired her. She asked her to resign (according to her as a "test of loyalty"😉 but when she didn't, she wasn't forced out of her job.
Yeah, I'll give you that she wanted to see about the POSSIBILITY of removing certain books, and she wanted to see if the lady would budge on the position or run away, but she didn't and Palin never persued it farther.
It's not the same as "she tried to ban books and tried to have her fired".
Dude, listen to yourself.
1) She wanted to have books removed (only thing that stopped her was the law)
2) She asked the woman to resign (because it would have been illegal to outright fire her)
Palin's a nut who's willing to impose her religious/convictions views on others, imo.
Edit: One thing of note, ask yourself, if she were in a position to change the law were she could ban/burn certain books, would you agree?
She has extreme views and she seems like a bit of a control-freak. But I'm not seeing the need to paint this woman as someone who'll burn your Hamlet, shoot men holding hands and sew up your pregnant vagina... and seriously in the longer run of these next 60 days she'll become less newsworthy and more irrelevant.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
She has extreme views and she seems like a bit of a control-freak. But I'm not seeing the need to paint this woman as someone who'll burn your Hamlet, shoot men holding hands and sew up your pregnant vagina... and seriously in the longer run of these next 60 days she'll become less newsworthy and more irrelevant.
She (essentially) did try to burn my Hamlet in Alaska, if the law allowed it, she would have banned those books she deemed wrong. It didn't happen due to a lack of her not trying.
She is/was against domestic partnership laws, what forced her to veto the bill was the Constitution (law), not her own convictions on equality. At least she's willing to but Constitutional law ahead of her views (on one issue at least), I'll give her that.
*I believe she is for reversing Roe V. Wade. Not that she could.
I don't think she's the devil spawn either though. You're right, she's the first woman to run for VP, she's milfish and she's a decent speaker, the limelight is shining on her for the moment.
*Edit: BF pointed just out how extreme she is on this issue.
Yeah, I know she's incredibly religious right. And I'm aware of the situation around her veto of the removal of domestic partner benefits thing.
However while I don't agree with pretty much any of her positions, be it on libraries or god or gays or guns; she doesn't seem to be a "career"/self-serving politician in the sense that she seems to have gotten into public involvement/office to, in her view at least, improve her community/town/city and work for her constituents and I can respect that at least.
Also, yeah, she's MILFish.