Did Sarah Palin Seek to Ban Gay Book?

September 13, 2008 at 11:17 am 15 comments

Cross-posted at LGBT for Obama

You may have heard the reports that as mayor of Wasilla Sarah Palin considered banning books from the local library. Now the traditional media is finally picking up on the story. Among the book she may have looked into banning was Pastor, I am Gay by former PFLAG regional director Reverend Howard Bess.

Palin, now the Republican Vice-Presidential nominee, was elected mayor of Wasilla in 1996 with strong support from the Wasilla Assembly of God. The Assembly of God is well known for preaching anti-gay rhetoric from the pulpit.

Good Morning America aired this investigative report into the controversy:

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Conservatives, LGBT, Politics, Republicans, Sarah Palin, Video, YouTube. Tags: , , , , .

Trailer for New Harvey Milk Film McCain Afraid

15 Comments Add your own

  • 1. queerunity  |  September 13, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    either way she is pro-censorship
    http://queersunited.blogspot.com/

    Reply
  • 2. Kurt  |  September 14, 2008 at 6:06 pm

    “Justify their sin”?!?
    This is what Palin believes. She only changed churches because she went to the Assemblies of God affiliate in Juneau. She hates – literally HATES – anyone who doesn’t believe what she believes. She’s guilty of cronyism, censorship and abuse of power.
    Here’s a clip you might find interesting:

    Reply
  • 3. D.A.  |  September 15, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    Did we not all just watch the same video? Re-watch the video and you will see that this proves absolutely nothing. The video of the Assembly of God pastor was obviously a weak and feeble attempt by the media to gain attention towards Palin much the same Jeremiah Wright did for Barry Obama.

    Next, we hear a proclaimed “Democrat” describing an event from over 12 years ago and doing so in excellent detail. Ask any criminal justice major and you’ll find anyone who can go into the detail that this whacko did is lying. People use more details to convince people they are telling the truth when they are lying.

    Censorship? Are you guys kidding me? This is hilarious especially with the Liberal whacko’s trying to put censorship on Conservative talk radio…..repeat after me…

    This is the Kettle calling the Pot Black

    Reply
  • 4. Christopher  |  September 17, 2008 at 12:06 pm

    The Wasilla librarian said yes.

    CNN, and namely, Rick Sanchez, says no.

    Now, I realize CNN is in the tank for McCain now that their darling, Hillary Clinton, is history, but who do you believe?

    A librarian who was there, or the MSM?

    Reply
  • 5. D.A. Slinkard  |  September 17, 2008 at 9:30 pm

    The Librarian couldn’t recall any specific book titles to be removed so your first part of the statement is wrong.

    As for you stating CNN is ‘in the tank for McCain’ is just as wrong as your first part of the statement.

    Obviously you need to re-watch the video, get the real story and try not to impose on the ideologies you want reported. So, who is to believe? The Librarian (not recalling any specific book titles), CNN & Rick Sanchez reporting exactly the same report, or you twisting the story around?

    Reply
  • 6. Christopher  |  September 18, 2008 at 4:40 am

    DA Stinkard,

    Nice try but you’re wrong.

    McCandy’s efforts at banning library books and specifically,

    From the New York Times:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/us/politics/14palin.html?pagewanted=3&_r=2&hp

    Witnesses and contemporary news accounts say Ms. Palin asked the librarian about removing books from the shelves. The McCain-Palin presidential campaign says Ms. Palin never advocated censorship.

    But in 1995, Ms. Palin, then a city councilwoman, told colleagues that she had noticed the book “Daddy’s Roommate” on the shelves and that it did not belong there, according to Ms. Chase and Mr. Stein. Ms. Chase read the book, which helps children understand homosexuality, and said it was inoffensive; she suggested that Ms. Palin read it.

    “Sarah said she didn’t need to read that stuff,” Ms. Chase said. “It was disturbing that someone would be willing to remove a book from the library and she didn’t even read it.”

    As to CNN.

    They ran a segment euphemistically called “CNN Fact Check” with Rick Sanchez narrating. In it, CNN asked:

    “Did Sarah Palin try to ban library books?”

    Over a picture of shelved books, in red letters, CNN posted “INCORRECT.”

    Palin did, on multiple occasions go to the Wasilla librarian and seek ways to remove certain books she and her conservative, lunatic friends found offensive. (See above NYTs article.)

    Reply
  • 7. Webster  |  September 18, 2008 at 11:36 am

    Christopher ~

    DA is positively drunk on the Kool-Aid. He’s crawled up McHerbertHoover’s backside so far he’s using John’s kidneys as armrests–you are wasting your typing energy. DA’s not interested in anything that resembles the Truth (kinda like Bush and Cheney that way).

    Reply
  • 8. D.A. Slinkard  |  September 18, 2008 at 8:26 pm

    Christopher,

    I want to commend you on the amount of immaturity displayed in purposely mis-spelling my last name. You are definitely the first person to ever do that….no wait…..the last time someone did this purposely was back in 7th grade.

    As for the ‘witnesses and contemporary news accounts’ you are right Palin did ask about banning books, but only your leftist-leaning rag (due to your earlier immature comments, you might have to look this word up) is one, heck maybe the only one, that has actually named book titles. Even the video that Michael Crawford linked to says the Librarian could not recall specific titles. Again it is a weak attempt to tarnish the image of Palin and it’s not working.

    In further proof that you are spoon fed the material, you reference Ms. Chase but according to the CNN report, that wasn’t even the librarians name. So you’re adding verbatum from the NY Times and trying to suggest something that’s not there.

    As for your statement for CNN and posting ‘Incorrect’, if the leftist-media outlet finds that the story is inconsistent then you know there’s nothing to it, simply because CNN has been on the Obama-mania frenzy for 19 months.

    Reply
  • 9. D.A. Slinkard  |  September 18, 2008 at 8:31 pm

    Webster,

    It always amazes me that Liberals cannot attack the message they can only attack the messenger. It seems your useless insult was ‘wasting your typing energy’.

    If you support Obama, you know nothing about the truth. This man does not want to talk about his past because he knows the American public will not tolerate the truth. You know though, if you tell a lie over and over and convincing enough it is no longer a myth but becomes a fact in the feeble mind of the deceptor.

    So you and Christopher can hide on your like-minded Liberal blogs or you can venture out, expand your horizons, chances are you’ll learn something and debate on my blog. That’s the real challenge, go to the opposing sites and attack the message.

    Ready for the challenge or will you follow suit in the Liberal tactic and ‘Cut-&-Run’?

    Reply
  • 10. Tommy  |  September 18, 2008 at 8:42 pm

    I wish the media would talk about Obama and his ties to the following more and more since Barack doesn’t want to:

    1.) Louis Farrahkan
    2.) Rev. Jeremiah Wright
    3.) Bill Ayers
    4.) Tony Rezko
    5.) His gaffs about Selma, AL
    6.) Just make it all of his gaffs.

    I’d like to see Webster & Christopher talk about these issues. Stop the talk about banning books and start talking about the person that truly is Barack H. Obama.

    Reply
  • 11. Christopher  |  September 18, 2008 at 9:35 pm

    Stinkard,

    Are you a Log Cabin Repug?

    A het on the “DL” posting on a gay blog?

    You can’t possibly be a gay, liberal man because you lack even the most remote suggestion of intelligence one sees in gay, liberal men.

    Tommy,

    Your talkingpoints are a page taken from (take your pick):

    – Limbaugh
    – Hannity
    – Beck
    – Savage
    – Coulter

    Not original. Not accurate and not factual.

    Reply
  • 12. Michael Crawford  |  September 18, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    D.A., we don’t have to do anything to “tarnish the image of Palin.” She is doing a damn good job of that with her ignorance about foreign policy, her willingness to go to war with Russia, her lack of awareness of the Bush Doctrine and her inability to do anything other than mouth Rovian talking points.

    But, I guess that’s the kind of woman that turns you on. Unfortunately, we are talking about someone how would be a heartbeat away from the presidency and not some right-wingers pinup.

    Reply
  • 13. Michael Crawford  |  September 18, 2008 at 9:40 pm

    Tommy,

    I wish the media would focus more on McCain’s eagerness to start a war with Iran, piss off Spain which is one of our closet allies and choose as his VP running mate a woman who is not qualified to be governor, let alone be president.

    Oh, the media should also talk much more about McCain who owns anywhere from 7-12 houses and has a millionaire trophy wife and how he believes the economy is strong even as we are facing an economic meltdown brought on the Bush/Cheney/McCain era of deregulation.

    Reply
  • 14. Tommy  |  September 18, 2008 at 10:16 pm

    “…choose as his VP running mate a woman who is not qualified to be governor, let alone be presient…”

    So are you against Obama as well being that he was a U.S. Senator for only a mere 140+ days?

    McCain’s in-laws became what they are today because of hard work, not because of hand-outs. It’s crazy to think that money drives greed so bad that people such as yourself want to stifle those who have made & live successful American lifestyles. Besides, Obama has no room to talk about the rich and the poor. He has no idea what being poor is. Especially when his wife makes over $300,000 in one year for a ‘fluf’fy’ job.

    As for the meltdown, sure blame can be placed on the Bush administration but let me remind you of the leaders of the Democratic controlled house & senate. What’s their approval rating, what like 9% which is about 3 times less than that of the ‘dreaded’ Bush. Seems like all indications lead to the fact Democrats should be afraid, very, very afraid.

    Reply
  • 15. D.A. Slinkard  |  September 18, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    Christopher,

    Nope, not a Log Cabin Republican at all. Once again a weak attempt to attack the messenger and you’re the one that wants to talk about intelligence.

    Any time I want a good laugh I head over to these Liberal web sites to see what the current whacko mentality is for the day.

    What’s a matter though Christopher, afraid to take on a man in political debate? Afraid you might get your feelings hurt?

    As for Michael, read the news outside your leftist rags and you will read story after story that many Democrats are scared. Hell there was an article that just came out that said Obama needs to be more aggressive and more passionate. The next time you see him on television mute the television and watch his body language, he looks like an angry black man….yep, falling right in line with his heroes (Farrakhan, Wright, etc.).

    Go back to the Rick Warren forum and you will quickly find that Obama is no genius or has the answers that him and axelrod would like everyone to believe. Besides, as much bashing as you do on McCain, I’d say you’re scared too.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


AddThis Feed Button
Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory

Blog Stats

  • 832,976 hits

Archives


%d bloggers like this: