Sarah Palin Prompts former NYC Mayor Koch to Endorse Obama

***ED KOCH STATEMENT***

I have concluded that the country is safer in the hands of Barack Obama, leader of the Democratic Party and protector of the philosophy of that party. Protecting and defending the U.S. means more than defending us from foreign attacks. It includes defending the public with respect to their civil rights, civil liberties and other needs, e.g., national health insurance, the right of abortion, the continuation of Social Security, gay rights, other rights of privacy, fair progressive taxation and a host of other needs and rights.

If the vice president were ever called on to lead the country, there is no question in my mind that the experience and demonstrated judgment of Joe Biden is superior to that of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a plucky, exciting candidate, but when her record is examined, she fails miserably with respect to her views on the domestic issues that are so important to the people of the U.S., and to me. Frankly, it would scare me if she were to succeed John McCain in the presidency.

***

Previously
Former NYC Mayor Ed Koch Celebrates Gay Pride [tr]

Comments

  1. Michael W. says

    That’s exactly right, 100%. It’s scary and people should be very afraid of that. Religious extremists want to keep people ignorant so that they can promote their own agendas. You “gay republicans” that post on this site cannot deny that wanting to ban books should knock her completely out of contention for any type of political office in THIS country, let alone the vice presidency.

  2. Derrick from Philly says

    I hope that Koch’s endorsement proves much more important for Obama than folks realize. There may be a chance in Florida afterall.

  3. RB says

    Well this should certainly push Obama over the top! Really, let’s not get too excited just yet. Koch hardly has national appeal. Not to mention that he is a little crazy himself.

    And Michael W, what sounds “scary” on a liberal blog is hardly scary to the middle of the road American that will place the next president in the whitehouse.

    Palin is an anomaly and represents the real middle class. Even the not so middle Billie Jean King is smitten with her! The far right, Pat Buchanan, and the far left, Ted Kennedy and their followers do not elect presidents. Centrist middle of the road people get elected. Obama and Biden, the third most liberal senator, are hardly middle of the road. Obama is beginning to crack and make serious mistakes. His “muslim faith” comment for example will galvanize middle America whether there is a shred of truth to or not. Those are the facts. The masses elect a president not the extremes.

    Love her or hate her she has mass appeal. I know that everyone has these lofty ideals but when the rubber hits the road it is small town USA, Walmart custotmers that go to the polls religeously and vote for those that do not “scare” them. Palin not only does not scare them she excites them!

  4. says

    it saddens me that bigotry, shooting polar bears from helicopters, anti-choice, anti-sex ed (which results in teenage pregnancy), anti-science and censorship are values the “masses” celebrate in this country.

    since when did intelligence and common decency become fringe values?

    i am fed up with this country lately. i cannot believe most people cannot see Sarah Palin and John McCain for what they really are.

  5. Robert says

    “The designation of Palin to be vice president. She’s scary…Any time someone goes to the library and says, ‘I want to ban books,’ and the librarian says ‘no,’ and she threatens to fire them — that’s scary.”

    ONLY, she didn’t. Sorry Ed.

    DEBUNKED:

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/157986

  6. soulbrotha says

    Robert this is from the LA Times:

    Here’s what the Valley Frontiersman says: “Emmons said Palin asked her outright if she could live with censorship of library books. This was during a weak [sic] when Palin was requesting resignations from all the city’s department heads as a way of expressing loyalty.”

    The article continues: ” ‘This is different than a normal book-selection procedure or a book-challenge policy,’ Emmons stressed Saturday. ‘She was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can’t be in the library.'”

    Palin described her inquiries as “rhetorical” and told the paper, in a written statement issued in 1996, that “she was only trying to get acquainted with her staff at the time.”

    Rhetorical? Well, OK … if she says so. Still, it seems like an odd getting-to-know-you question to me. — Carolyn Kellogg

  7. Steve says

    This lady is the ‘smoke and mirrors’ that the GOP is using to hide another term of Bush. Don’t take the bait…Let’s hope that she will finally answer some questions from the press so we can see what kind of freak-job she really is!

  8. RB says

    Unfortunately Robert, there are many a judge and jury right here that do NOT want to hear the truth. They have tried and convicted Palin on the rumors of the Daily Kos. And I might mention that the National Enquirer is often more accurate!

  9. RB says

    Unfortunately Robert, there are many a judge and jury right here that do NOT want to hear the truth. They have tried and convicted Palin on the rumors of the Daily Kos. And I might mention that the National Enquirer is often more accurate!

  10. Rad says

    Go, Ed!

    That is the kind of sensible analysis I hope more people do during this election. It’s time we go beyond the spun rhetoric and subterfuge that has closely guarded the Bush (and now McCain) agenda.

    Bring out the spotlights!

  11. Robert says

    soulbrotha: hmmm…FactCheck.org or the LA Times as an authoritative source.

    I’m going with the one not known for being in the tank for Obama, thank you very much.

    RB: true, but I am going to try anyway. There are a lot of folks that read and don’t comment – those are the ones that probably care about the truth a little more.

  12. dc8stretch says

    RE: ALEX.

    “Shooting polar bears from helicopters”???

    Although I am no Palin fan, this is a perfect example of how the blogs are going to affect this election. Rumor and innuendo will go ‘viral’, which is why Obama’s ‘muslim’ gaffe will be the smoking gun that ended his campaign.

    As a responsible voter, I feel like I am a librarian- fact checking and triangulating every piece of information to get to the facts. Sarah Palin did not shoot POLAR BEARS from a helicopter, a humvee or from a jet she bought on e-bay.

  13. says

    But the “truth” is the woman is still aligned with the Republican party, thinks the war in Iraq is a mission from God (imagine if someone sent thousands of soldiers to die somewhere because a leprechaun told them to! Imagine!), is anti-choice, is married to big oil, and is a member of a church that likes to “pray the gay away.”

    Never mind that no matter how the McCain campaign wants to spin it, someone who was mayor of a podunk town in Alaska and then governor for less than 2 years (and in the midst of a big economic surplus in Alaska that she had nothing to do with) is not qualified to be the president of the United States.

  14. says

    As far as I know Palin supports shooting game from helicopters. She is a hunter herself.

    I find this reprehensible. Shooting a defenceless animal from a helicopter. Never mind her lack of concern for the enviornment with her desire to drill for oil on preserved land.

  15. soulbrotha says

    Robert, if you had taken the time to read what I posted instead of trying to be a pompous ass, you would see that it actually supports the Newsweek article but at the same times gives a FIRST HAND account.

  16. Michael W. says

    RB and Robert: What is it exactly about the Republican party that entices you so? It certainly can’t be fiscal responsibility, not with the current budget situation. Are you simply rich and don’t want the government to tax you too much? Honestly, that’s the only legitimate excuse I can see for voting Republican. The GOP is the party of rich people, and since there aren’t enough rich people in the country to vote Republican, they’ve duped stupid Christians into thinking their’s is the party of morality. Well that’s great. While the whole country goes to hell, at least we can be sure that gays can’t marry and women can’t choose to have an abortion. Brilliant.

  17. Wes says

    “The masses elect a president not the extremes.

    Love her or hate her she has mass appeal.”

    … except that she IS extreme. Extreme right.

  18. Marc says

    I found the part of his statement interesting where he talked about protecting “gay rights, other rights of privacy […].” This makes it seem as if he thought of gay rights as the right to be private about being gay. I guess that could be true (freedom from public governmental legislation of sexuality) but when it comes from a public official long rumored to be closeted, that phrasing takes on another resonance.

    Anyway, I’m glad whenever anyone speaks out in favor of Obama.

  19. says

    She’s not remotely prepared to assume the Vice Presidency. She’s just the most cynical ploy the GOP have ever played to take our eyes of Bush’s woeful eight years.

    She’s a Trojan Moose. A sop to the Religious Right. And a contradiction of everything John McCain once said he stood for.

    McCain supported Bush 90% of the time, Sarah supported him 97% of the time, that would mean four more years that sucked as hard as the last eight.

    Vote her back to the frozen north.

  20. Paul R says

    Robert, I fail to see how relevant an individual pollster with a decade of experience and poor English skills (“Most American voters (60%) agrees and says the Supreme Court should make decisions based on what is written in the constitution…”) have to do with your GOP dogma.

    But your second point is even sadder. Though I live in San Francisco, I have few gay friends and no burning desire to be accepted by any community, gay or straight. I choose friends based on what type of people they are. But I also like having rights and respect—two things that will never come from the GOP.

    How about we liberals decide to stop claiming that Palin banned books as long as we can ban conservative posters from Towleroad? Because you guys really get tiresome.

  21. Robert says

    Blow right past the point…Check!
    Make wild assumptions about all Republicans…Check!
    Offer to accept reality as long as you don’t have to hear the truth from those you find tiresome…Check!

    Yes, sorry to interrupt the vibe in your echo chamber Paul.

  22. anon says

    Koch, though a Democrat for political purposes in NY, has long been a social conservative on many issues. However, his main thrust has always been his personal relations with the candidates themselves. If he likes them or not has been more important than their views. I suspect McCain just didn’t return his phone calls fast enough.

  23. patrick nyc says

    not being from NYC, what part affiliation is Ed Koch, and what was he when he was mayor, if different?

    Posted by: Dan B
    ——————–
    Koch first ran for Congress as a liberal Democrat, but later was often seen as not being open and hard enough with the Reagan GOP when AIDS first hit here in NYC. He was fighting the gay rumors for years, the first major time it came up was in his race for Mayor against Mario Cuomo.

    Thought the later denied involvement, there were flyers reading ‘Vote for Cuomo, not the homo’ being passed around outside of Manhattan. Koch won but the rumors never died. He became more and more conservative on many issues, but always backed most gay rights, passing some of the first bills into law.

    Activist Larry Kramer, who lives in Koch’s building in the Village, is very blunt about Koch being both gay and closeted, as well as not being there when AIDS hit.

    Koch ran for a second time as both a Democrat and Republican, in a landslide, which says a lot about his politics. He gained most white votes, but started to lose the black and gay vote.

    The next year he ran against Cuomo, but this time for Governor. Koch lost but won his third and last term as a Democrat and Independent. In the 88 race for the White House, Koch trashed Jesse Jackson and called him on his ‘Hymie Town’ quote, Jackson won NY, but the black community did not forget and David Dinkins would beat Koch becoming NYC’s first African-American mayor.

    Koch still is active, radio show, never heard it, and he writes for local papers and the occasional NY Times Ed page. He also is a regular on local news and cable outlets.

    Though I never cared for him, calling him on his AIDS stance face to face, I’m glad he sees how unfit Palin is and he will have a major affect on Jews and Conservative Independents, here and in FL, which is far more important.

  24. sugarrhill says

    Don’t feed the republican trolls. Even when you post to debunk their lies and innuendo they still stick their heads in the sand and pretend not to see or hear the truth. The fact of the matter is that Sarah Palin and John McCain view GLBT as second class citizens on every level. There is no room for negotiation with them. They would rather we pray the gay away. Maybe we should do the same with the republican trolls on this site. It’s one thing back up your beliefs with valid points, but when they conflict with your basic existence it’s time to call into question your beliefs. It’s understandable and admirable that gay republicans wants to change their party from within but to not acknowledge that fact they are being completely screwed with absolute no benefits to their cause is moronic. You can be gay, Republican, and still be against the McCain/Palin ticket. Being gay may not be your entire identity, but to deny it what makes you who you is asinine. The simple question every American must ask themselves in November before they cast their vote is this country better off now than it was 8 years ago? The answer is obviously HELL NO! We need someone that not comfortable with the status quo and will actually enact change and no co-opt someone else’s campaign slogan as their own. We need Barrack Obama as our president.

  25. says

    Koch started his political career in Greenwich Village (!) but never did come out at any time in his political life. Koch DID win his second term almost by acclamation, but love him or hate him, he was the only three-term mayor of NYC besides Fiorello LaGuardia…I do applaud him for supporting Obama, as even conservative Koch can see how absurd a McCain/Palin administration would be…

  26. misspronounced says

    i just saw this video post of a young conservative talking about homosexuality during a radio interview last week at the RNC. if his views in any way mirror that of palin’s or her more rabid supporters (and i’m inclined to think they do) we should be very afraid:

    http://www.pushback.org/2008/09/09/one-young-conservatives-take-on-the-lgbt-movement/#comment-1642

    a “highlight” (if you can call it that…):

    ”What the homosexual does as a pro-sodomy activist is they ignore the body as an important part of their personal reality,” Sorba said. “They ignore the body as an important part of who they are. So they blind themselves to a part of who they are and who others are.”

  27. JMo says

    Robert,

    There are still plenty of people who would like to figure out where you are coming from.

    If you can take the time to get a rouse out of the liberal posters here, I’m sure you can take the time to explain your position on the Supreme court, as well as the budget, war, religion, taxes, and the policies of the two candidates.

    And if you really get into it, which I hope you do, what is your take on the accusations of corruption and blunders made by the Bush administration?

  28. JT says

    I for one don’t wish to see anyone banned from posting. People with whom I don’t agree make me think. If I only read what I want to see and believe, I don’t know that such would make me an informed voter.

    I have gone to many of the websites posted here by the “conservative posters.” Some have changed my mind, some haven’t.

    One example: Not funding special needs programs. This seems, so far, to be totally untrue. Great!

    Another: The book banning thing. From all of the reports I have now read, it appears no specific books were ever asked to be banned. Fine. What I don’t get is, why ask the question? What’s with all of the being asked to resign, get fired, get rehired stuff? What’s with all of this when vetting for loyalty? Is this standard operating procedure or intimidation? I’m pleading ignorance here. Is it standard to ask librarians this?

    Regardless, I don’t like it.

    Teaching creationism seems to be another one where her opinion never impacted policy. Good. But I’m still scratching my head over the sex ed thing. She appears to be for both abstinence education AND birth control, but doesn’t want anything explicit. If creationism should be allowed to be brought up because knowledge and information are good, then explicit information on how one’s body works ought to be good as well.

    She never belonged to the separatist party. Good. But her husband did. She still seems to have fraternized. I want more info.

    I still didn’t like her speech this morning, where she trumpeted McCain (because he’d never bring it up himself, she said – POW stuff mentioned nearly every day notwithstanding) as the only candidate who has fought for his country. I think this is a particularly nasty comment, because I don’t believe going to war is the only way one fights for one’s country. God and Guns will never get my vote. Righteous wars fought for God may play well in the heartland, and may yet prove the strategy to win the election. I’m not ever going to sign on to that.

    The smug spin on her veto pen and selling that plane and the bridge won’t win me over either. But the fact is, I don’t like this stuff from any politician. Makes me queazy. And republicans have no monopoly on spin. They just seem to be so much more smug and blatant about it. But I’m probably biased, so filter this as you will.

  29. Michael W. says

    Robert, like you, I don’t have a burning desire to be accepted by the gay community either, but please, just tell me in your own words, why you are a Republican–don’t just point me to a website with someone else’s opinions. Surely you should be able to do that simply and in your own words.

  30. Michael W. says

    JT, I agree with your comments about Palin, concerning her being against anything explicit concerning sex education as contradictory. I have never understood why we shy away from our bodily functions like they’re unnatural or disgusting. It’s anatomy and physiology for God’s sake. Every body eats and shits and, if they’re lucky, has sex. EVERYBODY!!! And this is mirrored in every mammalian species on the planet, even gay sex! The only thing that is not mirrored by every other mammal species is abstinence. That is the definition of “unnatural.” So if everyone does it, why not educate people on it? Why so puritan about it? Why do we bring people up to think that it’s dirty and unnatural? This hold religion has on people is the true evil in the world. It keeps people ignorant, poor, diseased, and in war.

  31. Rocco says

    Arby & Bobert,
    I have been reading for several months and only recently was moved to post, mostly by the the “over the top” hyperbole by individuals like you two.

    Where is your evidence (numbers?)that Mrs. Palin is supported by the “mainstream?” Exactly how many electoral votes do Wal Mart shoppers (your words) have? FYI:Penecostal Christians are not viewed as mainstream, even among Protestant Christians. I have some in my family and have lived in the South. I suspect her views on abortion are not mainstream either, even among the “pro life” crowd.

    Where the echo chamber meets the mainstream is here: assuming you two are GLBT Americans, YOU are in the echo chamber here and in the rest of GLBT America(whether you want to accept yourself or not, or be accepted or not, whatever that means). Remember you came to this site, no one forced you. Why did you come? I would sincerely like to know.

    Two recent (30 days),major polls (listed on 365gay I think) cite Obama’s lead over Palin-McSame as 85-15% in our community. The usual split is 65% Dem, 35%GOP. Asked yourself why? Are we (85%) all just radical leftists, single issue voters, duped by “the one?” Doubtful.

    Mrs. Palin has charisma, to be sure. Who is she and what is her record? Whoever she is, we deserve to know the truth about her. She will be one heartbeat away from the presidency. McSame is 72 and has had major health concerns. It is a pertinent issue.

    The behavior on this site that you complain about is easily explained. Our community has been under attack for eight, long years.
    The attacks have come from Mrs. Palin’s constituency.

    While it does seem like many are alarmed by Mrs. Palin, the first thing that popped into my head was 1972 & Thomas Eagleton. The oldsters here will know what I am talking about. Mrs. Palin has a LOT of baggage. We don’t have much information about it. Time will tell if McSame’s bump in the polls is just a post RNC bounce or not.

    In the meantime, why not go to some Fox or LCR type site. Someone might accept you HERE…omg…

  32. Tyler says

    I love it when the Jews come out in support of “Partially” Blacks! They were some of the first slave owners, and are totally wall street, so the endorsement is HUGE !
    Sarah Palin is originally from Idaho, which is Aryan headquarters.
    What, she is busy trying to ban books during the Endtimes? She should really be preparing for the Rapture, I hear it’s coming on Nov 5.
    Then we (gays, jews and blacks) will finally get our Earth back from these nutjobs !

  33. Dan says

    I read the factcheck artticle on newsweek. It still sounds like to me she was wanting to ban some books. She asked the librarian, not once, but twice, maybe three times if she would ban books if asked — would that change if people were picketing to remove a book. Then fired the woman who said no not long after. What more do you want? If that’s some kind of “loyalty” check as Sarah claimed – well, that’s fucked up too. What type of crazy/nazi mayor expects loyalty when it comes to banning books? Some of the other rumors may and probably are false. But the library one rings true on every level. She may not have tried to ban an actual book, but she was heading there.

  34. says

    I wonder what it must feel like to be a gay republican man knowing that you’re disrespected by most of the rest of the gay men in the country. It’s just so bizarre that I’m thinking I may never understand it.

  35. RB says

    Michael W, sorry for leaving the thread, but I had to go to work. However, I can tell you why I vote repub in real terms as I have posted so many times before.

    I do not agree with unfettered access to abortion. I was actually told Friday night at dinner that my daughter who is currently 6 should be able to have an abortion at 12 WITHOUT MY PERMISSION OR KNOWLEDGE and it would be for “her protection”! I was appalled to say the least!!!

    I cannot support needle exchange programs. However, I am listening to opposing views on this subject and I am questioning whether my stance is the right one. I do listen to opposing views and consider them accordingly.

    For me, the question should not be should we drill for oil it should be how soon can we drill and where. I support off shore and Anwar drilling. I do NOT support windfall profits taxes on oil companies. We tried this in the 70’s and it caused long lines, gas shortages and a much worse situation! I remember sitting with my mother in line waiting to purchase gas and the station only had a limited supply. We MUST find multiple options for solving our dependence on foreign oil.

    Taxes, yes are a big deal to me. If the Bush tax cuts expire, EVERYONE will pay higher taxes across the board! EVERYONE!

    I do not support labor unions. No explanation here, just a statement of fact.

    So there, this is not an inclusive list however, it is a “list” with real facts which is certainly more than I get from others here when I ask the same question. Usually when I ask the same of dems here all I get is because “they are better for us”. No thought, no beliefs, nothing. And I will say again that I can and have crossed over party lines to vote for a dem that I believe is the right person. I doubt that anyone here would say the same. I voted for Kerry, with regret but I cannot stand Bush, but Obama is not the right dem. I do not trust anyone that preaches change and then brings Biden. The third most liberal senator and dried up rehashed old policies. Come on, the hope of change looked all around this great country and all he could find was Biden. Funny, very funny. While this is certainly not the only reason that I will not vote for him it is a big one.

    Take care

  36. RB says

    Tom Clark, I am not a lonely man! I have many friends and my own brother that are more liberal than I but they are certainly NOT as judgemental as you. I have no remorse, regrets and I can assure you that you thoughts of me cause me to lose no sleep at night.

    Take care.

  37. JT says

    RB

    Although you did not post to me, know that I read your latest.

    Know that my partner, who is an educator, is rabidly anti-union.

    Know that many share your view on needle exchange, often because they feel it implies endorsement. Personally, I am all for harm reduction. Pragmatically, even though you may preach the truth about harmful behaviors, your judgment falls on deaf ears, particularly with someone who is substance dependent. Fact is, research is showing changes in the brain as a result of dependency. It becomes a situation in which choice is no longer part of the equation.

    I am reminded of an exchange recently in a class I was taking, where I posed the quandary that one might have to have parental permission to get a tattoo, but not an abortion. Which is more invasive, I queried. Ooh, did I become ever so quickly the pariah.

    Here’s where this stuff gets complicated. I am pro-choice, but anti-abortion. How could this be? Because while I hate the thought of the reality, the ugly reality of life is that one can’t avoid it. Should someone like your daughter be raped, I wouldn’t want her to have to have to carry a resultant pregnancy to term. Should someone like your daughter be the victim of incest -and sadly, it happens, and sadly, pregnancy can result – I’d hate to have that young girl have to go to her parents for permission if one of those parents is the culprit. While it makes perfect sense to me that a parent be informed, sometimes that parent ain’t you.

    Abortion ends a life, but it also may protect one. Messy, huh?

    As for taxes, consider that studies have shown that some of the most liberal, heavily taxed countries report the highest level of life satisfaction. Ones where childcare, maternity leave, and healthcare are taken for granted. Interestingly, some of these are also great places to be gay. Who’d have thunk it?

    Have a good night,
    JT

  38. Paul R says

    RB,

    1. I’ve never met anyone proposing unfettered access to abortion—even rabid feminists. Most people (conservative or liberal) wish abortion didn’t exist. But as JT said, life is messy. A lot of people wish gays didn’t exist.

    2. Without needle exchange programs, some of my friends would probably be dead. They had harrowing addictions and caused themselves a fair bit of damage from which they’ve since recovered. Addiction to myriad substances hits myriad types of people. It would be nice if addiction didn’t exist, but I support needle exchanges because I don’t think anyone (especially those in, say, their teens) should be penalized for having once been an addict. AIDS, Hep C, and plenty of other things can be transmitted with a shared needle, and exchanges were actually where my friends found information on effective treatment programs. And if this is a budget concern, needles are dirt cheap. But in the scheme of GOP v. Dem issues, isn’t this a pretty minor one? It surprises me that this is your second main concern, since exchanges are only available in major cities, and are controversial everywhere. The liberals at my dog park hate having an exchange nearby.

    3. On energy, I support us finally tapping the brightest scientists and developing anternative fuel sources. It seems ridiculous to me that we think fossil fuels are a viable long-term solution to the world’s energy needs. The Earth is only so big, and oil demand is on a long-term rise. Fossil fuel use just isn’t sustainable, but I don’t want to run out of them before we have a solution. So, tie on this one.

    4. Your point on taxes assumes that any new administration will imposes taxes indisciminately. That can hardly be considered a given with either party. It is possible to tax different people in different ways.

    As for “dried up rehashed old policies,” recall that McCain and Biden have been in the Senate for almost the same time. I don’t see anything but rehashed old politics from McCain, and he’s too old, lacking in stamina and coherence, and poised to be four years even older in 2012. We can’t take that risk on a president, and can can’t take a risk on a VP who clearly has problems admitting the truth and never understood the pressurs and realities of national and foreign politics.

    I would explain why I’m liberal, but I’d rather sleep at the moment.

    Best.

  39. Michael W. says

    RB, thank you for your response. And just to let you know, there are some republican ideals that I happen to agree with, even though I vote democratic, such as agreeing with the right to bear arms.

    I also think abortion is wrong, when it is used as a form of birth control due to poor planning, but I don’t think the government has ANY RIGHT whatsoever to tell anyone, man or woman, what they can do medically.

    Additionally, I think the biggest impact on abortion would be stronger education on the subject, which republicans don’t seem willing to think about, out of some puritan ethic not to discuss bodily functions with children (teenages).

    I think the biggest, the BIGGEST problem in this country is ignorance. I’ve recently started back to school in an attempt to launch a career in a more secure industry and have had to take classes in sociology, psychology, microbiology, cellular biology, anatomy and physiology, and let me tell you, they have all been real eye openers, even to someone who thought he new everything!

    I think everyone in the country should at least take a course in sociology, but that will never happen because either they’re too lazy or scared to go back to school, or their religion has taught them that they don’t need to learn about certain subjects because their faith provides them will all they need to know. That is lazy and reckless and to me smacks of the thinking of the republican party; the “I’ve got mine” mentality.

    You seem well-educated. Palin asking the librarian about banning books should be scary to you. Why isn’t it? Even if she didn’t have a list in her hand of the books she wanted banned, her intent was clear. She wants the power to do so. This isn’t Nazi Germany. Why do she and republicans or christians like her feel the need to control people’s lives so?

    And the taxes thing: I don’t want to see higher taxes either but Jesus, I can’t run my personal financial dealings like the government can. The republicans attack the democrats as being “tax and spend liberals.” Well, what are the rebublicans, “don’t tax and spend?” Have you seen what has become of the budget with the republicans in control over the last 8 years? They entered the white house, after 8 years of democratic leadership, to a surplus budget, and have taken it completely in the opposite direction. I can spend money I don’t have only to a point. I’m all for looking at other ways to tax people though…

    Thanks for listening.

    Michael

  40. RB says

    First, thank you to JT, Paul R and Michael W for being civil and for being thought provoking. Usually I only get bashed. Having said that, I understand what it is like to be a liberal. My friend Zeke has been most eloquent in his explanation of being a liberal. I respect him greatly and fully understand his reasoning. We have agreed to disagree and remain friends.

    I have certainly evolved on many of my beliefs and becoming a father certainly changed some views. JT, I was anti-abortion but pro-choice for years. I even voted for Clinton in ’92 because I was afraid that we were on our way to overturn Roe. I do not want a return to back alley illegal abortion clinics. However, the more I listen to people like Sheri Sheppard state that they have had more abortions than they can count the less sympathetic to the cause I become. I support sex education and do not tow the party line on the issue. I cannot however go so far as to support Pelosi’s view on abortion that would allow my daughter an abortion at 12 without my knowledge! She cannot get her teeth cleaned at the dentist without my permission so an abortion is out of the question!

    Anyway, thanks for the responses. I can assure you that I have an open mind.

    Take care

  41. Michael W. says

    RB, having an open mind is the best thing possible! :)

    I have a question for you, and it’s not meant to fan the flames: Would you make your 12 year old daughter go through with an unwanted pregnancy? And I agree, a 12 year old should not be able to have an abortion without parental knowledge–I won’t say their consent, just their knowledge. (But I feel this issue, underage pregnancy, is an extreme used to polarize the discussion. The bottom line question should be should an average woman have the right to an abortion?)

  42. Matt says

    Um…I’m not for McCain/Palin but she didn’t want to ban books. Here is what the non-profit factcheck.org says about the incident:

    Not a Book Burner

    One accusation claims then-Mayor Palin threatened to fire Wasilla’s librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. Actually, Palin never asked that books be banned; no books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren’t even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication. The librarian was fired, but was told only that Palin felt she didn’t support her. She was re-hired the next day. The librarian never claimed that Palin threatened outright to fire her for refusing to ban books.

    It’s true that Palin did raise the issue with Mary Ellen Emmons, Wasilla’s librarian, on at least two occasions, three in some versions. Emmons flatly stated her opposition each time. But, as the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman (Wasilla’s local paper) reported at the time, Palin asked general questions about what Emmons would say if Palin requested that a book be banned. According to Emmons, Palin “was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can’t be in the library.” Emmons reported that Palin pressed the issue, asking whether Emmons’ position would change if residents were picketing the library. Wasilla resident Anne Kilkenny, who was at the meeting, corroborates Emmons’ story, telling the Chicago Tribune that “Sarah said to Mary Ellen, ‘What would your response be if I asked you to remove some books from the collection?’ ”

    Palin characterized the exchange differently, initially volunteering the episode as an example of discussions with city employees about following her administration’s agenda. Palin described her questions to Emmons as “rhetorical,” noting that her questions “were asked in the context of professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city.” Actually, true rhetorical questions have implied answers (e.g., “Who do you think you are?”), so Palin probably meant to describe her questions as hypothetical or theoretical. We can’t read minds, so it is impossible for us to know whether or not Palin may actually have wanted to ban books from the library or whether she simply wanted to know how her new employees would respond to an instruction from their boss. It is worth noting that, in an update, the Frontiersman points out that no book was ever banned from the library’s shelves.

    Palin initially requested Emmons’ resignation, along with those of Wasilla’s other department heads, in October 1996. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all of them (except one, whose department she was eliminating) to retain their positions. But in January 1997, Palin fired Emmons, along with the police chief. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons’ firing, but said she didn’t feel she had Emmons’ support. The decision caused “a stir” in the small town, according to a newspaper account at the time. According to a widely circulated e-mail from Kilkenny, “city residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin’s attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter.”

    As we’ve noted, Palin did not attempt to ban any library books. We don’t know if Emmons’ resistance to Palin’s questions about possible censorship had anything to do with Emmons’ firing. And we have no idea if the protests had any impact on Palin at all. There simply isn’t any evidence that we can find either way. Palin did re-hire Emmons the following day, saying that she now felt she had the librarian’s backing. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned.

    So what about that list of books targeted for banning, which according to one widely e-mailed version was taken “from the official minutes of the Wasilla Library Board”? If it was, the library board should take up fortune telling. The list includes the first four Harry Potter books, none of which had been published at the time of the Palin-Emmons conversations. The first wasn’t published until 1998. In fact, the list is a simple cut-and-paste job, snatched (complete with typos and the occasional incorrect title) from the Florida Institute of Technology library Web page, which presents the list as “Books banned at one time or another in the United States.”

    Update, Sept. 9: We have revised this section dealing with accusations that Palin wanted to ban books from Wasilla’s library to include more detail about what transpired at the time.

  43. Michael W. says

    Matt, why would a person even bring up the subject of banning books? It’s clear she doesn’t find anything particularly wrong about banning books, and she did indeed fire the librarian because she felt “she didn’t support” her–even if she was rehired the next day. From what we’ve read and what you’ve written here, a reasonable assumption is that this woman is all for banning books if she thinks it’s necessary. That’s all one needs to know.

  44. RB says

    I could no sooner force an abortion upon my 12 year old than I could pull the switch on an execution. I am sorry, call me what you will, but I do not support abortion and I do not support capital punishment. I just cannot do it.

    I used my daughter as an example from dinner last Friday night. The situation posed to me was that she should be allowed to have an abortion, I should have no knowledge because it was for her own protection?! People always want to throw that at me and use the whole incest thing as a reason to defend abortion. Truth be told, the total number of abortions due to rape or incest is less than 1%. The argument does not hold water. We are trying to say that all abortions should be easily accessed because of rape or incest when in fact it is because Sheri Sheppard cannot accurately swallow a pill or use a condom. Abortions are now used as birth control in this country. I will say that I have no issues with the day after pill. Take it everytime. However, when it has attached and it is growing I have to say no. I also have no issues with abortion when the mother’s life is in danger.

    I will say this, my mother was begged by her doctor to abort my youngest brother because of the trama she incurred during her pregnancy with me and then almost dying with my younger brother. She stood her ground and said if this is her time she will face it. It was a perfect nine month term with zero complications.

    So to answer you question Michael W, no I could not force my daughter to have an abortion should she be pregnant at 12. I just couldn’t!

  45. 24play says

    So, even if your daughter’s carrying your child, you would deny—and the law should prohibit—her from having an abortion?

    Is that what you’re saying, RB?

  46. Michael W. says

    RB, you didn’t answer the question I asked. I didn’t ask if you would force her to have an abortion. My question was would you force her to follow through with an unwanted pregnancy? In simpler words, would you allow her to have an abortion, at 12 years old, if she didn’t want to have the baby? (and really–not fanning the flames–just curious)

  47. RB says

    Michael W, no abortion, no way. Is that clear enough? Sorry but not going to happen.

    24play, go troll elsewhere! You comment is so off base it is ridiculous! This was a decent conversation until you got a day off at the gap and chimed in. “My child”…get real. Go play…in the street.

  48. noah says

    RB,

    So, you’re saying that you would force your 12-year-old to carry a baby that she did not want? What’s clear is that your beliefs outweigh your daughter’s decisions to control her own body.

    If her doctor explained that a 12-year-old’s body is not developed enough to carry a baby and that such a pregnancy could seriously injure her or kill her you would not allow her to choose an abortion?

    Have you read anything about fistulas?
    http://www.fistulafoundation.org/

    You don’t have a scientific understanding of how horrifically dangerous a pregnancy for a girl is. There is a reason why many “women” died in child birth. People in our era are clueless about how traumatic child birth can be for women. Up until the early to mid 20th Century, child birth was one of the leading causes of death for “women.”

    Simply, the body of a 12-year-old is not designed to give birth. When you’re talking in hypothetical terms, you should really understand what you’re saying and the real world repercussions.

    Last year in Nicaragua, the government allowed all abortions. What soon followed were deaths of women. Why? Because of things like ectopic pregnancies. Instead of the egg implanting in the uterus it embeds itself in the fallopian tubes. Eventually, the embryo grows and bursts through the tube killing the mother and itself.

    In Nicaragua, doctors refused to abort such an embryo because of the law. Women died.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21601045/
    http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/11/01/4959/

    So, again, would you force your daughter to endure a pregnancy that would kill her? Think before you answer because you might sound monstrous…

  49. noah says

    “You don’t have a scientific understanding of how horrifically dangerous a pregnancy for a girl is. There is a reason why many “women” died in child birth. People in our era are clueless about how traumatic child birth can be for women. Up until the early to mid 20th Century, child birth was one of the leading causes of death for “women.” ”

    On second thought, I should have made clear that mortality rates, etc. should refer to the developed world where medical services are more available. Rates for women and girls dying in childbirth are still high in poorer countries.

    Finally, I don’t believe in using abortion as a quick fix for reproduction mishaps. Someone has to be really stupid or in a very strange place in life to need multiple abortions to serve as birth control. But what kind of parent would someone who doesn’t want a child be to her kid? Adoption is great but would a woman who doesn’t want her child take herself during pregnancy? Would she resent carrying a child she doesn’t want?

    I hate the topic of abortions but I hate hearing about women dying needlessly and men imposing their will on women as is the case in Nicaragua.