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

Plz to read before you start another thread on the book banning, librarian firing, creationist teaching, Buchanan supporting, independence for Alaska thundercunt.

9/9/2008 9:07:16 AM

What the fuck is this shit?

Quote :

"Moreover, although Palin fired Emmons as part of a "loyalty" purge, she rehired Emmons the next day, and Emmons remained at her job for two-and-a-half more years. Actually, Palin initially requested Emmons' resignation in October 1996, four days before the public discussion of censorship. That was at the same time she requested that all four of Wasilla's department heads resign. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all four department heads to retain their positions. But on Jan. 30, 1997, three months after the censorship discussion, Palin informed Emmons and Wasilla's police chief, Irv Stambaugh, that they would be fired. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons' firing. Palin rehired Emmons the following day. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned."

9/9/2008 9:14:14 AM

factcheck.org didn't do their homework very well...

Quote :

"The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term."

BUT: http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/515512.html

Quote :

"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."

Quote :

"Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.""

http://www.thelangreport.com/political-commentary/sarah-palin-creationism-god-and-country-pt2/

Quote :

""Teach both," she said in a 2006 gubernatorial debate. "Don’t be afraid of information.""

Quote :

"She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She's been registered as a Republican since May 1982."

I'm registered independent, but I still support almost all Democrats. The party itself said she was a member. It's debatable whether that's true, but she certainly supported them, introduced their convention. They have now retracted their statement, but that's not hard to understand.

Quote :

"Most recently I have pulled the entire record regarding the Alaskan Independence Partys' 1994 Convention file. I went through all the video, audio and paper records for that function. Something I should have done earlier before making the statement that Governor Palin was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. For that I humbly apologize to Governor Palin, and, to both national and local press, and media. I, foolishly, repeated and accepted as fact what an officer of this membership shared with myself, and husband Dexter Clark, over a year ago. My statement was incorrect regarding the Governor's membership. What was correct was that Todd Palin was a member, that Sarah as a candidate for Governor appeared at the AIP Convention in 2006, and sent a welcoming DVD to the membership at the 2008 AIP statewide convention. Those truths do not take away my fault in mis-speaking regarding her membership. For that I do take full responsibility. I hold Governor Palin in high regard, I believe she is far and away the best individual Alaska could have as Governor, and as a woman, mother and wife is one of the best examples walking! "

http://www.akip.org/090308.html

9/9/2008 9:17:18 AM

Whats wrong with supporting Buchanan?

9/9/2008 9:20:15 AM

I still hope that she gets eaten by a bear.

9/9/2008 9:23:32 AM

If you are curious about Palin's religious thoughts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K_1Eit0pxM&eurl=http://beta.bloglines.com/b/view

Palin's churches are actively involved in a resurgent movement that was declared heretical by the Assemblies of God in 1949. This is the same 'Spiritual Warfare' movement that was featured in the award winning movie, "Jesus Camp," which showed young children being trained to do battle for the Lord.

A new breed of super Christians will have powers to get messages directly from God, heal the sick, and lay claim for God to cities across the world through "strategic level spiritual warfare" against territorial demons. You will see 'slaying in the spirit' by cell phone anointing, visions of a portal to Jesus on the third floor, and accounts of a village being saved by expelling a witch.

9/9/2008 9:43:12 AM

the chickens are coming home to roost

9/9/2008 9:54:50 AM

DG, whats wrong about the creationism thing? She personally supports it, but has not made any attempt to have it done in Alaska. I personally don't see a problem in teaching both. I had a really good science teacher in HS and when we got to evolution, he taught both and said you can think for yourself and decide what you want to accept. I'm more of an intelligent design guy myself, but it was nice they gave us both sides of the story. I had no problem with that, and not a single fucking person complained about it either.

9/9/2008 10:14:47 AM

^good post nighthawk.

The problem is that kind of rational thinking goes against the attacks from the obama supporters.

9/9/2008 11:00:42 AM

Quote :

"^good post nighthawk. The problem is that kind of rational thinking goes against the attacks from the obama supporters."

wow

what a complete douchebag

this guy reminds me of why I don't miss TWW, or TSB

9/9/2008 11:28:07 AM

Isn't it odd then how you keep coming back?

Almost like it's... insanity, wouldn't you say?

9/9/2008 11:30:34 AM

go bury your head in the sand terp. Thats is where a man of your intelligence belongs, the facts will only give you a headache.

9/9/2008 11:57:06 AM

Quote :

"I had a really good science teacher in HS and when we got to evolution, he taught both and said you can think for yourself and decide what you want to accept. I'm more of an intelligent design guy myself, but it was nice they gave us both sides of the story. I had no problem with that, and not a single fucking person complained about it either."

Your teacher did everyone a disservice. Intelligent design is not science. It cannot be considered as an alternative to evolution in a legitmate scientific debate. There is no place for it in schools.

9/9/2008 12:08:46 PM

SHE MURDERS PUPPIES


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cheri-shankar/palin-shows-no-love-for-b_b_124532.html

Quote :

"On a beautiful Alaskan summer morning in July of this year, a litter of 4-week-old wolf cubs were napping in the safety of their natal den, cuddled together, little bellies full of mother's milk when suddenly they were roughly pulled, half asleep, into the light of day and one by one, had their brains blown out by a bullet to each one of their tiny little heads. Who could do such a thing? A group of Alaskan state employees who were helicoptered into the wolves habitat at the behest and with the blessing of Gov. Sarah "Terminator" Palin, that's who. On federal land it is illegal to kill pups in their den (a practice charmingly referred to as "denning") but the mother wolf had made the grave mistake of giving birth to her babies on state owned land, so Palin's posse had the legal right to kill those pups on the spot. photo credit: First People The reason Palin and her mighty hunter pals want to kill off most, if not all of the wolves (and bears) in Alaska is to reduce the hunter's competition for the elk and caribou. Even though generations of Alaskans have negatively impacted the caribou and elk population through over-hunting, logging and other human activity, somehow the wolves are being made to pay the price for the decimation of these herds. What state game officials in Alaska will tell you is that it is necessary to kill predators in order to sustain the elk and caribou population, but what they won't tell you is that they kill wolves, bears and other predators in order to artificially boost the herd numbers so there are plenty of animals for the hunters to shoot. Given that only a tiny fraction of the U.S. population must hunt for sustenance and given the fact that our grocery stores are brimming with meat for our dinner tables, why must we mess with the main source of a wolf's diet? In her all out war against the wolves, Gov. Palin used the power of her office to help defeat a ballot measure in Alaska last month that would have banned the cruel and decidedly unsportsmanlike practice of aerial hunting of wolves. She approved a $400,000 state-funded propaganda campaign to promote aerial hunting and proposed to pay a $150 bounty for the left foreleg of every wolf killed. She is also helping to pass legislation to make it even easier to hunt wolves and bears from aircraft. And if you are wondering what happened to the wolf cub's mother, well, she, along with the rest of her pack, were killed by the same state employees, only in the mother wolf's case, she died by a bullet (or two or three) shot from a helicopter. No one can express how I feel about hunting better than Matthew Scully, author of Dominion: The Power of Man, The Suffering of Animals, and The Call to Mercy one of the most compassionate books ever written about animals. He writes: "Such terrifying powers we possess, but what a sorry lot of gods some men are. And the worst of it is not the cruelty but the arrogance, the sheer hubris of those who bring only violence and fear into the animal world, as if it needed any more of either. Their lives entail enough frights and tribulations without the modern fire-makers, now armed with perfected, inescapable weapons, traipsing along for more fun and thrills at their expense even as so many of them die away. It is our fellow creatures' lot in the universe, the place assigned them in creation, to be completely at our mercy, the fiercest wolf or tiger defenseless against the most cowardly man. And to me it has always seemed not only ungenerous and shabby but a kind of supreme snobbery to deal cavalierly with them, as if their little share of the earth's happiness and grief were inconsequential, meaningless, beneath a man's attention, trumped by any and all designs he might have on them, however base, irrational or wicked." Irony of ironies, Matthew Scully also happens to have penned Palin's successful and effective vice presidential acceptance speech. How strange a world we live in and all its contradictions. If you want to help the fight for the survival of American wolves, please visit Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to learn more. And here is a video that will show you all you need to know about aerial hunting. Animals Sarah Palin "

9/9/2008 12:24:30 PM

And I thought you libs wanted to talk about issues? change your minds?

9/9/2008 12:26:47 PM

Jeffrey Dahmer also murdered little animals - lets make HIM the fucking VP (if he were alive)

9/9/2008 12:34:31 PM

So I assume the fact that you feel the need to re-post verbatim between here and chit-chat is not a sign of your insanity, terpball? Despite, you know, you yourself making that claim of constantly repeating the same things expecting different outcomes being a sign thereof.

Or perhaps the rules simply don't apply to you.

9/9/2008 12:36:23 PM

Well you see creationism is a fucking lie so

9/9/2008 12:42:51 PM

Quote :

"Palin has not pushed for teaching creationism in Alaska's schools. She has said that students should be allowed to "debate both sides" of the evolution question, but she also said creationism "doesn't have to be part of the curriculum."

This is considered pushing for creationism.

Want to help our country's education? Elect an administration who believes students "should be allowed to debate" the Earth being 5000 years old.

[Edited on September 9, 2008 at 12:56 PM. Reason : spelling]

9/9/2008 12:56:16 PM

Quote :

"Your teacher did everyone a disservice. Intelligent design is not science. It cannot be considered as an alternative to evolution in a legitmate scientific debate. There is no place for it in schools."

So it was better to just show them this and have them go home and have the parents say "Them damn liberal scientists can't prove nothing, don't believe that bullcrap." and have the kids really confused, or have somebody that tries to give a better explanation of both that can help kids understand the difference and let them decide for themselves? He didn't teach creationism/intelligent design as a lesson or as a fact, and he didn't quote the Bible. He mainly explained some people believe in it, what it entails, how it differs from evolution, and he understood that many people would have questions. I got him into the intelligent design, as thats what I believed in, and he agreed with it saying that he couldn't deny the facts of evolution and genetics, but only found it very hard to believe that human anatomy was just a random series of events that began in a primordial ooze with no overall design. He didn't go into a hellfire and damnation speech against the damn hippie evolutionists, but he also didn't make fun of every kid who believes in God and tell them they were fucking morons.

I liked his approach and I would support that. But instead of just discussing (if not really teaching) the Christian creation story, I would make a whole lesson one or two days of the different types of creation stories for at least the modern religions that one is likely to run into at a modern high school (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc.). That way you include all the kids, the students get to hear the similiarities and differences in their religious beliefs with regards to creation, and compare it to evolution.

9/9/2008 1:07:54 PM

You shouldn't show it any legitimacy. It's the same reason we don't have alchemy, astrology, or phrenology in science class.

9/9/2008 1:12:42 PM

Here is my response to the 5000 year old thing. Its wrong.

I believe in the Bible, but I certainly know the Earth is older than 5000 years. Lets be honest, the Bible was written by men who were being told what to write from God. Oftentimes this was in dreams.

Now if somebody mentally gave you the story of how the universe was formed and you had to try to write it down as a semi-educated Jewish man in the time before Christ, are you going to understand epochs, ages, eras, planets, galaxies, the cosmos, etc? Probably the fuck not. Billions of years means jack shit if you don't know what it stands for. So they penned it where people could understand it. Nobody knew what a damn dinosaur was, so its pretty much glossed over. I doubt it God had sat down and said "About 10 billion years ago, a comet hit the planet, and in the process cellular life began. Through genetics and evolution, the little single celled organisms grew into animals that became fish. Fish eventually grew legs, walked on land, and developed animal life. The animals continued to evolve till we have dinosaurs, which were gigantic reptiles. They thrived until an asteroid hit the Gulf of Mexico, and wiped them out. Small mammals took over, grew and evolved to monkeys, apes, and eventually over millions of years, home sapiens. This is how you were created." People would have said "WTF God?"

9/9/2008 1:16:49 PM

^^ But those things are sometimes mentioned and explained in school. The difference is if they were presented as facts, which would obviously be stupid, as would be presenting creationism as facts. I do not see the big deal with mentioning the history of it, people's belief in it, and how it differs from evolution.

It may work better in a humanities type class but without a class specific to religion, there isn't a good class to put it in other than when you're talking about evolution in science class, because that's what it is commonly associated with.

I could see having a problem with a teacher if they presented it as truth and fact over evolution which is a definite possibility, but the concept of it being presented is not that big of a deal.

[Edited on September 9, 2008 at 1:21 PM. Reason : ^]

9/9/2008 1:21:38 PM

Quote :

"Moreover, although Palin fired Emmons as part of a "loyalty" purge, she rehired Emmons the next day, and Emmons remained at her job for two-and-a-half more years. Actually, Palin initially requested Emmons' resignation in October 1996, four days before the public discussion of censorship. That was at the same time she requested that all four of Wasilla's department heads resign. Palin described the requests as a loyalty test and allowed all four department heads to retain their positions. But on Jan. 30, 1997, three months after the censorship discussion, Palin informed Emmons and Wasilla's police chief, Irv Stambaugh, that they would be fired. According to the Chicago Tribune, Palin did not list censorship as a reason for Emmons' firing. Palin rehired Emmons the following day. Emmons continued to serve as librarian until August 1999, when the Chicago Tribune reports that she resigned."

?

[Edited on September 9, 2008 at 2:03 PM. Reason : But seriously...]

9/9/2008 1:55:06 PM

Babies, lies, scandal

9/9/2008 2:26:46 PM

Quote :

"Now if somebody mentally gave you the story of how the universe was formed and you had to try to write it down as a semi-educated Jewish man in the time before Christ, are you going to understand epochs, ages, eras, planets, galaxies, the cosmos, etc? Probably the fuck not. Billions of years means jack shit if you don't know what it stands for. So they penned it where people could understand it."

Oh, totally. I bet God laid out this highly scientific explanation (you know, the type He's known for) and the local Rabbi just transcribed it as:

Day 6: God created man.

9/9/2008 2:38:57 PM

I got a message from obama about Palins freak beliefs of Divine creation,

Obama: "Well um obviously that's um impossible. Democrats are the smartest um most gifted race on the planet. Um there's no way there could be um a God or divine source of um information, creation or design in the universe, b/c if um the democrats can't do it, nobody can."

9/9/2008 2:43:31 PM

Um... ok.

9/9/2008 2:56:44 PM

all the democrats taking cheap shots on Palin look about like this right now:

9/9/2008 3:16:52 PM

Looks like a gun-toting female.

That's a Republican demographic, last I checked.

9/9/2008 3:57:05 PM

Quote :

"it was nice they gave us both sides of the story"

both sides of the story?

LOL

9/9/2008 5:05:35 PM

Speaking of both sides, FactCheck.org also analyzed Sarah Palin's numerous lies in her speech at the convention. This includes her lies about her opposition to the bridge to nowhere, her lies about Barack Obama's record, and her lies about his energy policy.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/gop_convention_spin_part_ii.html

9/9/2008 5:55:22 PM

Maybe if she gets elected she will encourage MANDATORY bible reading time everyday.

John McCain= GOOD

Sarah Palin= Ignorant Right-wing Evangelical Moonbat

9/9/2008 6:16:26 PM

spookyjon,

actually neither of those examples would be considered lies in the full-sense. As your link points out, Palin did indeed say "no thanks" to the bridge to no where (though she initially didn't). And her comment on Obama's record all depends on how you define the subjective term "major", which is why FactCheck on classifies it as "unfair" instead of incorrect.

At best, you can say that Palin has glossed over her record and unfairly described the record of her opponent (OMG! Someone glossing their resume and pocking fun at their opponent!?!?!).

Obama on the other hand has no problem with actually lying about his record or the record of his opponent.

Here is Obama Actually lying about his record
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/23/AR2008032301706.html?hpid=topnews

Here is Obama getting caught distoring McCain's record.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts3U939CD3g

Now, I'm sure you can probably also find examples of McCain or Palin saying something else about their record that is incorrect or distorting Obama's position. But hey, if you're looking for a boy scout, maybe you should join a troop. You won't find them in Washington and you won't find one in Barack Obama.

[Edited on September 9, 2008 at 6:26 PM. Reason : This ain't bean bag.]

9/9/2008 6:16:44 PM

Quote :

"actually neither of those examples would be considered lies in the full-sense. As your link points out, Palin did indeed say "no thanks" to the bridge to no where, but only after she accepted the money for the bridge and instead used it for other projects"

there, fixed.
you're really toeing the line by claiming that's not a lie....

9/9/2008 6:28:24 PM

agentlion, Im pretty sure that a senator had to put in the pork.

9/9/2008 7:14:05 PM

What had happened was that the Alaskan Congressional delegation - specifically, Rep. Don Young, had put in the Gravina Island Bridge (i.e., "Bridge to Nowhere") earmark. At this time, Sarah Palin was among many local boosters of the project.

As it happens, the media got wind of the earmark, and Congress removed the stipulation that the funds be used on the bridge- but not the funds. Then-Governor Palin subsequently reversed course on her stand on the bridge, accepted the funds, and re-allocated them elsewhere in Alaska.

In other words, the perfect opportunist. Not exactly a paragon of reform, there.

9/9/2008 8:21:25 PM

Quote :

"agentlion, Im pretty sure that a senator had to put in the pork. "

I am pretty sure that guy is under indictment hearings as we speak. Ted Stevens as a republican supposedly representing "fiscal conservatism" created enough pork that it even makes liberals like Nancy Pelosi look like a conservative.

9/10/2008 12:53:31 PM

Quote :

"I liked his approach and I would support that. But instead of just discussing (if not really teaching) the Christian creation story, I would make a whole lesson one or two days of the different types of creation stories for at least the modern religions that one is likely to run into at a modern high school (Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc.). That way you include all the kids, the students get to hear the similiarities and differences in their religious beliefs with regards to creation, and compare it to evolution."

This has nothing to do with evolution.

And evolution is a THEORY, not a law, not the truth. If you have kids who can't understand the concept of scientific theory by middle school, or are too ignorant to be able to separate the worlds of science and faith, it's gone far beyond what a teacher can teach.

It's one thing to answer questions, it's another to TEACH religious viewpoints in a science classroom. It sends a completely wrong message to students and is extremely counterproductive. Now if you want to teach creationism and alternative faith origin stories in English, History, Religious Studies, or Social Studies courses I have absolutely no problem with it. But even what you are suggesting is not right and sure as shit not allowed in public curriculums.

9/10/2008 8:48:42 PM

Quote :

"agentlion, Im pretty sure that a senator had to put in the pork. "

pork? Is that some kind of bash against Gov. Palin? Are you just a sexist, or do you also beat your wife?

9/10/2008 8:51:40 PM

What happens when the biology teacher is not christian. Is she still going to be forced to teach bible passages on creationism as the 'alternative' theory to evolution.

I like how these soccer moms who probably never went to college know more than PhD experts

9/10/2008 9:11:45 PM

Quote :

"And evolution is a THEORY, not a law, not the truth. If you have kids who can't understand the concept of scientific theory by middle school, or are too ignorant to be able to separate the worlds of science and faith, it's gone far beyond what a teacher can teach."

I don't know. Some biology textbooks go so far as to say that evolution is a fact. Moreover, I'd wager to say that only teaching evolution would give implicit support to it being "fact," especially in the context of a public school with children, even fourteen- and fifteen-year-olds. The level of critical thinking skills needed to understand such a notion as you describe is not uniformly held among that demographic, and yet there you have someone of authority, the teacher, saying these things. You are correct, it is difficult to teach such thinking skills, and I don't think it can be done, but I don't know how to perfectly address such a situation. However, to say "well, they must be too stupid to figure it out if they don't understand it by that age" is, to say the least, naive, and it shows a lack of understanding of cognitive development.

9/10/2008 9:54:43 PM

Quote :

"What happens when the biology teacher is not christian. Is she still going to be forced to teach bible passages on creationism as the 'alternative' theory to evolution."

srsly, what fucking teacher is gonna bring in a bible to teach biology. wtf. that's fucking retarded.

just list the steps of the earths creation in bullet points, and then show this picture to explain the big bang and you've done your job + extra credit.

9/10/2008 10:04:46 PM

Quote :

"Intelligent design is not science."

Islam is not Christianity, either. What's you point?

9/10/2008 10:20:23 PM

pretty sure he laid out his point in the subsequent two sentences, asshat

and no, science is not a faith

[Edited on September 10, 2008 at 10:42 PM. Reason : .]

9/10/2008 10:33:51 PM

keep telling yourself that. maybe one day it will be true

9/10/2008 10:45:52 PM

Quote :

"faith Audio Help /fe??/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[feyth] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun belief that is not based on proof: "

Quote :

"sci·ence Audio Help /'sa??ns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sahy-uhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. "

but you're just trollin' anyway so fuck it

[Edited on September 10, 2008 at 10:52 PM. Reason : ,]

9/10/2008 10:51:34 PM

not worth getting into here, but we can agree to disagree. Most people who are religious fanatics will never admit that they could be wrong. So it is with science

9/10/2008 11:01:46 PM

And with stubborn trolls who subvert the language to make a contrarian point. Carry on.

9/10/2008 11:17:19 PM

nah. no subversion here. not even CVS.

9/10/2008 11:26:07 PM