Shirley Baechtold: Palin's Actions Merit Media Scrutiny.
Palin's actions merit media scrutiny
Shirley Baechtold
This is an open letter to Wolf Blitzer and "the best political team on television."
Concerned citizens have been waiting to hear from the person Sen. John McCain has chosen to lead this country if he is elected and then dies or becomes incapacitated.
We want Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to undergo the same kind of intense scrutiny and off-the-script questioning that Sens. Barack Obama, Joe Biden and John McCain have gone through for months.
We have seen the overblown hockey mom/pit bull thing over and over, and we want it to be over. Talk about overkill. We are tired of the sound bytes from the rallies where McCain shouts that he can hardly wait to introduce Palin to Washington.
If he can hardly wait to introduce her, why is he hiding her? And why is TV giving Palin a pass? Could it be that the media are so charmed by the novelty of a hockey mom as vice president that she doesn't have to respond to those pesky little abuse of power things that keep coming up?
One allegation to finally surface on TV has concerned citizens uneasy. It seems that when she was mayor of Wasilla, Palin asked librarian Mary Ellen Emmons whether she would be willing to remove books from the library if she were asked to do so. Since censorship is anathema to librarians — or should be — Emmons said no way.
Campaign people speaking for Palin first told us the question was "rhetorical." Why would anyone ask and then repeat a rhetorical question about censorship?
Now we hear that the question was a "policy" question. A policy about censorship? Did Palin expect Emmons to reply, "Well, my policy is not to remove books from the library, but I might be persuaded to ban books if you ask me. I'm sure you would have a good reason for deciding what people should not be allowed to read."
If Emmons had answered that way, perhaps she would not have received that letter from Palin telling the librarian that she was going to be fired.
Here's the thing: If Palin's question to Emmons was not an attempt to ban books that conflict with her conservative beliefs, then she needs to come up with a better explanation than "it was just policy."
Every mayor in the United States should know that censorship is an infringement on the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of expression and the right to know. Censorship proliferated during the 1970s and 1980s, when conservative groups intent on banning books became well organized, infiltrating school boards, legislatures and courts.
Island Trees vs. Pico, the only book censorship case to reach the Supreme Court, originated one night in 1975 when school board members entered the school library in Island Trees, N.Y., and removed books listed as unsuitable by a conservative group in Baton Rouge, La.
One board member is quoted as saying "These books had no business being in a high school library. Our taxpayers don't have to subsidize garbage."
Among that "garbage" were two Pulitzer Prize-winning novels and several highly acclaimed books by black authors.
Those looking for assurance that the court would make a strong statement protecting intellectual freedom and the First Amendment were disappointed when only five of the nine justices ruled against the school board. The other four were vigorous in their dissent.
Books by African-American authors continue to be targets of conservative critics. In March 2007, Toni Morrison's Pulitzer Prize-winning Beloved was attacked and dropped from the curriculum in Louisville's Eastern High School. Other books frequently banned include the Harry Potter series and works that deal with evolution.
People who are so sure their beliefs and decisions are sacrosanct and should not be questioned make effective censors, but they make scary presidents.
A president who thinks her own beliefs are unimpeachable may decide that views different from hers need to be suppressed. As "the decider," she may abuse the power of her office by firing federal attorneys who refuse to file false voter-fraud allegations; by blowing the cover of a CIA agent whose husband discredited the claim that Saddam Hussein tried to purchase uranium from Niger; by condoning illegal wiretapping of suspects and torture of prisoners; or by altering environmental reports and withdrawing protection for endangered animals in an effort to discredit global warming.
After meeting Palin and talking to her for 15 minutes, McCain apparently decided she would be the kind of distraction his campaign needed. He was right. His hockey mom running mate has been good for his campaign and good for TV.
Did he take the time to consider whether his choice was right for the country? This time, when he made that crucial choice, he failed to put his country first.
Shirley Baechtold of Richmond is a musician and retired Eastern Kentucky University English teacher. E-mail her at sabaech54@yahoo.com.
Shirley Baechtold
This is an open letter to Wolf Blitzer and "the best political team on television."
Concerned citizens have been waiting to hear from the person Sen. John McCain has chosen to lead this country if he is elected and then dies or becomes incapacitated.
We want Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to undergo the same kind of intense scrutiny and off-the-script questioning that Sens. Barack Obama, Joe Biden and John McCain have gone through for months.
We have seen the overblown hockey mom/pit bull thing over and over, and we want it to be over. Talk about overkill. We are tired of the sound bytes from the rallies where McCain shouts that he can hardly wait to introduce Palin to Washington.
If he can hardly wait to introduce her, why is he hiding her? And why is TV giving Palin a pass? Could it be that the media are so charmed by the novelty of a hockey mom as vice president that she doesn't have to respond to those pesky little abuse of power things that keep coming up?
One allegation to finally surface on TV has concerned citizens uneasy. It seems that when she was mayor of Wasilla, Palin asked librarian Mary Ellen Emmons whether she would be willing to remove books from the library if she were asked to do so. Since censorship is anathema to librarians — or should be — Emmons said no way.
Campaign people speaking for Palin first told us the question was "rhetorical." Why would anyone ask and then repeat a rhetorical question about censorship?
Now we hear that the question was a "policy" question. A policy about censorship? Did Palin expect Emmons to reply, "Well, my policy is not to remove books from the library, but I might be persuaded to ban books if you ask me. I'm sure you would have a good reason for deciding what people should not be allowed to read."
If Emmons had answered that way, perhaps she would not have received that letter from Palin telling the librarian that she was going to be fired.
Here's the thing: If Palin's question to Emmons was not an attempt to ban books that conflict with her conservative beliefs, then she needs to come up with a better explanation than "it was just policy."
Every mayor in the United States should know that censorship is an infringement on the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of expression and the right to know. Censorship proliferated during the 1970s and 1980s, when conservative groups intent on banning books became well organized, infiltrating school boards, legislatures and courts.
Island Trees vs. Pico, the only book censorship case to reach the Supreme Court, originated one night in 1975 when school board members entered the school library in Island Trees, N.Y., and removed books listed as unsuitable by a conservative group in Baton Rouge, La.
One board member is quoted as saying "These books had no business being in a high school library. Our taxpayers don't have to subsidize garbage."
Among that "garbage" were two Pulitzer Prize-winning novels and several highly acclaimed books by black authors.
Those looking for assurance that the court would make a strong statement protecting intellectual freedom and the First Amendment were disappointed when only five of the nine justices ruled against the school board. The other four were vigorous in their dissent.
Books by African-American authors continue to be targets of conservative critics. In March 2007, Toni Morrison's Pulitzer Prize-winning Beloved was attacked and dropped from the curriculum in Louisville's Eastern High School. Other books frequently banned include the Harry Potter series and works that deal with evolution.
People who are so sure their beliefs and decisions are sacrosanct and should not be questioned make effective censors, but they make scary presidents.
A president who thinks her own beliefs are unimpeachable may decide that views different from hers need to be suppressed. As "the decider," she may abuse the power of her office by firing federal attorneys who refuse to file false voter-fraud allegations; by blowing the cover of a CIA agent whose husband discredited the claim that Saddam Hussein tried to purchase uranium from Niger; by condoning illegal wiretapping of suspects and torture of prisoners; or by altering environmental reports and withdrawing protection for endangered animals in an effort to discredit global warming.
After meeting Palin and talking to her for 15 minutes, McCain apparently decided she would be the kind of distraction his campaign needed. He was right. His hockey mom running mate has been good for his campaign and good for TV.
Did he take the time to consider whether his choice was right for the country? This time, when he made that crucial choice, he failed to put his country first.
Shirley Baechtold of Richmond is a musician and retired Eastern Kentucky University English teacher. E-mail her at sabaech54@yahoo.com.
Labels: General information
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 3:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home