you bet I want to look at the systemic reasons; where the hell has the Republican administration been as this situation has evolved; you do know the Justice Department has an antitrust division, right? and you know who runs the Justice Department, right?

since when does “government demand that banks make mortgage loans to those with bad credit histories” ? and, assuming for the hell of it that you’re right (which you are not), whose government?

do you not read the persistent demands from neocons for “less government regulation” ? you got it; here we are.

Yes, the financial system is having major problems, but perhaps you lefties don’t want to really look at the systemic reasons it is, now do you?

- govermment demands that banks make mortgage loans to those whose credit histories would make them very risky borrowers, even to those like illegals who shouldn’t even be here, and in neighhorhoods where property values don’t necessarily go up
- government encouragement, or at best benign neglect, of illegal immigration, which lowered the cost of building houses (by displacing higher paid citizens), allowing home builders to construct more inventory than they could normally sell under the old lending rules
- allowing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to become bloated, corrupted quasi-governmental organizations, whose officers (hack political appointees, mostly Clintonistas) cooked the books for years to quadruple their bonuses

All the above were exactly what the left wanted. Now they’ll blame McBusHitler, and propose disastrous “solutions” to the calamitous problems they caused in the first place.

Stay safe, ProgMeister.

thanks, Nine … we’re broadcasting again, a little storm-weary but entirely safe

What I still want to know is, how can you ban a book two years before it’s published?

I don’t know how this got started re her actually banning books, though there’s evidence that she had it in mind; in any case, I think it’s past time to comment about Palin unless and until she engages substantive issues. Needless to say, I reserve the right to change my mind.

Time to start focusing in on the economy, folks … the banking system is in tatters; anything to do with taxes is not an answer to the systemic problems which got us to where we are

And the garbage about her beliefs about creationism, picked up by both the partially Harvard educated Matt Damon, and the NYT’s Mo Dowd and broadcast as truth, were in fact totally made up as a hoax, and admitted to by the author as such:
http://unbearablebobness.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/08/governor-sarah-palin-quotes.html

I await the retractions and apologies by both.

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/

He links to records indicating that only FIVE books were even reviewed between 1986 and 2007, and only one of them was reviewed during SP’s term. There is no evidence that she herself requested the review. Of the five books, four remained where they were in the library, and one was moved to the Young Adults’ section. In short, not one book was ever banned.

http://www.cityofwasilla.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=516

When people here start railing against book bonfires and fascism, I assume they have some sort of documentation to back up their claims – right?

If Jack-of-Spades wants the story to be true, why is he/she/it speaking of “our good luck”?

Anyway – it’s not conservatives’ fault if Leftist librarians are spreading disinformation. They should have reviewed the publication dates of the books to find out whether or not the story was plausible. It doesn’t do any good to breathlessly “run away” with false details and, when called on it, darkly hint that conservatives generated them to destroy the Left’s credibility.

I checked the original article in the Frontiersman from 12/18/96, and it is quite telling that in her response to Palin, Library Director Mary Ellen Emmons never mentions any banned books by name. Palin specifically denies wanting to ban particular titles, and Emmons does not contradict her in the story. Emmons herself states SP discussed a hypothetical scenario where irate citizens picketed the library to have a book removed. In other words, their discussion was about what should be done if such a controversy DID arise, and was not about SP going after a particular book she didn’t like. If SP had really asked her to ban or destroy books then why didn’t Emmons tell the Frontiersman which titles were to be removed?

It looks like the inquiry was never as specific as the Left wants it to be, although some Democrats are still hoping against hope that a “real” list of banned books will surface. Best of luck to them.

Furthermore, the Frontiersman article strongly indicates that there was a book challenge policy that predated Palin’s appointment AND applied to more than one district in Alaska. Claims that she introduced censorship to an idyllic, freethinking community are questionable at best.

And was almost immediately picked up by the conservative blogisphere as if it where integral to the story. Note that both the blog owner and other commenters expressed doubts about the veracity of the list.

I guess it was just our good luck that someone posted that list of books when they did. Otherwise there would be no convincing way to discredit the story.

“Palin asked on you behalf.” What is he rambling about?

Nobody did anything on my behalf. What I still want to know is, how can you ban a book two years before it’s published?

(A) ABC AND THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA WILL FIGHT TO THE DEATH TO DEFEND ABORTION, SAME SEX MARRIAGE, WELFARE, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, TRADE BARRIERS, HEAVY UNIONIZATION, SEXIST, AND HOMOSEXUAL RIGHTS.

(B) ABC AND THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA TEND TO BELITTLE CITIZENS WITH CHURCH GOING FAMILIES, THAT WORK VERY HARD TO KEEP WHAT THEY EARN, THAT INVEST IN GOOD PARENTING, THAT ARE PRO-LIFE, AND HAVE CONSERVATIVE VALUES, AND THAT HAVE DIFFICULTY RECONCILING ABORTION AND SAME SEX MARRIAGE WITH THEIR KIDS.

(C) WHY DOES DISNEY OWN ABC? WHICH SIDE DOES DISNEY TAKE? THE APPROACH DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH (A) OR THAT OF PARAGRAPH (B). BY HAVING OWNERSHIP AND OVERSIGHT OF ABCNEWS AS A LIBERAL ELITE MEDIA OPERATION, IT APPEARS DISNEY TAKES PARAGRAPH (A), EVEN THOUGH YOUR CORPORATE IMAGE WITH THEME PARKS, STUDIOS, AND OTHER OPERATIONS PLAY IN THE IMAGES OF PARAGRAPH (B).

(D) FOR DISNEY/ABC, THIS IS A CLOUDED, CONFUSED CORPORATE IMAGE AT BEST, AND HYPOCRISY AT WORST. AS A MAJOR MEDIA COMPANY, YOUR IMAGE AND YOUR ABILITY TO BE TRUSTED IS MAGICAL AND GOLDEN.

(E) WITH ANY MAJOR MEDIA COMPANY, YOU SHOULD BE JUDGED BY SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THE FOLLOWING:

“WHAT MAKES YOU WORTHY OF TELLING US WHAT YOU THINK?”

CHARLES GIBSON, ADVERTISES HIMSELF AS “YOUR TRUSTED SOURCE”.

(F) DISNEY, ABCNEWS, AND CHARLIE HAVE AN OBLIGATION IN SHOWING US WHAT MAKES YOU WORTHY OF TELLING US WHAT YOU THINK, IF YOU CHOOSE TO TELL US WHAT YOU THINK, INSTEAD OF JUST REPORTING THE STORY OBJECTIVELY.