oh fuck, it's jarron gilbert's arch-nemesis. nice try, mink, but everyone here knows you were only ever able to jump out of a kiddie pool

>> ^MINK:
dude jumps out of shallow pool. wow.
what next? girl opens jar of jam after man loosens it for her? librarian finds book in under 10 minutes? caterpillar eats leaves?
coming soon on "amazing"sift.

dude jumps out of shallow pool. wow.

what next? girl opens jar of jam after man loosens it for her? librarian finds book in under 10 minutes? caterpillar eats leaves?

coming soon on "amazing"sift.

Ahhh Bill... love 'im. Seen him live, he had me and the wife crying with laughter. He's one of the most intellectual and in the same breath, ridiculous comedians there are. Great to have a comedian not playing to the lowest common denominator.

And he wasn't in a show about librarians, they worked in/owned a book shop, show was black books.

he also was in a show from britcom about some crazy librarians. enjoyable

>> ^MarineGunrock:
THEY aren't. WE are.

Right. They aren't.

She is so sexy in those geek glasses!

Like a young, lesbian librarian. Rawr!

Reentering this discussion too late to really matter, and I'm not even sure if the people who downvoted me for trying to be a voice of reason will see this, but if you read the reports at snopes (http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/bannedbooks.asp) and factcheck (http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html), you'll see that the question of banning books WAS hypothetical, and that even the librarian in question says she was never actually asked to ban any books.

I latched on to the bit about book banning in this ad, because otherwise it is an EXCELLENT ad that hits all the high points. The point of my comment was to draw attention to the fact that accusing Palin of trying to ban books was an unnecessary lie in a very powerful ad, and that lie could have been enough to turn off a moderate who might otherwise have been swayed, because it injects that little hint of suspicion that there might be other lies in the ad.

The incredible number of negative, falsehood filled advertisements are a big reason the Republicans lost the election, and I really think it's a shame that a small, independent Democrat group decided to throw in a completely debunked claim when they had such an otherwise factual and POWERFUL advertisement.

When the truth is so effective, why throw in even a half-truth?

Whoa whoa, the book banning thing failed because responsible, intelligent people STOOD UP TO THAT NUTJOB. It most CERTAINLY doesn't need to drop.

Some facts about it:

1. She wanted to ban some stuff, so she asked the person in charge of the libraries what she thought and received the answer that books would not be banned as long as the librarian kept her position

2. She fired the librarian in an attempt to get by her.

3. The librarian was reinstated when people came to her aid.

4. Palin drops the attempt only after it appears she can't win.

Just because she was an INEFFECTIVE nutjob in that case doesn't mean that we shouldn't still know where shes coming from.

Now, all that said, I find it hilarious that the one thing you latch on to here is the book stuff and ignore all the stuff about woman's rights...

Oh, and as for the $42k tax thing... I love it. The reps have been just lying this last week to try to scare people. It went from $250k businesses, to $100k and now the poster above claiming it is for incomes above $42... yeah, keep lying guys... that's the way to better this country, lie a candidate into office.

She's tasted real power, and will thirst for more...

... therefor I predict she will become a vampire, an eternal creature of the night, lording over dreaming cities and townscapes which had once welcomed her and praised her, feasting upon the Prius drivers and the PETA members, the news reporters and librarians, unable to satiate her yearnings, unable to slay her sulfurous desires, driven by ever-present demons to commit the next unspeakable act, until the dawning of the end of times...

>> ^nibiyabi:
>> ^lavoll:
where do you work?
and sexmachine is an excellentname for a computer

I work at a Catholic university in California. Yeah, yeah, I know, but trust me; this stuff is pretty universal in the American workplace. It's a combination of our prudishness and our litigiousness.


Hee hee, reminds me of a high school prank someone had - they set up a nudie screensaver on the high school librarian's computer. Of course the librarians were nuns, so that went over well.

Everyone had a good laugh about it, actually.

NSFW is used "liberally" (or, if you will, in a "conservative" mindset manner) as a "lowest common denominator". As discussed by the other posters and in earlier sift-talks.

The main function of NSFW is to:
1. warn you when you might get random swearing / sexy talk in a video, especially if you're not expecting it, and you
a. are in a 'work'-like place, or
b. have younger kids around who you want to hold off on teaching profuse swearing to until they've reached their fourth birthday.
2. deal with the adult ninnies whose freakin' ears might hurt.

Embrace the tag as a mark of your 'edginess' (real or imagined) and sift on.

half her sentences aren't even english as she tries to jam her talking points and buzzwords into the middle of a lie... and it still doesn't matter because she wears her hair up and has glasses... wow she must be a clever girl, maybe a librarian or a scientist or something.

ugh.

she is very very childish. it's like listening to a precocious schoolkid who has figured out the style and doesn't understand about putting weight behind it.

"let's work together with the stakeholders" etc etc bla bla

if she doesn't win, i can imagine she'll push the podium over and run home screaming "it's not FAAAAIR!!! they ruined EVERYTHING!!!!"

>> ^quantumushroom:
I have to give you credit for consistency, QM, your ignorance and apparent racism extend even to the boundaries of space.
You mean I'm not permitted to hate on a country whose tyrannical government promotes censorship, trial-free imprisonment, forced abortions, invasion of Tibet and harvesting prisoners' organs?
It's likely the Chy-knees rockets were built with tech stolen (or given) to them during the criminal Clinton years.
Only liberals hate Bush and waterboarding more than the evil empires.


Soo... What about the invasion of America? I mean honestly, lets look back at history, Native Americans got a raw deal, they just don't complain enough about it. You want to talk about trial-free imprisonment, is that anything like slavery or trial free interment camps? Censorship... Like firing librarians for not removing certain books from their shelves? I'm not trying to say that I agree with Chinese politics, I think there is a lot going wrong in that country, but I have faith that the Chinese people will be able to liberate themselves from it in the coming years. I just find it amusing that racists like you, like to hide behind some sense of patriotism. And don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good off color joke as much as the next person, which was why I was looking past your first comment about rice-o-nauts, but comments like this one, are just plain ignorant.

volumptuous is right when he (she?) says: "Free speech isn't exactly a 'right' in public schools." My mom was a middle school librarian. Children would be asked to turn their shirts inside-out or go home and change if they caused any sort of disturbance like this.

Honestly, can you see a 13 year old girl wearing a Hooters t-shirt to school? How about a bikini top? How about a microbikini bottom like this? Any shirts with messages that would get the rest of the room riled up makes it harder for the teachers to maintain a learning environment. In a similar vein, any children that choose to speak up and voice their opinions in a disruptive way also make it difficult for teachers to maintain control of the classroom and keep the kids learning.

It's one thing to have a political discussion. It's quite another to stand in the corridor and yell "OBAMA IS A TERRORIST'S BEST FRIEND"; the voiced equivalent of this shirt.

well, its funny the left is playing the games they used to accuse the far right of playing.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html
We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

* Palin did not cut funding for special needs education in Alaska by 62 percent. She didn’t cut it at all. In fact, she increased funding and signed a bill that will triple per-pupil funding over three years for special needs students with high-cost requirements.

* She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a "What if?" question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin's first term.

* 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.

* Palin never endorsed or supported Pat Buchanan for president. She once wore a Buchanan button as a "courtesy" when he visited Wasilla, but shortly afterward she was appointed to co-chair of the campaign of Steve Forbes in the state.

* 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."

No, the point is that an elected official shouldn't have to ask the question. She might ask one of her aids, or legal counsel, in private, and hopefully she'd get the right answer, if she honestly didn't know.

But to ask the librarian, in a public, official capacity, is ridiculous, and yes, it is wrong.

AND

An elected official who'd be dumb enough to ask the question in that context is not someone I want anywhere near the chain-of-command of our executive branch.