I'm a degree carrying librarian (though I probably will never again work in the profession). Therefore if I make a pronouncement on that issue I will automatically win. Yay.

But I'm not participating. But I will.

Public librarians deal with this kind of thing all of the time, queries from the public (and even government) about removing books. So far I have seen no evidence that Palin made any significant attempt to get books removed from the library beyond asking about how it would be handled.

I have no idea if the "librarian" in question is actually a librarian or just someone hire to run the library (not necessarily the same thing, especially in small towns) so I don't know how "political" of a position it might be in that situation. But that is moot until such time as I see evidence that Palin made an actual attempt to get books removed.

Besides, when it comes to small town libraries (and even large town libraries) there is a much simpler way to get a book removed from the collection. Check it out, "lose it," pay the fines for "losing" it. Odds are good that it will be years before the volume is replaced in kind.

You don't owe me one, per se - You owe an apology to everyone here who has ever offered an opinion without vast expertise or university sanctioned knowledge of the subject in question. Even to yourself.

If you stand by what you said, I have no problem with that. Of course, it then means what you have to offer on pretty much any subject becomes moot because of the standard you have chosen to hold opinions to.

*retrieves the half-eaten but still tasty bucket of popcorn he put into the trash, pops a few kernels in his mouth, and takes a seat*

Personally I found your use of the term "you have no informed opinion" patently offensive. It's tantamount to calling someone an ignorant fool. A personal attack. He apologized for responding in kind. You did not.

I've been avoiding this thread because it was getting too personal and downright nasty in tone. We all have strong opinions about this subject and it's inevitable that things will get heated, but personal attacks are never cool- an ad hominem attack is usually the last refuge of someone who lacks any real substance in their argument yet wants to continue on. That is not debate, discourse or anything remotely productive, and I'd like to think we were better than that.

I also agree with GD with regards to others throwing gas on this fire.

I'm voting for Alfred E. Newman.

She didn't frame it as such, but howzabout we consider that a Mod Warning ... and KNOCK IT OFF!

It's not so much that we like our sh!t stirred on the LoT, we just like the *ka-BOOM* you get when you throw a cherry bomb into an outhouse.

The stank is bonus.

Please note that personal attacks do not have to be ad hominem. Yes, I resorted to that, admittedly and unfortunately, but certainly not because it was my only thing to say to keep it going. However, I was indeed personally attacked without it being ad hominem. This is not fishing for an apology - I honestly do not need one nor do I care - I just want to point out while I participated I certainly did not start it.

Gotcha. Let's get this thread back on topic, OK?