Palin went to four different schools (including two separate stints at one of them) and earned one degree.  She transferred four different times.  It took her five years to complete a four-year degree.  I do not know the reasons for her numerous transfers, but they did certainly delay her completion of her degree.

Purely meaningless, since, as you stated, we don't know the reasons.

It took me 8 years to get my 4 years degree and I went to 2 different colleges because I moved.  I worked 2-3 jobs and could only afford the time/money to go part time.  The reasons matter.

The equivalent would be if the citizen wanted to ban adult content entirely ("for the children"), and I would be opposed to that as well.

Unfortunately it's much easier for people to make incorrect and invalid statements based on heresay than it is to do the research.  If the people who care enough about politics that they're participating in a political thread are doing it, imagine all the people out there who are informed only by the heresay and nothing else.

This isn't limited to one side or the other.  You see supporters for both candidates doing it all the time.

I have no disagreement about book banning being repulsive.  I just wish people would do a little research into something before making blanket comments like "Palin wants to ban books".

----------------

On that we are agreed.  It's Michael Moore syndrome: "I want better ammo than I have, so here we go into raisin cake territory."

And I reiterate: your version of events (I can't word this for shit; I don't dispute your version by calling it your version, rest assured) is damning enough in my eyes.  Concerned citizens who want library materials removed need to be educated on what it means to be an American.

It took me 8 years to get my 4 years degree and I went to 2 different colleges because I moved.  I worked 2-3 jobs and could only afford the time/money to go part time.  The reasons matter.

***********

Agreed completely. The end destination is what matters, not the road taken to get there.

I've known and worked with many successful people who took more than four years to get a college degree for a variety of legitimate reasons (family obligations, financial constraints, military commitments, etc.). Likewise, I've known plenty of people who graduated college in four years, often from "prestigious" universities, who were largely useless in a real world setting.

Clearly, both Barack Obama and Sarah Palin have been enormously successful in their endeavors up to this point. Their college transcripts are irrelevant to the jobs they are applying for, as no university teaches a course in "How to be President."

Criticizing someone for how they achieved their education is about on par with kicking a dog in my book.  Working toward a goal, however long it may take, is an honorable endeavor.  So that it took Governor Palin more than four years to get her degree is wholly irrelevant to my mind.

What is relevant is what she learned in pursuit of her degree.  Questioning a candidate on their education is no less fair than questioning them about their associations (assuming the questions are framed in a fair way).  Its the answers that matter.  Accordingly, asking Obama what he learned or experienced in Wright's church, and whether he agreed with it or not, is a fair question.  Asking Palin what she learned at University (by testing her knowledge base) is equally fair.

And to follow up from an earlier post Bruce -- I thought Palin, from a substantive stand point, did not return Biden's volley.  She "speeched" her way through it, with canned responses and prepared zingers.  I don't blame Palin for that  -- from a strategic standpoint its a good play.  Its the job of the moderator to stop that shit.  I felt Ifill did a TERRIBLE job by not asking any real follow up questions.  Watching the debate I wondered if she was even listening to the candidates responses. Palin, with the Couric interviews a recent memory, had set expectation levels so low for the debate that she would have received good marks just by showing up and not vomiting on the dais. 

I hope Scheiffer is better tomorrow night.

Palin, with the Couric interviews a recent memory, had set expectation levels so low for the debate that she would have received good marks just by showing up and not vomiting on the dais. 

***********

Well, given the knowledge that tens of millions of people would be watching me, I'm not sure I could meet those low expectations!!

A library card grants access to the library.  The entire library is available to any citizen with a card. Policing whether the material is appropriate for their children is the responsibilty of the parent.

I agree, in the end that is the case.  However, context matters.  Many libraries have children's sections and even young adult sections.  In somplaces it in a different part of the library from the main library.  I think it would a reasonable expectation that a Henry Miller novel (Tropic of Cancer for example) not be in such sections.  If the complaint to the policitican was the library was intermingleling what is obviously adult fare with kids books -- I think its a reasonable gripe.  If its about Henry Miller's works being in the library in general (because they are "dirty")  then thats an entirely different kettle of fish.

Oops.  Turns out McCain was ok to hang with ACORN. 

So was Obama, now that I think about it...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2008/oct/ 13/election-acorn-voter-fraud