MEADOR: Book banning attacks thick with irony

It's safe to say we've entered the political Twilight Zone.

Earlier this week Bill Clinton - he of "South Carolina voted for Jesse Jackson, too" fame - said it's time for Democrats to demonstrate greater civility by ending the personal attacks on Sarah Palin.

Irony this thick used to come in short supply, but in today's political environment it's becoming more and more common.

We've already seen the "candidate for change" use the negative campaigning tactics he so eloquently denigrated earlier.

Then we saw the Republicans - who have controlled all three branches of government for most of the past eight years - start trying to advertise themselves as the party of change. Mitt Romney even went so far as to say we need to establish a conservative Washington, as if a Republican White House and Congress for six of the past eight years wasn't exactly that.

We've also seen the candidate of change select a senator with 35 years in the supposedly corrupt world of Washington, D.C. as his VP candidate.

Then we saw the candidate of experience select a VP whose experience consists of serving as mayor in a town of 5,000 and as governor (for two years) in a state of 600,000.

It seems that the current political mover sand shakers - from the left and the right - have just about cornered the market on irony.

But the best example came earlier this week, and it easily takes the cake.

You may have heard about a recently-circulated e-mail purporting to be a list of books that Palin attempted to ban while on the Wasila City Council. The e-mail may also have included other juicy details, claiming that Palin fired the city librarian when she refused to ban the books.

To the delight of liberal bloggers everywhere, this news broke during Banned Book Week, an annual week-long celebration that draws attention to past attempts to ban controversial books and encourages Americans to read controversial literature so that they can make up their own mind about the book, rather than unquestioningly accepting the judgments of others.

And if only most of the scenario described above was actually true, it might actually merit the sensationalist coverage showed it by many liberals.

As it turns out, a story in the Anchorage Daily News gives a fuller picture of what happened.

While a member of the Wasila City Council, Palin did ask the city librarian about the possibility of removing controversial books from the library. And upon her election to mayor, Palin did ask for the resignation of the city librarian.

However, she asked for the resignations of many other city officials at the time, too. The dismissed officials had been appointed by the previous mayor and had campaigned aggressively against Palin. Palin was, understandably, concerned that they wouldn't work well with her as the mayor. The librarian's dismissal was unrelated to her refusal to remove books from the library and, when pressured by the people of Wasila, Palin rehired her.

While still disconcerting, it's hardly the four-alarm scenario described in the e-mails.

It's always troubling when a politician even looks into banning books, and the entire episode has only added to my already considerable frustration with the Republican ticket. The fact Palin even asked about banning books is alarming and represents a hypocritical departure from the so-called small government conservatism that she and Sen. John McCain promise. And it only makes me more convinced that independents like myself are going to be left in the cold this November. Currently, I plan to write in Jesus for president.

But the doomsday e-mails sent out are hardly fair portrayals of what actually happened.

In a wonderful bit of irony, they embody the very spirit that Banned Book Week is meant to condemn: the uncritical acceptance of rumors masquerading as facts for the purpose of misleading large segments of the population who are too lazy to find the facts for themselves.

Even that isn't the end of the irony. These rumors aren't that dissimilar from similar rumors about the religious affiliation of Sen. Barack Obama.

Democrats understandably condemned those as outrageous pieces of fiction meant to incite partisan hatred. Yet this episode illustrates that many Democrats are willing to engage in the same tired tactics if they'll gain from doing so.

In both cases, the lesson of Banned Book Week is relevant: Don't accept purported facts just because you read them in an e-mail or a news story. Rather, take the time to educate yourself about the controversial issue being discussed.

If we fail to do this, we'll continue to corner the market on irony, and we'll take a few steps toward monopolizing stupidity as well.

Jake Meador is a junior English and history major. Reach him at jakemeador@dailynebraskan.com