And could you post the link to the reference about wanting to ban books?
Bret, glad you asked. Actually I had posted an older version which said this, but a new article from Salon entitled, "What's the difference between Palin and Muslim fundamentalists? Lipstick"A theocrat is a theocrat, whether Muslim or Christian. By Juan Cole addresses it as well and makes an interesting argument against extremists of any religion.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/09/09/palin_fundamentalist/
McCain pledged to work for peace based on "the transformative ideals on which we were founded." Tolerance and democracy require freedom of speech and the press, but while mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, Palin inquired of the local librarian how to go about banning books that some of her constituents thought contained inappropriate language. She tried to fire the librarian for defying her. Book banning is common to fundamentalisms around the world, and the mind-set Palin displayed did not differ from that of the Hamas minister of education in the Palestinian government who banned a book of Palestinian folk tales for its sexually explicit language. In contrast, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Our liberty cannot be guarded but by the freedom of the press, nor that be limited without danger of losing it."
McCain once excoriated the Rev. Jerry Falwell and his ilk as "agents of intolerance." That he took such a position gave his opposition to similar intolerance in Islam credibility. In light of his more recent disgraceful kowtowing to the Christian right, McCain's animus against fundamentalist Muslims no longer looks consistent. It looks bigoted and invidious. You can't say you are waging a war on religious extremism if you are trying to put a religious extremist a heartbeat away from the presidency
As for the Vetting, Frank Rich, one of my favorite NY Times columnists writes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/opinion/07rich.html?hp[
[quote]The Times had it right. The McCain campaign’s claims of a “full vetting processâ€
