Meanwhile… Back In West Bend

The Christian Civil Liberties Union is suing the city and the mayor over the library issue. 

The Milwaukee branch of the Christian Civil Liberties Union (CCLU) has filed a legal claim that says a book that is available in the West Bend Community Memorial Library is offensive.

  Robert C. Braun of West Allis, Joseph Kogelmann of Milwaukee, Robert Brough of West Bend and the Rev. Cleveland Eden of Milwaukee, representing the Milwaukee based group, filed the claim with the city of West Bend clerk’s office.

  Named in the claim are the city of West Bend, Mayor Kristine Deiss, the West Bend Library Board and Library Director Michael Tyree. The group is seeking $30,000 per plaintiff, Deiss’ resignation and a racist book be removed and publicly burned or destroyed as a deterrent to repeating the offensive conduct, the claim states.

Yeah, I’m not going to support burning books.  Not cool. 

1. Funny, if an opposing group were to request that some Christian books be burned, I’m sure they’d be up in arms about how wrong that is.

   Posted by MommaBlogger on May 02, 2009 at 1228 hrs




2. Someone want to tell me how it is that three elderly folks came to read a book geared towards teenagers?  Did one read it and then say “wow, this book is super obscene and offensive!  Here, you should read it too!”

   This whole whole thing just jumped the shark.  Nothing like the circus coming to town to obfuscate whatever legitimacy the original claims might have had.  Can’t wait to start seeing all you fine folks on The Colbert Report.  It’ll be nice to put some faces with the names.

   Posted by Recess Supervisor on May 02, 2009 at 1250 hrs




3. And SafeLibraries claims that this issue doesn’t have a gay slant, either.  At least not anymore - now it’s got religion.

   http://the-motley-cow.blogspot.com/2009/04/west-bend -society-for-suppression-of.html

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 1324 hrs




4. RS - threw me for a loop there - had to go into the article for the “elderly” thing:

   The plaintiffs, all of whom are elderly, say their mental and emotional well-being were damaged by the book at the Library, the claim states

   So, that’s worth $30,000 each, courtesy of the taxpayer?  Maybe they should be suing to have their competency examined.  Owen better hope they don’t come here and follow a link to something that offends them.

   Just thinking back, there is a pretty tough crowd here when it comes to lawsuits:

   http://www.bootsandsabers.com/index.php/weblog/perma link/buchers_sue_west_bend_hotel/

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 1347 hrs




5. The lawsuit is ridiculous.  So are the petitions going around on both sides.  It would be nice if the library simply moved the smuttiest books, just to be nice, and it would be nice if parents would supervise what their kids are reading at the library.  It’s just common sense on both sides.  It doesn’t have to involve petitions or protests or counter protests.  My gosh.

   This is such a tiny issue in the grand scheme of things.  That it’s riling up the community in such a nasty way shows that we are truly blessed that we don’t have real problems.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 1538 hrs




6. I don’t understand the concept of petitions, anyway.  I mean, do they have any kind of standing for anything?  I always thought they were merely “fluff” - might give an idea of a specific persons standing on an issue, but I don’t see much more relevance.

   By the way, Wendy, this is meant very sincerely (no snark or anything), I think you would be an excellent appointee to the library board.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 1555 hrs




7. As a Christian, I could find all kinds of offensive things. In today’s society and culture, that would be incredibly easy. There are bigger things to worry about than books in a library. People are still free to make the choice of what they read in this Country, especially from a Library. Personally, I’d be more concerned with spreading the good news than looking to ban books. ONe has no effect on one’s soul, the other does.

   Posted by Billiam on May 02, 2009 at 1708 hrs




8. Yeah, I’m not going to support burning books.  Not cool.

   
   Glad to see that lest we strip you of your libertarian status. I’m with Wendy - this could have been handled locally and with little fanfare. Unfortunately, I fear that those behind these actions have pathological lust for the limelight.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 1822 hrs




9. Thanks, mht, that’s nice of you to say.

   Btw, the only purpose of petitions is to gather names and addresses of like-minded people.  Putting your phone number on a petition gives them permission to call you, no-call list or not.

   Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 1943 hrs




10. “I told you, I have too much time on my hands.”

    -Homer Simpson, when asked by Lisa why he has to fight with every utility in town.

    Seemed apt.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 2108 hrs




11. So $30,000 per head for this case and defense fees for this lawsuit + 4-5 major groups lining up against the safe library proposal if it is rammed home = one more lawsuit on the charge of censorship.

    If the big free speech groups collectively sue the city and library on charges of censorship, and they bring in their lawyers, where is the money coming from to pay for the city/library’s defense of the safe library proposal?  Will taxes be raised?  Way fewer books bought?  Some city program or service gets cut? Will Ginny and her group have a safe library defense fund bake sale?

    I recall the library board works for free and they have an interest and expertise in protecting the library and community from lawsuits.  Fairly logical fiscally conservative decision to make here if one can adjust to the library’s reconsideration policy procedural schedule.  I bet this would be over in 2 months at little cost if they were allowed to do the job they volunteered for.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 2123 hrs




12. Apt indeed.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 02, 2009 at 2230 hrs




13. This is awesome.  That crazy mayor is going down on a library book.  Serves her right for not nipping this in the bud….

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 0736 hrs




14. Smeety,
    How could the mayor “nip this is the bud”?
    Ginny changed her complaint two or three times, was always first to raise the bar, and was always getting more passionate people on her side every time (who were only fed on Ginny’s POV.  The mayor is not directly involved in library policy.  The library board (LB) is.  LB member, Barbara Deters, explained the problem well: The LB could not respond to Ginny because Ginny changed the nature of her complaint.

    Ginny’s recruiting contributed to the number of people that overwhelmed the fire code occupancy rule which led to the cancellation at the first city hall meeting, which was created due to the first planned meeting at the library having to be canceled due to Ginny’s and opposition’s recruiting.  The LB’s proposed East HS auditorium meeting did not work for Ginny. The Silverbrook presentation was ALL Ginny; the LB did not go at the advice of the city attorney. 

    A complaint about a library book or policy is not something to take lightly and should follow a procedure; West Bend uses the SAME procedure used by hundreds of libraries nationwide, and it has historically worked wonderfully.  Following procedure (though slow) avoids knee jerk reactions, it clarifies the issue, and it’s designed to prevent the issue from leading to further (legal) complaints.

    Give policy and procedure and the LB board a chance: I reiterate: The LB works for free, that is fiscally conservative, it will avoid the need for going to court and the costly services, it will avoid taking monies from other parts of the city’s budget to pay for legal work, and we can move forward .  It just takes time.

    By the way, I appreciate Owen your allowing several points of view to be expressed and you are not editing behind the scenes,  unlike WISSUP.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 0817 hrs




15. How?  By moving the smut to the correct section of the library.

    It’s not complicated…

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 0822 hrs




16. I think cities have committees, commissons, boards, etc so that not too much power is vested in one person.  And without that power vested in one person, that also means one person (i.e., the Mayor) can not unilaterally enforce these kinds of actions.  Also, Boards tend to be appointed to staggered terms, so that every time a new Mayor or council is elected, there is not a big “regime change” where everybody gets replaced with “cronies”.  We ain’t like Chicago.

    Some of the delays in dealing with this (i.e, the shifting complaints, need for larger public arenas, etc.) can also now be attributed to the city council by delaying the appointment process, although technically, the old board still stands. 

    Smeety, can you name any cities of similar size to West Bend where the mayor is as “hands-on” as you seem to expect here?  West Bend isn’t like the townships where the town chairman carries a chainsaw in his vehicle for dealing with downed trees on town roads.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 0839 hrs




17. I would have trouble naming a city in which the mayor would let something get this out of hand….  Crazy woman needs to go…

    It’s not complicated.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 0858 hrs




18. It’s not complicated

    Obviously not in your universe.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 0953 hrs




19. Yes.  In my universe that idiot mayor is going to lose her job protecting 12 year olds’ right to read Penthouse Forum.

    Owen needs to post clips of the smut each time he starts a discussion to keep it in perspective.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 1058 hrs




20. Um, Owen does not need to post the “smut” here.  Put smut on your own site.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 1516 hrs




21. It was rhetorical, thank you.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 1608 hrs




22. “Penthouse Forum”? The lines quoted by Ginny sound like a sex act described by a shy, chaste, disinterested, forensic pathologist. 

    GmToday, Friday, May 1, 2009, “The American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression, The National Coalition Against Censorship, The Association of American Publishers, and Pen American Center . . . say the dismissals [of library board members] threaten free speech in two ways - by punishing [LB] board members for attempting to apply objective criteria in the selection of books and by pressuring the library to remove the controversial books.” The American Library Association and the Information Studies staff at UW-Mil is alarmed; I’m sure the ACLU is watching. 

    Yea, the library board or mayor should just pull the books Ginny named in her 1st of three organic complaints without any discussion.  No one’s gonna request those meeting records.  No one’s gonna file a lawsuit with lawyers and past supreme court cases to contest the decision.  Kevin Scheunemann is naive to think the “intolerant gay lobby” and “average taxpayer’ crushing government is going to come to roost in West Bend and take the decision to court.  No, it will be infuriated BIG business groups who don’t take kindly to knee-jerk decisions that hurt sales.  Unless the library board does one heck of a methodical and objective job addressing Ginny’s ever-changing complaint(s), THEY WILL WIN, and we will be out of money for court costs, time, energy, and the respect of our neighbors.

    ...and the books will be put back on the shelves, and we’ll still have Ginny.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 03, 2009 at 2355 hrs




23. just move the books…what books?  the ones that GINNY finds sexually explicit?  who is the authority on what is explicit??  who will judge all the books in the library now and every book that the library wishes to add?  wissup has yet to address this HUGE task…  at this point, anyone who agrees with her can just consult her blog for books to NOT check out.  problem solved!

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 04, 2009 at 1143 hrs




24. After this falls through, what sexually-related cause will Ginny take up next?  3X = pattern behavior.

    Posted by (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 04, 2009 at 1923 hrs