US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #8

[anitram]

Originally Posted by deep

Why push it down to 5 year olds??


why not at least 5th or 6th grade ?

Are you being purposely obtuse with respect to the parental opt-out clause?

I think if the shoe was on the other foot, you'd be RIPPING Obama for this ad, given the petty, insignificant things that you have lambasted him for, including incorrect ones (visiting the troops in Germany being a shining example).

[TheEdge U2JT]

Originally Posted by namkcuR

You're the one asking about common sense. It would be interpreted by school boards, people who run school districts. Do you honestly think that any school board in America is going to give the ok to show kindergardeners condoms and diagrams of sexual organs and all that? Do you? Of course you don't because the first school board to do so would be the subject of outrage and maybe even legal action brought about by angry parents.

No, I don't think that. You're missing the point. When then? 6th grade? 8th? High School? Who determines that?

You guys all seem like your going to defend Obama to the bitter end, willing to overlook just about everything along the way.

[TheEdge U2JT]

Originally Posted by anitram

Including set age ranges would likely expose the legislation to possible constitutional issues (arbitrariness).

So did I miss something? Is K-12 not an age range? Did I read it incorrectly when it appears that it was originally 6-12?

Thats not a good argument anitram

[Vincent Vega]

Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT

Come on, what ever happened to common sense? Write legislation with how is supposed to be implemented. There is no reason for it to be that vague and no for there to be a range of K-12 for sex ed.

Then, legal speech in Germany is more different to that in the US than I thought it was.

[namkcuR]

Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT

No, I don't think that. You're missing the point. When then? 6th grade? 8th? High School? Who determines that?

You guys all seem like your going to defend Obama to the bitter end, willing to overlook just about everything along the way.

Still school boards. Middle schools and high schools have them too.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by anitram

Are you being purposely obtuse

I used to think he was playing devil's advocate, but I'm not sure anymore...

[anitram]

Originally Posted by deep

Again if Obama stands by the legislation

why did it get tabled (killed) in the Ill State Senate?

and not even come up for a vote?

Well since you want me to do your legal research for you....

The Illinois Senate tabling rules (at the time it was Rule 5-4, now you will find it in Rule 7) clearly states that the SPONSOR of the bill requests tabling.

Senate Sponsors
Sen. Carol Ronen - M. Maggie Crotty - Susan Garrett - Iris Y. Martinez - Jeffrey M. Schoenberg

None of these were Obama.

But you can explain to me how he should have prevented tabling contrary to the rules.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT

So did I miss something? Is K-12 not an age range? Did I read it incorrectly when it appears that it was originally 6-12?

Thats not a good argument anitram

No you know what, it's a good argument, it's that you are clearly uninformed.

K-12 sets out the cohort to whom the bill in its entirety applies. That is not arbitrary.

You asked about specifically setting up age ranges at which ___ or ___ can be taught. THAT is arguably arbitrary and many a statutory provision has been stricken down this way by the courts.

[flybabe]

Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT

You guys all seem like your going to defend Obama to the bitter end, willing to overlook just about everything along the way.

You hit the nail right on the head,they just want something there,just for it to be there. He talks out of his ass is what he does,he only wants you to "believe" that he can actually do something.

[TheEdge U2JT]

Originally Posted by flybabe

You hit the nail right on the head,they just want something there,just for it to be there. He talks out of his ass is what he does,he only wants you to "believe" that he can actually do something.

Thanks. At least there are a few of us in here that get it.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by flybabe

You hit the nail right on the head,they just want something there,just for it to be there. He talks out of his ass is what he does,he only wants you to "believe" that he can actually do something.

Well show me why I should believe in your canidate. You drop in every once in awhile call a few folks liars and accuse groups of "just wanting something there", but why not actually discuss the issues? You attack(usually baseless) but never give any reason why your canidate is better...

[yolland]

I'm beginning to wonder if there's any point in attempting to discuss the campaign in this forum at all anymore.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by yolland

I'm beginning to wonder if there's any point in attempting to discuss the campaign in this forum at all anymore.

No, I think I'd be better off cleaning my apartment.

[Lila64]

Originally Posted by yolland

I'm beginning to wonder if there's any point in attempting to discuss the campaign in this forum at all anymore.

[indra]

Hmm... I was just going to clarify my use of explicit from a few days ago but upon reading the past few pages here I see it's completely useless.

[deep]

Chad does not post in this forum
but he has some sincere advice for Obama supporters

Are you panicking over where the presidential race stands?

Submitted by Chad on Tue, 09/09/2008 - 10:09

Even after the convention bounces, Barack Obama and John McCain are virtually tied in the polls. The focus has been on Sarah Palin and Sarah Palin, but not on the issues or even the presidential candidates. And there are 8 weeks until the election.

Is it time to panic? Are you panicking now? As the great philosopher Lou Reed once said, "Valium would have helped that bash."

Well, I can't prescribe Valium for every reader or even provide acetaminophen with codeine (available w/o a prescription in Canada) to ease the pain. So what do you do for the next 8 weeks?

Obama has remained calm and cool since he announced his presidential run in February 2007. When Obama trailed in the polls late in 2007, he didn't panic. When Sen. Hillary Clinton regained momentum in New Hampshire, no panic. When Clinton surged at the end, again no signs of panic. And now, with momentum on the side of McCain/Palin, there is no panic.

I have had anxiety issues. I have had prescriptions for Valium and similar cousins of the product, so I definitely have some familiarity with this world. While medication is a useful tool, you also have to be more pro-active in trying to resolve your anxiety. So let's try and diffuse some of that anxiety.

-- If you are anxious now, try being a Republican in 1988 when Michael Dukakis had an 18-point lead. True, Dukakis made a number of mistakes, but McCain is certainly capable of that as well. Winning now doesn't mean winning later.

-- Limit your TV viewing in general. You could just watch Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow 5 days a week, and feel content. But a sampling of the right-wing media and the clueless corporate media is necessary to get a true feel of the world. But be very careful: too much TV punditry, whether you agree or disagree, can distort your view and, yes, add extra anxiety to your life.

-- Notice that even the MSM is spending some time actually being critical of the Republican nominees for president and vice president. We can all agree that they don't spend enough time and resources, but there is more in 2008 than 2004 or 2000. It's an encouraging sign.

-- The debates are still to come. McCain and Palin have been frighteningly absent in their specifics for anything. While they have sailed scot-free on this so far, debates bring this inadequacy out.

-- Read up on Canada or Mexico or [insert country name here]. Discover the joys of what it would be like to live in a different country.

-- Finally, do something. Make a contribution, not just financial. Use your time, resources, money, and whatever to make you feel like you are making a difference. And if you can't do that, exercise or clean your damn apartment these things help to reduce anxiety.

[Utoo]

Originally Posted by TheEdge U2JT

No, I don't think that. You're missing the point. When then? 6th grade? 8th? High School? Who determines that?

You guys all seem like your going to defend Obama to the bitter end, willing to overlook just about everything along the way.

You're missing much, much more. For someone who seems to care so much about your children's education, you sure as hell don't know much about it at all.

Who on earth do you think determines when sex ed is done now? Who the hell do you think determines when a student reads Tolstoy? Do you think that there's an explicit bill signed into law that says: "Students shall not read Shakespeare until 7th grade?"

What the fuck???

[Popmartijn]

This cartoon is hilarious!

http://aka.zero.jibjab.com/client/ze...les.jibjab.com

[Irvine511]

wow. this thread. just, wow.

i feel your pain anitram.

good for you for cutting the bullshit and calling out people for what they are: uninformed. not stupid. not wrong. not dumb. just very simply uninformed.

(i'm kind of glad Memphis and i decided to watch 3 hours of Andrew Zimmern last night so i was away from the computer)

Out of bounds! McCain misstates Obama sex-ed record
Margaret Talev | McClatchy Newspapers

last updated: September 09, 2008 07:44:08 PM

WASHINGTON — Throw the flag against: The McCain-Palin campaign.

Call: Unsportsmanlike conduct.

What happened: A new 30-second TV ad attacks Barack Obama's record on education, saying that Obama backed legislation to teach "'comprehensive sex education' to kindergartners." The announcer then says, "Learning about sex before learning to read? Barack Obama. Wrong on education. Wrong for your family."

Why that's wrong: This is a deliberately misleading accusation. It came hours after the Obama campaign released a TV ad critical of McCain's votes on public education. As a state senator in Illinois, Obama did vote for but was not a sponsor of legislation dealing with sex ed for grades K-12.

But the legislation allowed local school boards to teach "age-appropriate" sex education, not comprehensive lessons to kindergartners, and it gave schools the ability to warn young children about inappropriate touching and sexual predators.

Republican Alan Keyes tried to use Obama's vote against him in the 2004 U.S. Senate race. At the time, Obama spoke about wanting to protect young children from abuse. He made clear then that he was not supporting teaching kindergartners about explicit details of sex.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said Tuesday of McCain's ad: "It is shameful and downright perverse for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls."

Penalty: 15 yards for the McCain campaign's deliberate low blow.

[Popmartijn]

This article saying about the same thing: As Campaign Heats Up, Untruths Can Become Facts Before They're Undone

As the presidential campaign moves into a final, heated stretch, untrue accusations and rumors have started to swirl at a pace so quick that they become regarded as fact before they can be disproved.