Limbaugh takes a stand: gets hard over Obama

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: Vic
Limbaugh isn't running for President.

Thankfully.

 

[Vic]

No, newnameman and lupi think that 5 year-olds should be taught to talk to strangers.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Sinsear

Originally posted by: Vic
Limbaugh isn't running for President.

Thankfully.

No kidding.

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: newnameman

The ad claims Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners. Obama admits it. I'm not sure what about the ad has been "debunked"?

Listen carefully I will explain it one last time. read carefully there are differnt words in my next sentence that are used to explain what myself and the others are talking about. I will bold those words this time so you don't miss them again.

Obama supports teaching age appropriate sex education to kindergarteners and making them aware of sexual predators

Does that make sense? Do we need to slow it down and explain it again for you? Can you understand the difference? did you graduate High school?

Do you think kindergarteners should be taught about the prevention of HIV and other STDs?

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: OrByte

Obama supports teaching age and developmentally appropriate sex education to students from kindergarten through 12th grade. Funny how the ad leaves out the "age and developmentally appropriate" part of the definition of sex education.

There is nothing "funny" about it. To many households there is no "age appropriate" comprehensive sex education course for a kindergarden student, again which is why the legislation was defeated.

Im having trouble following your logic, but I have a feeling I agree with you ultimately.

because I feel that no one should be teaching my children anything about sex, thats my job.

But...thats not really the issue here is it?

That is the issue with the bill.

As for the ad they probably went with it due to the lack of controversial legislation bho put his name to. I'm not even sure in how many places they ran it as I never saw it as an ad spot, just run over and over on the talk circuit.

If they wanted something that could sizzle and couldn't be muddied as a message they should have picked up the post birth abortion stuff. There you have legislation which unanimously passed the US Senate that bho opposed in illinois senate.

 

[ProfJohn]

Isn't there a thread about the sex-ed thing???

 

[351Cleveland]

Deflect, divert. The original issue was the distortion and "out of context" same old shit that happens every campaign. Normally, I wouldnt bat an eyelash at it and say "yep, that's modern politics," but I hold Obama higher than that. Why? Because he said he would be above all this crap. Shocking... he isnt. He is now in "anything to win" mode. Again, wouldnt care so much EXCEPT he said he wouldnt do it, and he has and continues to do it. Dont talk to me about McCain, I will ignore you. I despise his campaigning equally as much. This thread isnt about McCain or his sex-ed ad on Obama (although deflect and divert liberals would like to make it so). It is about Obama, his pledge to rise above this kind of campaigning, and his complete failure to do so.

ABC was defending Rush... ABC. Come on... if they think it's wrong, then its gotta be bad.

Obama wants to teach kindergarteners about sex. Period. That is wrong. Period. My daughter is 4. In 2 years she will be in Kindergarten. I dont want the teacher telling her what is an isnt appropriate contact. That is MY JOB as a father. So, lets take the definition of sex-ed at the definition that liberals want to give it. It is still WRONG. It is not society's job to raise my child. It is mine and my family's. Keep your damn sex-ed off my kids.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

Obama wants to teach kindergarteners about sex. Period. That is wrong. Period. My daughter is 4. In 2 years she will be in Kindergarten. I dont want the teacher telling her what is an isn't appropriate contact. That is MY JOB as a father. So, lets take the definition of sex-ed at the definition that liberals want to give it. It is still WRONG. It is not society's job to raise my child. It is mine and my family's. Keep your damn sex-ed off my kids.

If all kids had a father who'd teach them what is and isn't appropriate contact maybe it wouldn't be such a problem. Unfortunately it's not the case. How can you blame him for wanting to protect innocent children?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland
Deflect, divert. The original issue was the distortion and "out of context" same old shit that happens every campaign. Normally, I wouldnt bat an eyelash at it and say "yep, that's modern politics," but I hold Obama higher than that. Why? Because he said he would be above all this crap. Shocking... he isnt. He is now in "anything to win" mode. Again, wouldnt care so much EXCEPT he said he wouldnt do it, and he has and continues to do it. Dont talk to me about McCain, I will ignore you. I despise his campaigning equally as much. This thread isnt about McCain or his sex-ed ad on Obama (although deflect and divert liberals would like to make it so). It is about Obama, his pledge to rise above this kind of campaigning, and his complete failure to do so.

ABC was defending Rush... ABC. Come on... if they think it's wrong, then its gotta be bad.

Obama wants to teach kindergarteners about sex. Period. That is wrong. Period. My daughter is 4. In 2 years she will be in Kindergarten. I dont want the teacher telling her what is an isnt appropriate contact. That is MY JOB as a father. So, lets take the definition of sex-ed at the definition that liberals want to give it. It is still WRONG. It is not society's job to raise my child. It is mine and my family's. Keep your damn sex-ed off my kids.

Exactly. Also, I find it hilarious that the leftists here get so wound up for every piece of Limbaugh "news" they can find. The funny thing is - this "news" actually hurts them because it exposes BHO's ad as a complete distortion(or "lie" since that's the new accusation from the left lately)

 

[351Cleveland]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

Obama wants to teach kindergarteners about sex. Period. That is wrong. Period. My daughter is 4. In 2 years she will be in Kindergarten. I dont want the teacher telling her what is an isn't appropriate contact. That is MY JOB as a father. So, lets take the definition of sex-ed at the definition that liberals want to give it. It is still WRONG. It is not society's job to raise my child. It is mine and my family's. Keep your damn sex-ed off my kids.

If all kids had a father who'd teach them what is and isn't appropriate contact maybe it wouldn't be such a problem. Unfortunately it's not the case. How can you blame him for wanting to protect innocent children?

I dont blame him for his intentions. I blame him for his implementation. He doesnt want to make it an optional program offered at schools before or after normal classroom times, he wants to make it required learning during normal classroom times without parental notification. Let me rephrase that. He isnt necessarily againt parental notification, but nothing I have seen REQUIRES it. Show me that portion that says I can opt my child out of it (which by definition means that I am notified), and we have somewhere to start. I still have issue with classroom time being used for this purpose, as our schools arent getting the basics taught anymore.

Doing the wrong thing for the right reason is just as dangerous as doing it for the wrong reasons. Intentions mean little to me.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

I dont blame him for his intentions. I blame him for his implementation. He doesnt want to make it an optional program offered at schools before or after normal classroom times, he wants to make it required learning during normal classroom times without parental notification. Let me rephrase that. He isnt necessarily againt parental notification, but nothing I have seen REQUIRES it. Show me that portion that says I can opt my child out of it (which by definition means that I am notified), and we have somewhere to start. I still have issue with classroom time being used for this purpose, as our schools arent getting the basics taught anymore.

Doing the wrong thing for the right reason is just as dangerous as doing it for the wrong reasons. Intentions mean little to me.

What basics do they teach in Kindergarten, oh yeah social skills. Seems like that is a basic to me. I agree with you om one thing the parents should be able to opt out on having their children taught this. Wouldn't this be for each individual school district to decide?

 

[351Cleveland]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

I dont blame him for his intentions. I blame him for his implementation. He doesnt want to make it an optional program offered at schools before or after normal classroom times, he wants to make it required learning during normal classroom times without parental notification. Let me rephrase that. He isnt necessarily againt parental notification, but nothing I have seen REQUIRES it. Show me that portion that says I can opt my child out of it (which by definition means that I am notified), and we have somewhere to start. I still have issue with classroom time being used for this purpose, as our schools arent getting the basics taught anymore.

Doing the wrong thing for the right reason is just as dangerous as doing it for the wrong reasons. Intentions mean little to me.

What basics do they teach in Kindergarten, oh yeah social skills. Seems like that is a basic to me. I agree with you om one thing the parents should be able to opt out on having their children taught this. Wouldn't this be for each individual school district to decide?

Again, no. Why should a school district decide this? I am the parent. The school district, paid for by my tax dollars, is my employee. There is no way that this is taught in schools without my knowledge and approval as a parent. If I am doing my job right as a parent, I have already taught my children that NOBODY you dont know touches you. If it is someone they know doing this to them, then somewhere I have missed something as a parent and not properly vetted the people she knows. Bad on me. My job as a parent is to shield my children as much as I can from this crap (sex, drugs, etc.) until they have the mental capacity to process and understand it. Classrooom programs like this strip that right and responsibility from me.

I got to thinking about it again. It was around 4th grade that dad took me to a health education center for my first sex education "class." I think it was organized through the school, but was completely optional, after classes, and my dad attended with me. School officials werent even there. My first "in the classroom" experience was 6th grade, and they divided the boys from the girls, and it was a filmstrip. I seem to be a well adjusted human being, so it couldnt have been a bad program.

FWIW, if all they teach in kindergarten is social skills these days, then there is problem 1 in our education system. I started to learning to read, write, and do math in kindergarten. I remember because I constantly left the "i" out of my name, and the teacher worked with me on it

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland
I seem to be a well adjusted human being, so it couldnt have been a bad program.

That's because you were lucky enough not to have a perv for a dad who was buggering you every chance he had. Some kids aren't so fortunate.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland
I seem to be a well adjusted human being, so it couldnt have been a bad program.

That's because you were lucky enough not to have a perv for a dad who was buggering you every chance he had. Some kids aren't so fortunate.

There is no emoticon to express what I'm feeling right now.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: 351Cleveland

Obama wants to teach kindergarteners about sex. Period. That is wrong. Period. My daughter is 4. In 2 years she will be in Kindergarten. I dont want the teacher telling her what is an isn't appropriate contact. That is MY JOB as a father. So, lets take the definition of sex-ed at the definition that liberals want to give it. It is still WRONG. It is not society's job to raise my child. It is mine and my family's. Keep your damn sex-ed off my kids.

If all kids had a father who'd teach them what is and isn't appropriate contact maybe it wouldn't be such a problem. Unfortunately it's not the case. How can you blame him for wanting to protect innocent children?

I dont blame him for his intentions. I blame him for his implementation. He doesnt want to make it an optional program offered at schools before or after normal classroom times, he wants to make it required learning during normal classroom times without parental notification. Let me rephrase that. He isnt necessarily againt parental notification, but nothing I have seen REQUIRES it. Show me that portion that says I can opt my child out of it (which by definition means that I am notified), and we have somewhere to start. I still have issue with classroom time being used for this purpose, as our schools arent getting the basics taught anymore.

Doing the wrong thing for the right reason is just as dangerous as doing it for the wrong reasons. Intentions mean little to me.

the curiculum is optional. Parents have the right to pull their kids out of the lesson if they dont agree with the plan.

this is straight from the bill

 

[HomerJS]

Can't wait until the Obama camp make an ad of Rush's own words making fun of McCain hinting he is crazy from being captured for 5 years.

 

[Superrock]

This ad is a fair depiction of Rush. His statements that say otherwise do not make logical sense. It was clear he was speaking his racist mind in making the statements although I doubt he is as openly bigoted as those quptes make him out to be.

It is unfair however that Obama is tying Rush with the McCain campaign since there are extremist elements on both sides of the fence and doing so is only inciting the the downfall of the election.

 

[sportage]

Who's Rush? :thumbsup:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: sportage
Who's Rush? :thumbsup:

The Mascot of the Republican Party

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Superrock
This ad is a fair depiction of Rush. His statements that say otherwise do not make logical sense. It was clear he was speaking his racist mind in making the statements although I doubt he is as openly bigoted as those quptes make him out to be.

It is unfair however that Obama is tying Rush with the McCain campaign since there are extremist elements on both sides of the fence and doing so is only inciting the the downfall of the election.

Obviously you have not looked at the context of those two clipped quotes. If you had, you have not posted what you did.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Superrock
This ad is a fair depiction of Rush. His statements that say otherwise do not make logical sense. It was clear he was speaking his racist mind in making the statements although I doubt he is as openly bigoted as those quptes make him out to be.

It is unfair however that Obama is tying Rush with the McCain campaign since there are extremist elements on both sides of the fence and doing so is only inciting the the downfall of the election.

Obviously you have not looked at the context of those two clipped quotes. If you had, you have not posted what you did.

Old Blubber Butt got a dose of his own medicine.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Does anyone still listen to that moron?

 

[SilthDraeth]

UberNeuman is a broken record, can someone please disconnect his keyboard?

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: newnameman
So will you now condemn Obama for taking Limbaugh's words out of context? Charlie Gibson for taking Sarah Palin's words out of context? Obama for for taking McCain's quote about 100 years in Iraq out of context?

"If you are unskilled and uneducated, your job is going south. Skilled workers, educated people are going to do fine 'cause those are the kinds of jobs NAFTA is going to create. If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people, I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do -- let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work."

IMO there's no context where that comment is appropriate.

 

[Throckmorton]

Wait, so how is this taking Limbaugh's quote out of context?? Was he referring to someone other than Mexicans when he said "stupid Mexicans"?