Originally Posted by Nathans_Dad (Post 4174756)

No, the McCain ad says Mr. Obama supports comprehensive sex education for kindergarteners which is what the bill that Mr. Obama voted for says. You wouldn't be bending the intent of the McCain campaign's ad to support your position would you?

I understand that Obama has said he doesn't think kindergarteners should be having explicit sex education, and that's a good thing, but he DID vote for the bill as written which mandates COMPREHENSIVE SEX EDUCATION STARTING IN KINDERGARTEN.

It's really not that tough to understand. I understand that you don't like the ad, it paints Mr. Obama into a position that he likely never meant to take. I'm sure when he voted for the bill that he never figured that it would come to this. I'm sure he had good intentions. I would say, though that he should have READ the bill he voted for. He voted yes to the bill and there is explicit language in that bill that supports the McCain ad.

Originally Posted by kang (Post 4174745)

McCain states that Obama is in favor of explicit sex ed for kindergartners.

Originally Posted by Nathans_Dad (Post 4174756)

He voted yes to the bill and there is explicit language in that bill that supports the McCain ad.

Originally Posted by kang (Post 4174745)

The issue is not what a given principle will decide. The issue is McCain’s ad. McCain states that Obama is in favor of explicit sex ed for kindergartners. That is not true. Obama has made it clear that he does not support that.

We could discuss the pros and cons of that bill, but that is not the issue. The issue is dirty politics.

Originally Posted by Burnin' oil (Post 4174784)

THAT is a flat out lie.

Originally Posted by rouxroux (Post 4174787)

Principal, principle....Choose your words wisely young Grasshopper. Remember, words MEAN things, as does one's "Principle".
;)

Originally Posted by Rick Lee (Post 4174623)

How do you give a tax cut to 95% of Americans when 40% of Americans don't even pay any fed. income taxes? I think it's called welfare.

Originally Posted by kstarnes (Post 4174627)

I thought it was the parents' responsibility to teach their kids about the birds, bees and other requisite issues. What happened to that concept?

Originally Posted by nota (Post 4174870)

yes and we know the GOP HATES welfare EXCEPT when it goes to the CORPs :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by nota (Post 4174888)

see Sarah Palin kid's for how well that works

Originally Posted by nota (Post 4174870)

yes and we know the GOP HATES welfare EXCEPT when it goes to the CORPs :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by nota (Post 4174888)

see Sarah Palin kid's for how well that works

Originally Posted by kstarnes (Post 4174920)

Admittedly I was very well informed in sex-ed when I had my first bit of unprotected sex. And we weren't trying to have a baby, but had hormones aplenty.

If you're argument is that a more comprehensive sex-ed could have prevented Palin's daughter from getting pregnant (without knowing the extent of Palin's daughter's sex-ed) , I and most every other person who has ever been a teen would probably enjoy such a debate. :)