Does the Truth Matter Anymore?
 

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/does_the_truth_matter_anymore.html?hpid=opinionsbo x1

This is not false naivete: I am genuinely surprised that John McCain and his campaign keep throwing out false charges and making false claims without any qualms. They keep talking about Sarah Palin’s opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere without any embarrassment over the fact that she once supported it. They keep saying that Barack Obama will raise taxes, suggesting he’d raise them on everybody, when Obama’s plan, according to the Tax Policy Institute, would cut taxes for “about 80 percent of households” while “only about 10 percent would owe more.” And as Sebastian Mallaby pointed out in his recent column, Obama would cut taxes for middle-income taxpayers “more aggressively” than McCain would.

And now comes a truly vile McCain ad accusing Obama of supporting legislation to offer "'comprehensive sex education' to kindergartners." The announcer declares: "Learning about sex before learning to read? Barack Obama. Wrong on education. Wrong for your family."

Margaret Talev of McClatchy newspapers called the ad a “deliberate low blow.” Here’s what she wrote in an excellent fact check: “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.”

Is McCain against teaching little kids to beware of sexual predators?

McCain once campaigned on the idea that the war on terrorism is the “transcendent” issue of our time. Now, he’s stooping to cheap advertising that would be condemned as trivial and misleading in a state legislative race. Boy, do I miss the old John McCain and wonder what became of him. And I wonder if the media will really take on this onslaught of half-truths and outright deception.

UPDATE: I wrote this post late Tuesday night. I'm glad to see the story on the front page of today's Post begin to take up what will be an ongoing imperative in this campaign.

Just want to get this in before I leave the computer...

I predict the same old group of PPOT conservatives will have called you a long list of pubescent obscenities by this time tomorrow.

I already anticipated that, and I'm ready to ignore them.

the BIG LIE is a trusted GOP plan

This campaign is "political". While I know I have bias to one side, I see plenty of truth stretching, spinnage and even dishonesty on both sides.

If one sees a problem with the above on only one side, it is time to reconcile one's mental checkbook. :)

All I can say is that if McCain/Palin or Obama/Biden is the best this country has to offer - we're in serious trouble. Serious trouble.

Yes, we see it on both sides, but IMO the Democratic frinnge is responsible on that side, and the McCain Campaign is responsible on the Republican side.

There are the tactics of Carl Rove and his disciples. Which I take to mean that McCain is now a tool of his party. I can no longer consider voting for him.

They will however sucker a lot of trusting Americans. Add that they are now saying that they are the party of change. Spare change maybe. We are now supposed to believe that they are the only ones who can solve the problems that they themselves created.

Yeah, yeah, THAT's the ticket.

Good people would not subject themselves to the scrutiny. Maybe I should have said smart people.

You believe the washington post, why not read the truth in todays Wall Street Journal.
Oh well, you don't want the truth.

That is certainly an opinion. :)

YOU CAN"T HANDLE THE TRUTH. How's that?:D

Dim ocrats decrying the lack of truth, amazing!

Honestly, if Obama or anyone else is shocked, he/they are quite naive.

The same goes for the McCain side...

Does the Truth Matter Anymore?
Obviously not to you it doesn't.

is that it?

liberal columnist accuses mccain of lying. and for proof he links to a bunch of other liberal columnists. who link back to him.

First, no the truth doesn't matter in political campaigns. The truth has NEVER mattered and the truth that you are referring to (for both parties) is the whitewashed, safe for consumption truth. The REAL truth about Washington would include all the backroom meetings and secret handshakes and I suspect that if we all knew the REAL truth none of the people in Washington would stand a chance of being elected.

So, getting that out of the way, politics has been and always will be about presenting your version of the truth to your best advantage.

According to your own fact checker, Obama did vote for the bill that would have allowed schools to teach sex education to kindergardeners, right?

So, voting for a bill is....not supporting it? Do you have to sponsor a bill to be considered to have supported it? This seems to be the point of the writer when she calls it a "low blow".

So, if Obama voted for the bill and McCain said he supported the bill where is the falsehood?

Kang, why wait? Here is a direct quote from the messiah:

"I remember him, uh, using this in his campaign against me saying "Barack Obaba supports teaching sex education to kindegartners.: (laughter) And, you know, which --I didn't know what to tell him...BUT IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO."

He spoketh these words while preaching to the choir (talking to a planned parenthood meeting) 11/20/2007 when talking about Alan Keyes.

Why wait for some paper's spin? There it is, so sayeth the B-HO. Any er, uh, mmmm,ahh mo' questions?"
...oh yeah...I guess in B-HO's case it's "stranger danger"....

The words of the messiah need to be interpreted by a Liberal high priest such as Cardinal Oberman.

At least the original poster had the respect to post his source.

We might never have a smart, good, honest president, because smart, good, honest people will never bother to run.

Jeee whiz, I saw it on TV today, I thought it was funny but didn't know it was a big deal yet.

At least now I know it was some sort of TV interview.

American politics, do you reckon they'll start having duels like we read about in the history books?

An accurate assessment.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/sex-ed-for-kind.html

Sex Ed for Kindergarteners 'Right Thing to Do,' Says Obama
Email
Share

July 18, 2007 1:13 PM

ABC News' Teddy Davis and Lindsey Ellerson Report: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told Planned Parenthood Tuesday that sex education for kindergarteners, as long as it is "age-appropriate," is "the right thing to do."

"I remember Alan Keyes . . . I remember him using this in his campaign against me," Obama said in reference to the conservative firebrand who ran against him for the U.S. Senate in 2004. Sex education for kindergarteners had become an issue in his race against Keyes because of Obama’s work on the issue as chairman of the health committee in the Illinois state Senate.

"'Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,'" said Obama mimicking Keyes' distinctive style of speech. "Which -- I didn’t know what to tell him (laughter)."

"But it’s the right thing to do," Obama continued, "to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools."

Ah yes, such lies coming from the McCain campaign!!! Lies, lies, lies!!!

Ridiculous. :rolleyes:

+1x10^300

Who in the hell can support some broad who believes the earth is 5,000 years old, global warming does not exist, not teaching abstinence to teenage daughters, not allow sex education in schools, nor the use of condoms to protect against sexually transmitted disease, does not believe polar bears are endangered, abuse government travel funds, steal from the Alaskan coffers for the benefit of her home town and on it goes. Lets not forget she lost the beauty contest has an incredibly annoying voice and a 50's hairdo and VERY NERD glasses. Real righteous! Just the kind of nut we need if McCain croaks in office.

When "lipstick" Palin comes forward and starts to answer serious questions on serious issues then folks will listen. For now she is just another far right radical pawn on the Repuiblican chess board.

And..........Damn is worth millions and a self made man. He is entitled to his opinion. So much Matt Damon envy here.

:D

So does this mean the political ban doesn't apply to the left?

You would be correct.

He supports “age appropriate sex education.” McCain’s campaign ad states “comprehensive” sex education. There is a big difference between “age appropriate” and “comprehensive.”

For example, you could teach kindergartners about when their uncle touches them. There is touching that is OK, and touching that is NOT ok. That’s what this bill was about. Not teaching kindergartners what a “dirty sanchez” is.

As for the truth, here it is:

Personally, I find it incredibly vile that McCain would stoop so low.

You say ridiculous only because you are reading what you want to read, not what is actually out there. You want to believe McCain’s ad, you want to believe that Obama supports teaching full sex education to kindergarners. You want to have a reason to hate Obama.

You missed this quote from the very article you referenced above.

By omitting this, you have presented (like McCain has) a very distorted view of the facts. You have entirely misrepresented Obama’s position. You have warped the truth to make it seem like he is “suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it” when in fact his quote is just the opposite:

'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,' Obama said.

Another Obama translator.

Yep. Get some left wing wackazoids from SF to come up with a whole new sex ed program for kindergardeners.

6.0238x10^23

No translation required.

'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,' Obama said.

OK Kang...Here's a direct quote fromSB0099:

"Each class or course in COMPREHENSIVE sex education offered in any of grades K through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections, including the prevention, transmission and spread of HIV."

Now I don't know how they teach comprehension in your state, but that word I capitalized "comprehensive" to me means "all inclusive"...What say ye?

Now there is "age appropriate" language in the bill, but right there the word COMPREHENSIVE is pretty visible to me.

Oh, if you want to read the entire bill for yourself, go to www.ilga.gov/legislation
and click on "legislation & laws", then click "bills & resolutions", then type in SB0099 and look for Section 5. The School Code is amended by changing the Sections 27-9.1 and 27-9.2 as follows:



...so, in closing "comprehensive" is what is stated in the FIRST section. So that point can not be argued.

What is "age appropriate" to a code pink leftie? Or a NAMBLA guy from the bay area?

Do you have a typo in the bill number? The SB0099 I find in that link is something about a Sudan Investment. Perhaps I am looking in the wrong place, but I am looking under “senate bills.”

In any case, Obama has made it clear that he does not support teaching full on comprehensive sec ed to kindergartners. What part of that do you no understand?

Again: “'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,' Obama said.” What part of this quote do you not understand? Obama is very clear here.

What that sentence you quoted says is what the comprehensive class will teach. While it does mention grade K, it does not state that the comprehensive class will be taught to grade K. Grade K will receive “age appropriate” sex ed.

Come on people, you don’t really believe these lies, do you? Do you really believe that Obama supports full on sex ed to kindergartners? That’s just crazy talk. It’s is really just warping the actual facts so that you can convince yourselves of that.

And it really is a low attack from McCain.

It really is “In referring to the sex-education bill, the McCain campaign is largely recycling old and discredited accusations made against Mr. Obama by Alan Keyes in their 2004 Senate race.”

What part of “discredited” in the sentence do you not understand?

Kang, it is 093_SB0099

And as I said, there is "age appropriate" wording, but AGAIN, you can not argue that it does not state COMPREHENSIVE. So the point is moot about the "interpretation of the difference".

I guess it depends on what your interpretation of "is" is, right?

Kang,

I have heard Obama say tax cuts for 95% of Americans and tax increases for 5%. Your initial post quotes a source saying the numbers are 80%/20%. Who's lying? I think everyone in politics lies, some more than others.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vJ6vZRy62KY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vJ6vZRy62KY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>