8th election thread

[sweetheart-mine]

At this point, the Democrats really really need Bill (and Hillary). Strange how things come around isn't it??

 

LouieB

they do, and it is. things must be very changed from hillary's point of view now. it would be one thing to have four years of mccain and then hillary try again in 2012 against republican candidate X, but another to find herself running against a seasoned palin that year. a debate between the two this year would have been a treat, though. hillary would have steamrolled right over her in just about every way i can think of.

[H-Bomb Henry]

Since I live among moderately racists white assholes (you know the people who say they aren't racists but are) I fear what the republicans are trying to do. Nothing will infuriate the moderate racist more than seeing a black man talk down to a white woman and to me this is the image they are trying to portray. We're fucked.

[jenbobblehead]

When do I get my Benz?

You still make me laugh even if you are a crusty old republican man now, who shakes his fist all the time.

[Central Scrutinizer]

they do, and it is. things must be very changed from hillary's point of view now. it would be one thing to have four years of mccain and then hillary try again in 2012 against republican candidate X, but another to find herself running against a seasoned palin that year. a debate between the two this year would have been a treat, though. hillary would have steamrolled right over her in just about every way i can think of.

Just think how hollow all of McCain's "sexist" attacks would be if Hillary was the candidate. Can't claim the other side is sexist when the Republicans are attacking Hillary for being ugly, wanting to be a man, is a lesbian, etc. etc. etc.

[sweetheart-mine]

Just think how hollow all of McCain's "sexist" attacks would be if Hillary was the candidate. Can't claim the other side is sexist when the Republicans are attacking Hillary for being ugly, wanting to be a man, is a lesbian, etc. etc. etc.

those are excellent examples of the schoolyard arrested-development attacks that appeal to prejudice and keep the campaign dialog off the issues. i find mccain's whining to be hollow anyway.

[kwall]

. . . you had asked me if i was seriously suggesting that all ads need to show people of every race in order not to be considered racist -- or some such nonsense. so again: are you serious when you make up out of thin air things that other people supposedly suggested?

you had suggested that the mccain ad featuring white children was a small piece of evidence of racism. so, i guess i should have asked if you thought that all political ads must now contain a member of every race in order to avoid being called a small piece of evidence of racism. i stand corrected.

[Elixir Sue]

From the SUntimes:

 

In the new McCain spot, an announcer says "Obama's one accomplishment? Legislation to teach "comprehensive sex education" to kindergartners. Learning about sex before learning to read?

Barack Obama. Wrong on education. Wrong for your family."

 

The facts: 1. The bill was not Obama's. The sponsors were Democrats Carol Ronen, M. Maggie Crotty, Susan Garrett , Iris Y. Martinez and Jeffrey M. Schoenberg 2. The measure never passed. 3. The legislation in several places said all sex ed had to be "age and developmentally appropriate." Obama backed teaching youngsters about inappropriate touching by strangers. 4. The bill would let parents opt out of a sex education course.

 

 

Wasn't he the chairman of the Health and Human Services Committee where the bill was sent and passed through?

 

And, again, who determines what is "age and developmentally appropriate"?

 

A friend of mine gave a pretty good summary of this whole thing, via an email today, which some of you might find interesting:

 

"For anyone who wants to see the whole bill (including the recommended deletions and additions), it's here. Note that an amendment was offered after the initial vote that included leaving the minimum grade at 6 and inserting the "age appropriate" language in the section of the bill that everyone has been discussing. The only place the age appropriate qualifier appeared in the original is in a section amending the Comprehensive Health Education Program (which I think is the actual source of the sex ed programs that the other parts of the bill assume already exists).

 

That said, the bill (or at least the original version) would have expressly lowered the grade for sex ed, whatever the content might be, from 6 to K. I'm really not sure what sort of education regarding HIV and other STDs is appropriate for a kindergartener, to be honest.

 

As for the claim that this would really be about teaching these kids about "inappropriate touching" -- well, I don't see that in the statute. The closest it comes is in a discussion about male-female power dynamics and sexual violence with a focus on acquaintance rape. It does seem somewhat of an odd place to put such a discussion of inappropriate touching, since the Illinois statutes already had a section mandating such education: 105 ILCS 5/27‑13.2

(available here).

 

That section discusses instruction on preventing abduction and child sex abuse (and as far as I can tell, it was enacted in 1989, so it was already there when the 2003 bill came along).

 

I don't think the ad is based so much on a lie, then, as it is on the fact that the statute is just dumb -- it's long and sort of specific without actually saying anything. But that's how most education bills get written, since they leave most of the nuts and bolts up to educators.

 

The ad's implications that Obama is some kind of degenerate and that he was heading the charge on the bill are unfair for sure, but I don't think McCain's direct claim that Obama supported legislation that would have extended sex ed to grades K - 6 is any more unfounded that Obama's response that the bill was aimed at "protect[ing] young children from sexual predators . . . ." (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/09/politics/horserace/entry4433099.shtml). Maybe I've missed something in the substance of the bill, but so far I can't find anything that really supports what Obama's camp claims it's about.

 

So, if you want to fight about the ad, do so over the parts that are really problematic, like the leering image at the end. Or better yet, the ad's claim that this was an Obama "accomplishment" or that the bill became law -- as far as I can tell, the bill passed out of committee, then died on the Senate floor when the body ended its session sine die."

[Guest Jules]

Since I live among moderately racists white assholes (you know the people who say they aren't racists but are) I fear what the republicans are trying to do. Nothing will infuriate the moderate racist more than seeing a black man talk down to a white woman and to me this is the image they are trying to portray. We're fucked.

this is pretty ridiculous

[kwall]

Maybe I've missed something in the substance of the bill, but so far I can't find anything that really supports what Obama's camp claims it's about.

i refuse to believe that obama would ever be anything but completely honest and truthful. stop it. this hurts my eyes.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Since I live among moderately racists white assholes (you know the people who say they aren't racists but are) I fear what the republicans are trying to do. Nothing will infuriate the moderate racist more than seeing a black man talk down to a white woman and to me this is the image they are trying to portray. We're fucked.

 

 

The white moderate racist is most likely voting for McCain, and those that support Obama most likey are annoyed by Palin's dirty looks. Besides, Obama won't debate Palin. She's up against a man who kows his shit, and she better read up. She's bound to be the one frustrated and mean.

 

I doubt Obama will ever talk down or personally insult Palin. He didn't do it to Hillary, and she did get a bit on the nasty side. Palin's bound to be a stinky dog though, but Obama knows how to stay cool.

[bobbob1313]

The moderate racist is most likely voting for McCain, and those that support Obama most likey are annoyed by Palin's dirty looks. Besides, Obama won't debate Palin. She's up against a man who kows his shit, and she better read up. She's bound to be the one frustrated and mean.

 

Yeah? I know plenty of black people who are at the least, moderately racist, who are voting for Barack.

 

Racism is a reality, and it comes from every side, but it's always more convenient for liberals to paint it with a white, conservative face.

[sweetheart-mine]

you had suggested that the mccain ad featuring white children was a small piece of evidence of racism. so, i guess i should have asked if you thought that all political ads must now contain a member of every race in order to avoid being called a small piece of evidence of racism. i stand corrected.

yah, apparently you lost track of my small part in that conversation. i was more generally questioning your questioning of john smith; e.g., first i asked if you challenged only non-republicans' take on ads. you gave a reply that led me to observe generally, not about ad X specifically: "so it's ok to take note only of large, long pieces of evidence, not the small ones that sometimes add up to the larger." i'm not familiar with the ad and have no opinion of it.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Yeah? I know plenty of black people who are at the least, moderately racist, who are voting for Barack.

 

Racism is a reality, and it comes from every side, but it's always more convenient for liberals to paint it with a white, conservative face.

 

 

Huh? I said the white moderate racist is most likely voting for McCain. Why would a white moderate racist vote for Obama?

 

Your searching for a tiff here and it does not exist. No where in that post do I cry white racist in liberal speak now do I? Liberals fight racism strong in this country bobbob, so that point about liberals painting blah blah blah something is stupid.

 

I've already said many times I am sure there are people voting Obama cause he's black, and people voting Palin cause she's a woman. You have no point in racism with my post. Quit searching for a fight.

[bobbob1313]

Huh? I said the white moderate racist is most likely voting for McCain. Why would a white moderate racist vote for Obama?

 

Your searching for a tiff here and it does not exist. No where in that post do I cry white racist in liberal speak now do I? Liberals fight racism strong in this country bobbob, so that point about liberals painting blah blah blah something is stupid.

 

I've already said many times I am sure there are people voting Obama cause he's black, and people voting Palin cause she's a woman. You have no point in racism with my post. Quit searching for a fight.

 

The moderate racist is most likely voting for McCain, and those that support Obama most likey are annoyed by Palin's dirty looks.

 

Yeah, you said that in the post I was replying to, my bad.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Yeah, you said that in the post I was replying to, my bad.

 

 

I was replying to a post about WHITE moderate racist assholes you..

[bobbob1313]

And you didn't specify what you were talking about.

Am I wrong?

Am I wrong?

 

I don't think what I said was untrue, and it's kind of the 800 pound gorilla in the room when discussing the campaign with Barrack supporters. They will cry racism when it hurts him, but ignore the racism that is helping them.

[sweetheart-mine]

Racism is a reality, and it comes from every side, but it's always more convenient for liberals to paint it with a white, conservative face.

always? and only convenience can explain it? and ALL liberals paint it? you know, i'm getting deja vu -- someone earlier today freaked out and complained that a person who had just referred to "the republicans" meant "ALL republicans." it might have been you. why are you doing the exact thing you point your disapproving finger at? could it be a little hypocrisy, a bit of a double standard? you guys are really something.

[kwall]

obama should have picked a white moderate racist as his running mate to secure this obviously key demographic.

[bobbob1313]

always? and only convenience can explain it? and ALL liberals paint it? you know, i'm getting deja vu -- someone earlier today freaked out and complained that a person who had just referred to "the republicans" meant "ALL republicans." it might have been you. why are you doing the exact thing you point your disapproving finger at? could it be a little hypocrisy, a bit of a double standard? you guys are really something.

 

You guys? That's racist.

 

Fine, I'll accept it as a double standard. I don't think it makes my point less valid.

 

And I think my "blanket statement" isn't nearly as bad as John Smith's was, but whatever.

[Gobias Industries]

And you didn't specify what you were talking about.

Am I wrong?

Am I wrong?

 

FORGET ABOUT THE FUCKING TOE!

 

Seriously, this whole racism talk is the toe and we need to be talking the real stuff (straight facts), like policy stuff, though I suppose it's not as fun as it is to clamor about "race issues," so to speak.

[kwall]

FORGET ABOUT THE FUCKING TOE!

 

Seriously, this whole racism talk is the toe and we need to be talking the real stuff (straight facts), like policy stuff, though I suppose it's not as fun as it is to clamor about "race issues," so to speak.

so go ahead and talk it. i'm all ears. give me the straight facts.

[kwall]

she played the stinky dildo card on you.

[Party @ the Moontower]

 

 

[embiggen]

I hope someone is watching Barrack on Letterman right now.

[fatheadfred]

I'm feeling good about recent polls. 7 point cut in MO. Nevada slipped though. Obama's humorous, then serious diss of McCain's pig lip accusation this morning is telling me the O is turning the corner on this shit. He was down for a week w/ the Reps' flurry following the 1-2 punch of VP nomination and convention. As many pollsters have said, McCain has seen his spike and it wasn't even enough to do much damage to the electoral polls. The yard sign went out today; the persuasive attempt to get voters has begun, in earnest.

 

And, typically, when a fed program is instituted they get experts in the field to determine educational delivery to fit the appropriate psychological development stage. Were we thinking the messiah Obama would figure that one out too?