Registered? Please log in below.
New? Please register.
Here are some reasons why.
Register
User login
Poll
Recent comments
- Donavan
- Wry Mouth
- Wry Mouth
- Wry Mouth
- crywalt
- Wry Mouth
- john 2000
- john 2000
- john 2000
Active forum topics
Recent blog posts
- Instamonkey: God bless Tom McClintock
- Instamonkey: Penn Jillette on Obama and Vegas
- The Green Police can get the hell out of my head, out of my house, and out of my wallet
- Rep. John Murtha has died (UPDATED)
- Dr. Zaius is now a contributor to Big Government
- The Tea Party, Joseph Farah and Sarah Palin: Trying to distinguish the fringe from the mainstream in the Republican Party
- Peggy Noonan is wrong about liberals and 9/11
- Imagine if America's Founders had Auto-tune, Marshall stacks and Final Cut Pro
- Drinking on the cheap
- No, this is not a bad dream
Who's online
There are currently 2 users and 52 guests online.
Online users
- RobbL
- Ben
Navigation
Credits, etc.
Monkey logos by Katherine Roe
(who had no part in the color design)
Hosting graciously provided by Oliver Fross.
Those accusing McCain of "lying" about Obama in the "sex ed" ad need to apologize
Tue, 09/16/2008 - 23:22 — Dr. Zaius
I'm not singling you out, Joel. Ok, I will — sort of. Joel did state a couple of days back that McCain was running a dishonorable campaign. That he was, in Joel's words, a liar. But it's not really Joel's fault. Everyone in the MSM was saying the same thing. Joel cited McClatchy news service as saying McCain was lying about Obama supporting a bill that gave 5-year-olds the kind detailed sex education instruction that you'd give to 12- and 13-year-olds. Here's what McClatchy's political ad referee said:
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.
Ok, lemme pick the low-hanging fruit first. When did McCain say Obama "sponsored" legislation dealing with this issue? I didn't catch that in the ad, and it's certainly not stated in McClatchy's account. Call: Red Herring, or (gasp!) lying by McClatchy about what McCain's ad claims.
Now, on to the more substantive part. Yes, the bill did mention "age appropriate" stuff like helping kids identify who a sexual predator is and how to stop/avoid them. But it is simply a fact that the bill Obama voted for a bill to expand the sex education program slated for grades 6-12 to apply fully to K-12. Byron York did some actual reporting on this matter, found the bill and pulls out this actual text from the bill.
The old law read: "Each class or course in comprehensive sex education offered in any of grades 6 through 12 shall include instruction on the prevention, transmission and spread of AIDS."
Senate Bill 99 struck out grade six, changing it to kindergarten, in addition to making a few other changes in wording. It read: "Each class or course in comprehensive sex education 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.
That seems rather clear. McCain was not lying. It's Obama's fault for not reading, and better amending, the bill he voted for. Want York's whole take down? Read this. Want an explanation of who's really lying in one-minute video form? See Brit Hume's Grapevine from Tuesday:
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Chatter (tweets)
- benboychuk: Instamonkey: God bless Tom McClintock http://tinyurl.com/yllofkj
- benboychuk: @PhilHendrieShow The Snickers spot with Betty White and Abe Vigoda. Betty White is a GENIUS.
- benboychuk: @jstrevino Yeah, I won't defend that episode. Truth is, my wife and I were latecomers to the David Tennant Doctor. Critical sense failed.
- benboychuk: @jstrevino The ending alone is worth it. But I sort of liked "Planet of the Dead." I don't know. Maybe I was beguiled by Michelle Ryan.
- benboychuk: Instamonkey: Penn Jillette on Obama and Vegas http://tinyurl.com/yzgb3m2
- benboychuk: @lschmeiser That's why I prefer to buy rather than borrow. I'm addicted to marginalia.
- benboychuk: RT @lschmeiser: There is a special place in Hell for people who write things in library books. Demons going for the eyes with a poison p ...
- benboychuk: It's fun to read #24 tweets without watching the show. It's like trying to decipher fragments of Greek pottery or something.
Alliances
"The Monkeys have been going through my garbage. I blame John Ashcroft."
- Glenn Reynolds
Comments
Nice try
No, they should not. It says nothing else than that the EXISTING classes in comprehensive sex education should include information about diseases. It says nowhere that it will create NEW classes in comprehensive sex educatiion.
Called out? Moi?
I don't have the time right this second for a more-considered response, except to note a couple of things:
• The ad calls the bill Obama's "one accomplishment." That indicates a higher level of involvement that merely voting for a bill -- after all, Obama voted for lots of bills, more than one. So why it doesn't say "sponsored," it clearly implies "sponsored." (And since the bill didn't even pass, it's not even an "accomplishment.") An implied lie is still a lie, in my book.
• What's more, Z, I don't think you can even fully sell yourself on this thing. I'll quote you:
Based on the way you constructed that sentence, it sounds like even you don't think Obama intended to offer comprehensive sex ed to kindergarteners; you're assigning a rather more passive role to him. We now cross the line into (admitted) speculation on my part, but here goes: I don't think the McCain campaign believes that was Obama's intention, either.
This is usefully considered in light of McCain's "lipstick" ad. You can avoid admitting to lying if you're willfully, obsessively literalistic and refuse to look at the context of a situation. OK. Maybe I'll back off the word "lie" to describe the ad. But it's mighty misleading -- I'd say intentionally so. What's the word for that?
More Than Lipstick
On the lipstick comment:
Sarah Palin was known for two things coming out of the convention; the lipstick comment and she acquired the moniker "barracuda".
That being said, right behind the lipstick comment, Obama also said you could wrap an old fish in a paper called change and it would still stink. My opinion: Obama is stupid. He is either stupid for using two metaphors back-to-back that would be connected to Gov. Palin or he is stupid for believing the people of this country would look over his cleverly constructed speech that would give him plausible deniability.
Re: Called out? Moi?
But it's mighty misleading -- I'd say intentionally so. What's the word for that?
Politics?
Heh.
Perhaps. But I reserve the right to throw a tantrum now and again about it.
Not often, though.
Post new comment