Know what you are voting for : Simple Breakdown.

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

http://www.afa.net/08VG/index.html

http://www.afa.net/pdfs/08vg_print.pdf

Also, Georgia's early voting info... look for your county and you can vote in the weeks before Nov. 4

http://www.sos.georgia.gov/elections/11_04_earlyvoting.pdf

[BobbyFresco]

Way to post info from an impartial, non partisan website. / sarcasm.:rolleyes:

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

Way to post info from an impartial, non partisan website. / sarcasm.:rolleyes:

You need to get the fucc off my ass... You've done it twice now.. Chill out.

[Vteckidd]

Way to post info from an impartial, non partisan website. / sarcasm.:rolleyes:
pot calling kettle, hey your black

[BobbyFresco]

You need to get the fucc off my ass... You've done it twice now.. Chill out.



Who are you again?
Sorry that I don't kiss your ass like every other thirsty mf'er on here. My bad.:rolleyes:
It's my opinion on this thread; Don't like it or me, use the ignore function. You've been here long enough so you should know how to use it.:goodjob:

[BobbyFresco]

pot calling kettle, hey your black


That's a keen observation on your part. Great Job! *high five*

[4dmin]

You need to get the fucc off my ass... You've done it twice now.. Chill out.

so you admit what you posted was BIAS :lmfao:?

:doh: that is about as bad as Jaime using CBN as his source for political arguments

[BobbyFresco]

so you admit what you posted was BIAS :lmfao:?

:doh:



LMMFAO....:lmfao:

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

Who are you again?
Sorry that I don't kiss your ass like every other thirsty mf'er on here. My bad.:rolleyes:
It's my opinion on this thread; Don't like it or me, use the ignore function. You've been here long enough so you should know how to use it.:goodjob:

I could ask you the same...

I do not want anyone kissing my ass. Thanks.


so you admit what you posted was BIAS :lmfao:?

:doh: that is about as bad as Jaime using CBN as his source for political arguments

I wasn't being bias, just posting some information that was posted on the AFA website.

[NevrNufTorq]

so you admit what you posted was BIAS :lmfao:?

:doh: that is about as bad as Jaime using CBN as his source for political arguments
no offens bro, but thats like saying anything you post isnt a running ad for obama!!! same said for mine an ad for mccain :2cents:

i dont care either way, just saying :cheers:

[4dmin]

no offens bro, but thats like saying anything you post isnt a running ad for obama!!! same said for mine an ad for mccain :2cents:

i dont care either way, just saying :cheers:

that is incorrect sir i offer my opinions w/ FACTS... you can hardly call what was posted credible. that is like using US Weekly as your news source to choose your candidate. the link to bias information focused on primary two things which i'm not surprised considering the source that Obama loves HOMOs and wants to KILL babies :rolleyes: the fashion of people that believe such sh!t are voting republican anyway we are just stating the obvious.

http://www.republican-elephant.com/mccain-north-carolina-gop-ad.jpg

[BobbyFresco]

There's no disputing that the source the OP used is biased. The name of the "organization" is a dead give away.

[Vteckidd]

i offer my opinions w/ FACTS...
:lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao:

we got a comedian here guys :D

[Vteckidd]

There's no disputing that the source the OP used is biased. The name of the "organization" is a dead give away.
its no more bias than CNN on a wed afternooon

[4dmin]

:lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao:

we got a comedian here guys :D

please... i'm sure you, jaime, and tiff all went through both candidates voting records :goodjob:

[Vteckidd]

please... i'm sure you, jaime, and tiff all went through both candidates voting records :goodjob:
you know what they say, birds of a feather........


You never answered my PM, who is your "boss" voting for. Just curious

[4dmin]

its no more bias than CNN on a wed afternooon

what !?! :lmfao:i'm not even going to justify w/ an answer

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/US%20Weekly%20Obamas.jpg

^ yup thats my source for voting :lmfao:

[4dmin]

you know what they say, birds of a feather........


You never answered my PM, who is your "boss" voting for. Just curious

actually i don't know to be honest... when he gets back into town i'll ask :goodjob:

[BobbyFresco]

its no more bias than CNN on a wed afternooon



I guess maybe the sourced site gets their "info" from Fox News.:lmfao:

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

please... i'm sure you, jaime, and tiff all went through both candidates voting records :goodjob:

I haven't done much research on either candidate. It's probably best that I do not vote; however, I am sticking to what I always have... I am a conservative on most subjects (with the exception of Homosexuality because I AM bisexual), I am a mother and I am a Christian and I believe the way I do because that's how I was raised and what I feel is morally and ethically correct. (Yes, I know homosexuality and Christianity clash; however, I can't help the feelings that I have about people of the same sex, so please do not go into a bible/moral lecture because I won't hear it.) I don't care what anyone says. I know who I'm voting for, I know (for the most part) what they stand for and believe and I'm not explaining why I feel the way I do in any more depth.:goodjob:

I think Barack Obama is an excellent speaker and have no doubt that he is a wonderful compelling individual, husband, and father - but I don't believe him. I don't like his wife either. Biden, I just don't like him period.

I think McCain is a TERRIBLE speaker like Bush, but I believe what he says. Plus, I really like his wife. I'm not big on Palin, but I like a woman with guts and she's got them... I don't like the fact that she bashed Obama, but whatever...

[Vteckidd]

I guess maybe the sourced site gets their "info" from Fox News.:lmfao:
FOX is more unbiased than CNN sorry pal

I bet you love MSNBC too

[4dmin]

I haven't done much research on either candidate. It's probably best that I do not vote; however, I am sticking to what I always have... I am a conservative on most subjects (with the exception of Homosexuality because I AM bisexual), I am a mother and I am a Christian and I believe the way I do because that's how I was raised and what I feel is morally and ethically correct. (Yes, I know homosexuality and Christianity clash; however, I can't help the feelings that I have about people of the same sex, so please do not go into a bible/moral lecture because I won't hear it.) I don't care what anyone says. I know who I'm voting for, I know (for the most part) what they stand for and believe and I'm not explaining why I feel the way I do in any more depth.:goodjob:

don't take it personal but this is the problem w/ society. education is the key to success and majority of america is failing. i rest my case.

[4dmin]

FOX is more unbiased than CNN sorry pal

I bet you love MSNBC too

um sorry but cnn is probably least bias of ABC/FOX/CNN... denying that shows your thought process.

Fox is so far up republican asses it's ridiculous. I watch it every morning to see what is going on w/ McCain/Palin. For a station to have created some of the most controversial shows over the years they have the most conservative viewers for news. funny how that works :lmfao:

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

don't take it personal but this is the problem w/ society. education is the key to success and majority of america is failing. i rest my case.

I totally agree, but you have to understand... Politics aren't my forte - they never have been and being a full time single parent/student/property manager, I don't really have time to watch TV and read the paper (You'll understand one day if you ever have rugrats)... Granted, I AM becoming more interested daily as I see how it partains to me and my life personally. The younger crowd will see it one day as they grow up too, much like I have and you have.:yes:

[NevrNufTorq]

funny this turned into this, and like i said paul, what you post is an ad for your guy and my posts an ad for mine...


if most of this post doesnt prove it i dont know what does, what i find 'credible' you dont and vice versa so how do 'your facts' become anymore credible than mine? just asking since we both know who we want in and are 'grownups' about it...just imho :goodjob:

[Vteckidd]

You cant be serious that CNN is UNBIASED?

CNN and MSNBC are the MOST LEFT ORGANIZATIONS OUT THERE, might as well be the New York Times.

Fox is Right, but not FAR RIGHT they are pretty conservative.

you do have a few guys that are RIGHT on there, hannity can tend to be far right on some things.

But for the most part the report stuff accurately

[BobbyFresco]

I haven't done much research on either candidate. It's probably best that I do not vote; however, I am sticking to what I always have... I am a conservative on most subjects (with the exception of Homosexuality because I AM bisexual), I am a mother and I am a Christian and I believe the way I do because that's how I was raised and what I feel is morally and ethically correct. (Yes, I know homosexuality and Christianity clash; however, I can't help the feelings that I have about people of the same sex, so please do not go into a bible/moral lecture because I won't hear it.) I don't care what anyone says. I know who I'm voting for, I know (for the most part) what they stand for and believe and I'm not explaining why I feel the way I do in any more depth.:goodjob:



I'm not trying to attack you personally so don't take this as such but this post is contradictory in many respects.

By your own admission you say that you have not done any significant amount of research on either candidate and that perhaps you shouldn't vote because of that but yet you know who you're voting for and the why.:rolleyes:

The whole conservative/bisexual thing I'm not going to touch because you've pointed out all on your own how hypocritical that is. (* cough * not a christian!* cough/ sarcasm).:doh:


So, on what basis have you come to the firm decision for whom you're voting for?

I have my own suspicions but I'll keep those to myself.;)

[Jaimecbr900]

so you admit what you posted was BIAS :lmfao:?

:doh: that is about as bad as Jaime using CBN as his source for political arguments

It is no different than you guys using CNN, ABC, NBC, etc as a reliable "unbiased":rolleyes: source. What exactly constitutes, in yall's book, as a "reliable" enough source to become a "fact"? Maybe if God himself says that Obama sucks some of yall will believe it? Well, God told me himself he does, now what? Wait, most of yall don't BELIEVE there is a God either, so that won't work, huh?:rolleyes: See the point?

BTW, you still didn't disprove any of what I said in the other thread about sex ed and Obama. I'm sure IF he actually DIDN'T say what I QUOTED him saying, then it should be rather easy, since 90% of all media are Obama lovers, to find "facts" to prove me wrong. :goodjob:

So maybe the source is not as "unreliable" as you guys WANT it to be, huh? ;)

[4dmin]

I totally agree, but you have to understand... Politics aren't my forte - they never have been. Granted, I AM becoming more interested daily as I see how it partains to me and my life personally. The younger crowd will see it one day as they grow up too, much like I have and you have.:yes:

true. like i said nothing personal your a great girl - EVERYONE just needs to be a little more informed in life.

[Vteckidd]

don't take it personal but this is the problem w/ society. education is the key to success and majority of america is failing. i rest my case.
an noi offense to you but most of the LEFT and liberals have no clue what Obama really stands for, they just know what the medias talking points are.

I cant wait till we hang out :)

[NevrNufTorq]

um sorry but cnn is probably least bias of ABC/FOX/CNN... denying that shows your thought process.

Fox is so far up republican asses it's ridiculous. I watch it every morning to see what is going on w/ McCain/Palin. For a station to have created some of the most controversial shows over the years they have the most conservative viewers for news. funny how that works :lmfao:

ty for proving my point above, b/c i think nbc and cnn are in the tank for 'your guy'...funny how 2 educated men see things in 2 distinct diff lights huh?!?!?

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

I'm not trying to attack you personally so don't take this as such but this post is contradictory in many respects.

By your own admission you say that you have not done any significant amount of research on either candidate and that perhaps you shouldn't vote because of that but yet you know who you're voting for and the why.:rolleyes:

The whole conservative/bisexual thing I'm not going to touch because you've pointed out all on your own how hypocritical that is. (* cough * not a christian!* cough/ sarcasm).:doh:


So, on what basis have you come to the firm decision for whom you're voting for?

I have my own suspicions but I'll keep those to myself.;)

No offense taken. Like I said, that's how I was raised - so my parents play a large role in the way I vote. My dad has never voted though (he never registered for fear of being drafted or Jury duty)

I have to go to lunch, but I'll respond more in depth when I return.

[Vteckidd]

It is no different than you guys using CNN, ABC, NBC, etc as a reliable "unbiased":rolleyes: source. What exactly constitutes, in yall's book, as a "reliable" enough source to become a "fact"? Maybe if God himself says that Obama sucks some of yall will believe it? Well, God told me himself he does, now what? Wait, most of yall don't BELIEVE there is a God either, so that won't work, huh?:rolleyes: See the point?

BTW, you still didn't disprove any of what I said in the other thread about sex ed and Obama. I'm sure IF he actually DIDN'T say what I QUOTED him saying, then it should be rather easy, since 90% of all media are Obama lovers, to find "facts" to prove me wrong. :goodjob:

So maybe the source is not as "unreliable" as you guys WANT it to be, huh? ;)
How come when i try to make a point as eloquent as this, it ends up being some rehashed garbage.

CHeers to Jaime, the man who can type what im thinking LOL

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

true. like i said nothing personal your a great girl - EVERYONE just needs to be a little more informed in life.

Thanks. I agree 100%.

[4dmin]

funny this turned into this, and like i said paul, what you post is an ad for your guy and my posts an ad for mine...


if most of this post doesnt prove it i dont know what does, what i find 'credible' you dont and vice versa so how do 'your facts' become anymore credible than mine? just asking since we both know who we want in and are 'grownups' about it...just imho :goodjob:

i'm being a smartass posting pix to show the point you obviously missed... your trying to say my post are bias b/c i stated the obvious that her source was very bias... come'on did you even read the source or see how it was presented? probably not.

like i said people want to talk sh!t about candidates w/o backing sh!t up... Joe made a great post about tax plans after i started one that didn't get anywhere... it doesn't matter how BOLD or FACT something is some people are just blind to the truth. Christians are perfect example, but hey i'm just biased Democrat registered as Libertarian :thinking:

[BobbyFresco]

The fact of the matter is that impartial non- partisan sources are few and far in between...That goes for both sides of the fence.

[Vteckidd]

The fact of the matter is that impartial non- partisan sources are few and far in between...That goes for both sides of the fence.
smartest thing you have said all week

[4dmin]

It is no different than you guys using CNN, ABC, NBC, etc as a reliable "unbiased":rolleyes: source. What exactly constitutes, in yall's book, as a "reliable" enough source to become a "fact"? Maybe if God himself says that Obama sucks some of yall will believe it? Well, God told me himself he does, now what? Wait, most of yall don't BELIEVE there is a God either, so that won't work, huh?:rolleyes: See the point?

BTW, you still didn't disprove any of what I said in the other thread about sex ed and Obama. I'm sure IF he actually DIDN'T say what I QUOTED him saying, then it should be rather easy, since 90% of all media are Obama lovers, to find "facts" to prove me wrong. :goodjob:

So maybe the source is not as "unreliable" as you guys WANT it to be, huh? ;)

no i dont' see your point b/c your mixing up FACTS and BIAS literature... i totally disproved what you said and you could never state evidence. i have record of me asking at least 3x where was this "evidence OBAMA gave to the media that was his curriculum" which you were quoted saying he sent it to "MSNBC" which you could never pull up... so you gave me your CBN article which isn't biased... i mean look at the founder of CBN and what they stand for :rolleyes:

so where is it? where is the evidence that his curriculum was to teach K grade all you listed? you said he gave it to MSNBC prove it.


-a quote from the article itself, "Mr. Obama stated that he understood the main objective of the legislation, as it pertained to kindergarteners, to be to teach them how to defend themselves against sexual predators." this is TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN PREVENTING TEEN PREGNANCY....THE BASIS OF YOUR ARGUMENT.

^ this is another point

[BobbyFresco]

smartest thing you have said all week


:rolleyes: :lmfao:


I wasn't the civilized individual I am, I'd want to kick you in the throat at least once a week....:lmfao:

[Total_Blender]

This "issues" cited on the checklist are pretty vague. Here's an even scarier one from the primaries:

http://www.afa.net/pdfs/08vg.pdf

"Constitutional protection of marriage between a woman and a man"

Probably refers to "ban gay marriage and benefits for gay partners" legislation.

"Teaching of Homosexuality in Public Schools"

Is something I support. I think that kids should be taught that intolerance against gays, lesbians, transgendered people, and intersexed people is wrong. They should be taught how to acknowledge and accept the queer-ness of others in a safe and non-demeaning way. They should be taught things like proper pronoun use for transgendered and intersexed people, identifying gender stereotypes, how to identify and report hate crimes, etc. This doesn't have to involve technical discussions of butt-secks or whatever. Many straight people engage in butt-secks, therefore including it in safe sex curriculum is really not an issue specific to gays, but that's beside the point.

Some of you will say its the responsibility of the parents to teach this stuff, but look how much hate for gays is on IA. You think these people aren't going to pass that hate on to their kids? Where should homosexual kids/teens turn for information when their own families are intolerant?

The parents can teach whatever "Morals/Religion/etc" they want but LGBT's are a social group with the same rights as everyone else in this country and they have the right to be included in its culture of education.

:2cents:

[Mike Lowrey]

so you admit what you posted was BIAS :lmfao:?

:doh: that is about as bad as Jaime using CBN as his source for political arguments

Like you using the liberal media as your sources?..... :lmfao:

[Jaimecbr900]

no i dont' see your point b/c your mixing up FACTS and BIAS literature... i totally disproved what you said and you could never state evidence. i have record of me asking at least 3x where was this "evidence OBAMA gave to the media that was his curriculum" which you were quoted saying he sent it to "MSNBC" which you could never pull up... so you gave me your CBN article which isn't biased... i mean look at the founder of CBN and what they stand for :rolleyes:

so where is it? where is the evidence that his curriculum was to teach K grade all you listed? you said he gave it to MSNBC prove it.



You don't want to "see" it because you choose not to. I did put up several links to where I read what I quoted. You choose not to believe that because you say they're biased. They may very well be, but if the Obama camp can't refute it, then just WHO is right?

Here you go, more non-existant "sources" about what OBAMA himself said in several different interviews with the media on the subject:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/obama-targeted.html

Highlight comments:

"ABC News' Teddy Davis and Rigel Anderson report: Barack Obama came under fire from the McCain campaign on Tuesday for backing state legislation which would have armed public school teachers in Illinois - including those who teach students as young as kindergarten - with sex education standards."

Note: "Sex education standards" refers to OBAMA'S own proposal to the Illinois state legislature that HE tried to get thru there which uses the "standards" set forth by

"The criticism of Obama on sex education stems from his work in the Illinois state senate on legislation which would have taken the state's entire sex education standards, which related to 6th through 12th grade, and applied them to all of K-12."

Note: Again, right here, your very trustworthy:rolleyes: ABC News is reporting/explaining that Obama's "plan", which he has already admitted he would push for if he becomes President, basically entails pushing an already existing 6-12 sex ed and just push it back to include K-12. In other words, use the SAME STANDARDIZED AND APPROVED plan/guidelines that is used NOW for 6-12 graders and incorporate it to include K-5 graders too. The only difference is the notion of "age appropriate", BUT as mentioned above he admits that the definition of "age appropriate" will be left UP TO local school systems WHICH ALREADY ADHERE TO THE "STANDARDS" set forth BY . So put 2 and 2 together. He may not have come out and said "I want Kindergarden students to learn about condoms, masturbation, and homosexuality..." BUT he does want to use the same "standards" that include exactly that as part of the curriculum.

"'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,'" Obama told the Daily Herald (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/sex-ed-for-kind.html). "'If they ask a teacher 'where do babies come from,' that providing information that the fact is that it's not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing. Although again, that's going to be determined on a case by case basis by local communities and local school boards.'"

Note: Obama is double talking here. On one hand he SAYS he wants age appropriate teaching, but on the other he is going to leave that decision of what IS age appropriate to school systems he KNOWS use the standards set forth by .

I'll continue when I get back.

[4dmin]

You don't want to "see" it because you choose not to. I did put up several links to where I read what I quoted. You choose not to believe that because you say they're biased. They may very well be, but if the Obama camp can't refute it, then just WHO is right?

Here you go, more non-existant "sources" about what OBAMA himself said in several different interviews with the media on the subject:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/obama-targeted.html

Highlight comments:

"ABC News' Teddy Davis and Rigel Anderson report: Barack Obama came under fire from the McCain campaign on Tuesday for backing state legislation which would have armed public school teachers in Illinois - including those who teach students as young as kindergarten - with sex education standards."

Note: "Sex education standards" refers to OBAMA'S own proposal to the Illinois state legislature that HE tried to get thru there which uses the "standards" set forth by

"The criticism of Obama on sex education stems from his work in the Illinois state senate on legislation which would have taken the state's entire sex education standards, which related to 6th through 12th grade, and applied them to all of K-12."

Note: Again, right here, your very trustworthy:rolleyes: ABC News is reporting/explaining that Obama's "plan", which he has already admitted he would push for if he becomes President, basically entails pushing an already existing 6-12 sex ed and just push it back to include K-12. In other words, use the SAME STANDARDIZED AND APPROVED plan/guidelines that is used NOW for 6-12 graders and incorporate it to include K-5 graders too. The only difference is the notion of "age appropriate", BUT as mentioned above he admits that the definition of "age appropriate" will be left UP TO local school systems WHICH ALREADY ADHERE TO THE "STANDARDS" set forth BY . So put 2 and 2 together. He may not have come out and said "I want Kindergarden students to learn about condoms, masturbation, and homosexuality..." BUT he does want to use the same "standards" that include exactly that as part of the curriculum.

"'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,'" Obama told the Daily Herald (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/sex-ed-for-kind.html). "'If they ask a teacher 'where do babies come from,' that providing information that the fact is that it's not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing. Although again, that's going to be determined on a case by case basis by local communities and local school boards.'"

Note: Obama is double talking here. On one hand he SAYS he wants age appropriate teaching, but on the other he is going to leave that decision of what IS age appropriate to school systems he KNOWS use the standards set forth by .

I'll continue when I get back.

you still didn't support your previous arguements... you HAVE NO PROOF OBAMA WANTS TO K GRADE TO LEARN ABOUT CONDOMS, HOMOSEXUALS, ABORTION, ETC ETC AS YOU PREVIOUSLY POSTED....

Obama is for APPROPRIATE SEX ED for K grade "inappropriate touching"... ya that is such a bad thing :lmfao:

FURTHERMORE YOU SAID YOU HAD HIS CURRICULUM WHERE IS IT B/C YOU CAN'T SUPPORT THAT W/ ANYTHING YOU POSTED?

BY THE WAY I ORGINALLY POSTED THAT LINK AND YOU FORGOT TO LEAVE OUT THIS PORTION OF IT WHICH WAS QUITE BETTER


“It is shameful and downright perverse," said Burton, "for the McCain campaign to use a bill that was written to protect young children from sexual predators as a recycled and discredited political attack against a father of two young girls -- a position that his friend Mitt Romney also holds. Last week, John McCain told Time magazine (http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1836909,00.html) he couldn’t define what honor was. Now we know why."

[Total_Blender]

Note: Obama is double talking here. On one hand he SAYS he wants age appropriate teaching, but on the other he is going to leave that decision of what IS age appropriate to school systems he KNOWS use the standards set forth by .
I'll continue when I get back.

This argument has been busted already... so many times. Your source just says he wants "standards" and it doesn't say what the "standards" are. You are all going on an explanation of the plan thats not even a full paragraph. Tell me where he has a detailed plan of what he wants to teach grades k-6. You won't find it.


Like you using the liberal media as your sources?..... :lmfao:

So how are we supposed to get information? Should we just believe everything that comes from John McCains mouth and not seek info to the contrary? Is the only good news Fox News and is it only good when it supports Mac?:crazy:

I posted links to full-text .pdf's from the Library of Congress database... original sources, not from the "news media". And it seems that no one read them:screwy::crazy:

[Mike Lowrey]

So how are we supposed to get information? Should we just believe everything that comes from John McCains mouth and not seek info to the contrary? Is the only good news Fox News and is it only good when it supports Mac?:crazy:

Well, if you are looking for un-biased information, the liberal media is not the answer.... :goodjob:


I posted links to full-text .pdf's from the Library of Congress database... original sources, not from the "news media". And it seems that no one read them:screwy::crazy:

So it looks like you read about as much of my post as the others read of yours, huh?

I quoted Paul (i.e. admin). Reading FTL

[4dmin]

This argument has been busted already... so many times. Your source just says he wants "standards" and it doesn't say what the "standards" are. You are all going on an explanation of the plan thats not even a full paragraph. Tell me where he has a detailed plan of what he wants to teach grades k-6. You won't find it.


THANK YOU. Jaime is trying to imply christian opinion/values into political FACTS.

Obama wants standards for sex ed for all grades... well he must mean teaching K grade about screwing, homosexuals, and abortions...

[Total_Blender]

So it looks like you read about as much of my post as the others read of yours, huh?


I've read every post in this thread. and I have yet to see anyone on the right Wing side of this issue present an original source (i.e. a full-text of legislation, video of a speech or a senate session, congressional voting records, etc) that says what Obama will or won't require taught to grades K through 6.

The "liberal media" as you say might be biased, but when you look at the original sources for their information you can wade through any BIAS pretty effectively, and that goes for all media from CNN to CBN. As long as you recognize what their bias is and seek the original source of their information you can get a pretty good grip on the story. I watch just as much FOX as I watch CNN. Hell, I probably watch more FOX just to get the opposing view.

And it also depends on who you watch, almost every network has their liberals and conservatives. I mean CNN has a 3 hour block of conservatives Glenn Beck and Nancy Grace during prime time. But I have never *ever* seen a liberal commentator/anchor/etc on FOX. You can say Colmes is a liberal, but really? Have you read his books? He basically twists things around to support the conservatives from a liberal stance and makes apologies/excuses for why conservative policies are failing. :crazy:

[4dmin]

Nancy Grace

man i can't stand her... just how she talks and how the show flips to other commentators... i'm just like :crazy: when i watch it

[Total_Blender]

man i can't stand her... just how she talks and how the show flips to other commentators... i'm just like :crazy: when i watch it

Yeah, its hard to watch. The only good parts of her shows are the callers/guests who pwn her all the time. :lmfao:

[DeutscheBAG!]

FOX is more unbiased than CNN sorry pal


you owe me a new monitor..i just spit water all over it :lmfao:

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r179/Fdaveokc/foxnews.jpg

[tony]

Propaganda: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause

[Jaimecbr900]

you still didn't support your previous arguements... you HAVE NO PROOF OBAMA WANTS TO K GRADE TO LEARN ABOUT CONDOMS, HOMOSEXUALS, ABORTION, ETC ETC AS YOU PREVIOUSLY POSTED....

I have, but you just refuse to see it. So ONCE AGAIN, here you go:

These are direct quotes from SIECUS's own curriculum posted on their website....

"To help educators meet the needs of young people, SIECUS recently published the Third Edition of the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education; K–12. Developed by a task force of experts, the Guidelines set forth the key concepts, topics, and messages that would ideally be included in a comprehensive sexuality education program or curriculum. The Guidelines are not a curriculum but provide a framework for educators to create curricula or evaluate existing programs."

"To make it easier for educators to find exactly what they need, the resources are grouped by topic areas which correspond to many of the topics included in the Guidelines. The topic areas are: Multiple Sexuality Topics (for comprehensive programs and those that address a number of topics simultaneously), Puberty, Sexual Orientation, Abstinence, Pregnancy Prevention, HIV/STDs and Safer Sex, and Sexual Abuse. Additional sections include Resources for Educators and Spanish Language materials. Please note that some resources are listed more than once as they cover more than one specific topic area."

"All About Life: Grades K–4 Caring About Myself, My Family, and My Community

Caren Monastersky and Ellen Phillips-Angeles

This curriculum emphasizes social skills and is designed to prepare young people to care about themselves, their family, and their community. It consists of 20 lessons for grades K–2 and 20 lessons for grades 3–4 on such subjects as friendship, disability, feelings, families, sexual abuse prevention, anger, space, staying healthy, anatomy, babies, and pregnancy."

"These six skills-based curricula are designed to provide information about human development and reproduction and to promote young people’s respect for and appreciation of themselves, their families, and others. The curricula cover such subjects as puberty, sexual health and hygiene, reproductive systems, pregnancy, contraception, abstinence, sexual orientation, HIV/AIDS, STDs, sexual exploitation, and lifelong sexuality. Updated HIV & other lessons are available on line at www.metrokc.gov/health/famplan/flash (http://www.metrokc.gov/health/famplan/flash/)"

"Filling the Gaps: Hard-to-Teach Topics in Sexuality Education

Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS)

This teacher’s manual covers eight topics—abstinence, condom use, diversity, pregnancy options, safer sex, sexual behavior, sexual identity and orientation, and sexuality and society—that are often missing from or need strengthening in sexuality education programs. It provides background for teachers, rationale for teaching each topic, lesson plans, and information on additional resources. It is designed to supplement an existing curriculum."

"Our Whole Lives

Elizabeth Casparian, Eva Goldfarb, Richard Kimball, Barbara Sprung, Pamela M. Wilson

Our Whole Lives is a series of sexuality education curricula for five age groups: grades K–1, grades 4–6, grades 7–9, grades 10–12, and adults. It is designed to help participants make informed and responsible decisions about their sexual health and behavior by providing accurate, age-appropriate information in six subject areas: human development, relationships, personal skills, sexual behavior, sexual health, and society and culture. Sexuality and Our Faith is an optional component for use in religious settings. Educators must complete a training program before implementing the curriculum."

"Promoting Healthy Sexuality

Family Planning Association of Maine

This comprehensive curriculum covers grades K–3, 4–6, 7–8, and 9–12. Some of the key subject areas addressed include: communication, self-esteem, puberty, decision-making, birth control, sexual orientation, and disease prevention."

"When I’m Grown: Life Planning Education K–2

Advocates for Youth

This skills-based curriculum for grades K–2 consists of 50 discussions and activities designed to introduce the basic knowledge, attitudes, and skills that children need in order to participate successfully in adolescence and adult life. Topics include: self-understanding, family, growth and development, friendship, sexuality, life skills, health promotion, and careers."

"Healthy Sexuality: An Abstinence-Based Curriculum for Middle Schools

Louise Miller and Kay Nation

This curriculum, which focuses on abstinence, includes activities on sexual terminology and puberty, defining and maintaining healthy sexuality, resisting peer pressure, and finding and using support. It consists of 10 sequential lessons, many of which contain a homework assignment for students to complete with a parent or other trusted adult. An optional condom lesson is also included."

"Life Facts: AIDS
This curriculum, which is part of a seven topic set for adolescents and adults with mild-to-moderate developmental disabilities, teaches the dangers of AIDS, how it spreads, and how to reduce exposure to the disease. It includes non-explicit as well as explicit versions of lessons on high-risk behavior. The program comes with 56 laminated illustrations and a comprehensive curriculum guide. Educators will need to update some of the HIV/AIDS information."


Again, these are just certain excerpts from the long a$$ curriculum outline that SIECUS has published as a resource for EDUCATORS to buy, use, and go off of. I'm not saying this is what they WILL use, although even the Obama camp acknowledges that SIECUS is in fact the biggest resource used by educators when they are working up a curriculum. Does that mean it ends up being taught as outlined? No. Does that mean there is a possibility? Yes.

So let's put 2 and 2 together Paul......Obama says he is FOR K-12 sex ed. No dispute there, right? Ok, stay with me here and follow the dots. In an interview, which I believe was televised, Obama camp was asked..."What do you mean by "age-appropriate sex ed" for K-12?".....OBAMA'S PRESS SEC....directly said that SIECUS guidelines (which HE TOO SAID is used by the vast majority of school systems to come up with their curriculum) was a good place to start (not verbatim, but I'm going off memory here). So essentially, Obama steps on an ant pile and then walks away leaving "the local school systems", which he KNOWS uses the SIECUS curriculum as a guide, to decide what he has announced as a new great idea.

That's like me, a layman, walking into an operating room and looking down at the patient on the table and saying, "ummm, yeah....you can fix him...." and then walking away. Well, just HOW are we going to fix him???.....so I just throw them a medical book and say, "here, use this".....:thinking:

That's nothing more than double talk. Everyone praises him for his "new ideas" and "change", yet it all amounts to nothing really. He was asked what he meant by "age appropriate" and he told the media, SIECUS. We look at SIECUS and they talk about the things I quoted above. Then people want to defend it as "his" idea and "he only wants age-appropriate teaching" but none of you can figure out WHO is going to make that determination. THE GOV'T is going to, just like any other school function. So here we go again.....:rolleyes:


There's your "proof" Paul, but I'm sure you're not going to like this either so it will just be shelved in the no good file.

[4dmin]

So let's put 2 and 2 together Paul......Obama says he is FOR K-12 sex ed. No dispute there, right? Ok, stay with me here and follow the dots. In an interview, which I believe was televised, Obama camp was asked..."What do you mean by "age-appropriate sex ed" for K-12?".....OBAMA'S PRESS SEC....directly said that SIECUS guidelines (which HE TOO SAID is used by the vast majority of school systems to come up with their curriculum) was a good place to start (not verbatim, but I'm going off memory here). So essentially, Obama steps on an ant pile and then walks away leaving "the local school systems", which he KNOWS uses the SIECUS curriculum as a guide, to decide what he has announced as a new great idea.

That's like me, a layman, walking into an operating room and looking down at the patient on the table and saying, "ummm, yeah....you can fix him...." and then walking away. Well, just HOW are we going to fix him???.....so I just throw them a medical book and say, "here, use this".....:thinking:

That's nothing more than double talk. Everyone praises him for his "new ideas" and "change", yet it all amounts to nothing really. He was asked what he meant by "age appropriate" and he told the media, SIECUS. We look at SIECUS and they talk about the things I quoted above. Then people want to defend it as "his" idea and "he only wants age-appropriate teaching" but none of you can figure out WHO is going to make that determination. THE GOV'T is going to, just like any other school function. So here we go again.....:rolleyes:


There's your "proof" Paul, but I'm sure you're not going to like this either so it will just be shelved in the no good file.

AGAIN this is not proof - media asked and if i'm not mistaken Obama rep said "look into whatever state (oregon) uses" which happens to use SIECUS and you now say he supports teaching grade K about HOMOSEXUALS, ABORTION, ETC... that is a very far exaggeration and good slueth work inspector gadget.

FURTHERMORE IF HE SUPPORTS SIECUS DON'T YOU THINK THEY WOULD HAVE THAT ON THEIR SITE? GUESS WHAT NO MENTION OF HIM ON THERE.

YOU SAID IT WAS TELEVISED SHOW US THE FOOTAGE? YOU AND YOUR CBN SAID IT WAS ON MSNBC... GUESS WHAT THERE IS NO RECORD OF THIS.

Again "connecting dots" w/o actual proof verbatim (ie. voting record, policy, video, interview)... this sounds like 9/11 conspiracy. Guy is for teaching kids sex ed (grade k = inappropriate touching) and now you think he wants to demoralize your children. i guess you forget he has two young daughters - i'm sure he had indepth disucssions w/ them about masterbation, homosexuals, abortions, etc at 5 yrs old. :rolleyes:

[Total_Blender]

I just read the plan you posted and I don't see anything in it that implies that a full sex-ed curricula will be taught to grades k-6. Programs listed have K as the beginning grade but it does not say that the full curricula given in kindergarten.

[Tiff-O-Bitties]

So, why did all of this turn into a debate about sex-ed!? WTF!!!!