Posted on 01/20/2013 6:49:30 PM PST by grundle
The National Rifle Association is airing a television ad (and has on its website this four-minute video) that says the private school that President Obama’s daughters attend, Sidwell Friends School, has 11 armed guards. It doesn’t.
In fact, it has no armed guards. My Post colleague Glenn Kessler, who writes The Fact Checker column, wrote about the issue here and quoted Ellis Turner, associate head of Sidwell Friends, as saying: “Sidwell Friends security officers do not carry guns.”
Parents and students say they have never seen one either.
The president’s children are protected by Secret Service agents, which is required by federal law, but that is not the same thing as armed school resource officers.
The Fact Checker, who hands out “Pinocchios” depending on how accurate — or inaccurate — a particular story is, gave the NRA and its ad the worst possible rating, four Pinocchios. Whereas three Pinocchios are given for “significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions,” four Pinocchios are given for “whoppers.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I don’t think I would have let that information out.
I am not sure a mea culpa is indicated here - who actually provides the armed security (the school or the secret services) is a moot point - The real point/issue here is that the girls have de facto armed security (and they should).
IF THEY ARE WORTH ARMED SECURITY - WHY AREN’t ALL CHILDREN WORTH ARMED SECURITY? My daughter at 15 is the same age as the older one. Regardless of the specific details of the security itself i.e., whether or not the school or the secret service is the actual provider, the point to be considered is that all children deserve such security however it is accomplished.
1. My guess is that the SS actively vets any Special Police Officers that are hired.
2. When the President’s children attend the school all SPOs work for the SS. That may be a constant as their are a lot of embassy kids that go to Sidwell and it would be important to provide the kids with adequate security.
3. I would guess that between the current personnel, the SS and the nearby embassies the school is one of the hardest targets in the world.
I'm all for fighting. And I'm all for winning. I just don't think we have to sell our conservative souls, or betray our conservative values, to do so.
>>I’m all for fighting. And I’m all for winning. I just don’t think we have to sell our conservative souls, or betray our conservative values, to do so.
Oh, for crying out loud, we aren’t bashing infants’ heads against a wall! Conservative values do not include letting the enemy choose the time, place, weapons, and terrain for every fight. George Washington won most of his battles by subterfuge. His biggest win was accomplished by sneaking his men across a river at night and attacking on Christmas Day, which was a very unseemly thing to do and would definitely violate your “conservative values”.
The greatest conservative value is individual freedom. In fact, the ONLY conservative value is individual freedom. All other values come from that one thing. We are in a fight for that freedom against a remorseless enemy who will take that away from us. It is their goal!
All I’m saying is that we must fight the battle for hearts and mind using the same tactics they use against us. Those tactices are working and that’s why they are winning. Look at how many people believe that Sarah Palin said “I can see Russia from my house”!
The Left throws a dozen lies up against the wall each week to see which ones stick. The ones that stick get repeated a hundred times in the first 24 hours.
If we say that they’re lying, they just deny.
When we accumulate evidence that they are lying, they claim we are taking them out of context.
When we play the video to prove context, they claim that it isn’t important or that we misunderstand.
When we gather more evidence that it is lie, that their statements were in context, and that what they said is what they meant; they just say, “are you still talking about that? This is a week old and we have more important things to worry about.”
Now, if we do not engage in the same tactics, then they NEVER have to be on the defensive. We play defense constantly and they move the chains on every play.
One rule of combat is “If you find yourself in a fair fight, then your tactics suck!”
I simply don’t agree that we need to or should lie in order to advance conservatism.
I can see that there might be an extraordinary situation in which lying might well be justified. But I don’t think lying as a matter of course is either necessary or advisable for conservatives.
I believe that conservatism is the truth, and that the truth is strong enough to stand on its own. That truth helped defeat the Soviet Union. That truth helped make America the great country we are today.
Gandhi overcame violence with peace. I am not willing to become the enemy in order to “defeat” them.
I have been re-watching the Lord of the Rings movies lately. Boromir attempts to take the Ring, because he knows the Ring gives its holder the power to conquer the world.
Would it have given him that power? Yes, but he would not have been victor over Sauron. He would only have been his replacement. Later, his brother Faramir captures Frodo and decides to send the Ring to Gondor, to give Gondor its power. Galadriel comments that the captain of Gondor (that is, Faramir) has only to stretch out his hand and take the Ring, and all will be lost.
Upon seeing the power of the Ring to corrupt even Frodo, Faramir changes his mind and releases the Ring-bearer to continue his quest to destroy the Ring. In fact, he decides he is even willing to forfeit his life in order to do so. And that one decision makes a difference between a failure that looks like a victory, and a real victory.
And yes, it’s just a story. But great stories are great because they reflect the principles of real life.
Conservatism is strong enough to stand on the truth. That is what I believe. If you believe otherwise, then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Some folks are easily fooled.
My mom and I were talking about school security. She’s a retired teacher. She and I agreed, when I was in High School the principle was armed. Never saw the weapon, he never had to use it. It was also assumed, back then, that several other male teachers and coaches had weapons available. That was then, I guess. I do know for sure, that on any given day, from October till february at least 20 vehicles on campus, had a rifle or shotgun available. Hunting season.
It would seem to me, especially with elementary, pre-school, or middle school kids, that protecting your students must be your top priority.
I’m wondering where Breitbart got his information? I’m pretty sure they didn’t just pull it out of their ass.
Oh, kinda as an afterthought. I was called to the office one day in high school. Wondered wtf? cause you didn’t just get called out of class for nothing. One of the coaches met me. “David, you need to go out to your truck and put your shotgun behind the seat.” He was worried about someone breaking in my vehicle and stealing my shotgun.
They are using this tragedy and the graves of these children to advance one of their pet issues in a time of crisis.
They deserve ridicule and contempt, not apologies.
Either that, or someone was pressured to say the “right” things. The jury is still out on this on. I would not be surprised to see one of the Security personnel come out and say they do carry guns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.