Posted on 10/06/2008 9:21:50 PM PDT by jazusamo
A recent Republican campaign ad sarcastically described as Barack Obama's "one accomplishment" his supporting a bill to promote sex education in kindergarten.
During an interview of a Republican spokesman, Tom Brokaw of NBC News replayed that ad and asked if that was something serious to be discussed in a presidential election campaign.
It was a variation on an old theme about getting back to "the real issues," just as Brokaw's question was a variation on an increasingly widespread tendency among journalists to become a squad of Obama avengers, instead of reporters.
Does it matter if Barack Obama is for sex education in kindergarten? It matters more than most things that are called "the real issues."
Seemingly unrelated things can give important insights into someone's outlook and character. For example, after the Cold War was over, it came out that one of the things that caught the attention of Soviet leaders early on was President Ronald Reagan's breaking of the air traffic controllers' strike.
Why were the Soviets concerned about a purely domestic American issue like an air traffic controllers' strike? Why was their attention not confined to "the real issues" between the United States and the Soviet Union?
Because one of the biggest and realest of all issues is the outlook and character of the President of the United States.
It would be hard to imagine any of Ronald Reagan's predecessors over the previous several decades— whether Republicans or Democrats— who would have broken a nationwide strike instead of caving in to the union's demands.
This told the Soviet leaders what Reagan was made of, even before he got up and walked out of the room during negotiations with Mikhail Gorbachev. That too let the Soviet leaders know that they were not dealing with Jimmy Carter any more.
There is no more real issue today than "Who is the real Barack Obama behind the image?" What does being in favor of sex education in kindergarten tell us about the outlook and character of this largely unknown man who has suddenly appeared on the national scene to claim the highest office in the land?
It gives us an insight into the huge gulf between Senator Obama's election year image and what he has actually been for and against over the preceding decades. It also shows the huge gulf between his values and those of most other Americans.
Many Americans would consider sex education for kindergartners to be absurd but there is more to it than that.
What is called "sex education," whether for kindergartners or older children, is not education about biology but indoctrination in values that go against the traditional values that children learn in their families and in their communities.
Obviously, the earlier this indoctrination begins, the better its chances of overriding traditional values. The question is not how urgently children in kindergarten need to be taught about sex but how important it is for indoctrinators to get an early start.
The arrogance of third parties, who take it upon themselves to treat other people's children as a captive audience to brainwash with politically correct notions, while taking no responsibility for the consequences to those children or society, is part of the general vision of the left that pervades our education system.
Sex education for kindergartners is just one of many issues on which Barack Obama has lined up consistently on the side of arrogant elitists of the far left. Senator Obama's words often sound very reasonable and moderate, as well as lofty and inspiring. But everything that he has actually done over the years places him unmistakably with the extreme left elitists.
Sadly, many of those who are enchanted by his rhetoric are unlikely to check out the facts. But nothing is a more real or more important issue than whether what a candidate says is the direct opposite of what he has actually been doing for years.
The old phrase, "a man of high ideals but no principles," is one that applies all too painfully to Barack Obama today. His words expressing lofty ideals may appeal to the gullible but his long history of having no principles makes him a danger of the first magnitude in the White House.
One reason why I mentioned the name of Emil Jones in the previous thread was that Jones was Obama's mentor/teacher's pet in the IL Senate. What he'd basically do for Obama was he'd attach his name to bills that another Senator had already introduced and Obama would take credit for them as though they were his own--the term for this, I believe was "bill-jacking".
More of Hussein's "work" in his early days is detailed quite vividly in "The Case Against Barack Obama" that Sowell mentioned in the previous thread. If I were in the McPalin campaign, that would go a long way in how I would go after the man-child.
Sounds like a good approach.
Palin has been on the ball in her stump speeches but until today I wondered about McCain and his advisors and researchers. Hope they both keep it up now and increase the heat and everytime BO and his spokesmen try to belittle for personal attacks come right back at them.
The underlying theory of the “Annenberg Project” as implemented in Chicago. Get ‘em young, own ‘em for life. NEA’s been doing it for decades.
Ayers’ and Obama’s Annenberg Project: indoctrinate ‘em while they’re young.
Sadly, Sowell fails to call the enemy by name.
Our American enemies are Marxists. They aren't "left", "liberal", "progressive", or "socialist. To call them anything other than Marxist or communist is not clear thinking.
Marxism is our nation's **most** serious threat! Schools are the Marxists most important weapon. That Sowell fails to call for their complete closure, and fails to warn parents to remove their children immediately from government K-12 schools is also a failure of clear thinking.
It would be hard to imagine any of Ronald Reagan's predecessors over the previous several decades— whether Republicans or Democrats— who would have broken a nationwide strike instead of caving in to the union's demands.This told the Soviet leaders what Reagan was made of, even before he got up and walked out of the room during negotiations with Mikhail Gorbachev. That too let the Soviet leaders know that they were not dealing with Jimmy Carter any more.
- - - - - - - - -Ping! Ping! Ping!
Dr. Sowell always gets to the truth behind the curtain.
The bolded serves to exemplify Democrats in re the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac scam -- the monies grifted were given to Democrats in huge numbers; the consequences to the public be damned. And the monies below is just from Lehman Brothers, I've not listed all the other "corrupt" orgs who basically stold from the public via CRA and gave to "their politicians". This is a RACKET!
From AmericanThinker - Democrats Attack their Benefactor:
--snip
It turns out Richard Fuld of Lehman Brothers gave $151,300 in disclosed political donations in recent years . How does it break down?
* $45,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
* $10,000 to the Democratic National Committee Services Corp.
* $4,600 to Hillary Clinton, $4,600 to Chris Dodd and $2,300 to Barack Obama.
* Other contributions to Democrats: Dick Gephardt, Joe Lieberman, Jack Reed, Erskine Bowles, Joseph Driscoll, Nita Lowey, Bob Torricelli, Frank Lautenberg, Brendan Byrne, Jon Corzine, Bill Bradley, Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy, Ed Markey, and Dianne Feinstein.
---end snip
Again, quoting Thomas Sowell: while taking no responsibility for the consequences to those children or society
BTTT.
Sowell.
You should post it up on Free Republic as a new thread, and use that story as part of your commentary on it.
bump
Did she send you a physical copy? Or a link?
If you have a link - could you post it?
I’m also looking for the link of the actual curriculum that was flying around here a few weeks ago.
Hubby works with many “christian” educators who simply want to believe the myth of Obama without looking at the reality of Obama.
It would be nice to forward that info along with Mr. Sowell’s column.
The problem with this particular issue is that the “factchecking” sites and the “factchecking” msm reporters arrived at the conclusion that McCain’s staff got it wrong on that particular issue.
Pinging-a must read!
bttt
It is from the article.
She sent in an email without a link. As far as I can tell, the bill’s number is LRB 093 05269 NHT 05359b.
The actual law with strikethroughs. Search “kindergarten” on FR for more.
It is from the article.Next time I'll use comprehension. There's so much to cover and lately I spend too much non-productive time here on the computer so I'm just glancing over articles.
Thank you!
That oughta be easily found now that I have those numbers.
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.