McCain against (legislation to) protect children from sexual predators.

[rn79870]

McCain's camp has twisted Obama's "teach the kids how to protect themselves from sexual predators" issue to one of teaching sex ed to kindergartners. McCain's new ad calling Obama's plan to protect children from sexual abuse "sex ed for kids who can't even read yet.

Total twist of the Obama's proposal. But did the public fall for it? Nope. (John, we're not as stupid as you may thing)

“It is shameful and downright perverse 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," Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said in a statement. "Last week, John McCain told Time magazine he couldn’t define what honor was. Now we know why."

One reader responded...Quote »Obama supported "age appropriate" sex-education for children as a means of teaching them what was proper or improper touching, as well as to protect them against pedophiles. McCain and Palin should be ashamed of their gutter tactics. The Obama campaign should sue them for libel. [/quote]This one backfired McCain. Even your Trojan Moose can't hide you from this one.

[wingFeather]

Please post more links referencing this issue.

[AZhitman]

Wow.

Misleading title much?

I'll stay out of this one, but the sensationalism of the left's POV seems to be inversely proportional to their lead in the polls.

[srellim234]

I agree. McCain seriously twisted the issue but the OP's title is way out of line. His statement that "McCain against protecting children from sexual predators" is blatantly false and merely trying to inflame and incite using the same sensationalism we see in the media all the time.

[rn79870]

Misleading title much?

What exactly would you call it when McCain criticizes a plan to protect children from sexual predators? Pro-predator? Anti-predator? Choose please.

[wingFeather]

What exactly would you call it when McCain criticizes a plan to protect children from sexual predators? Pro-predator? Anti-predator? Choose please.

We both know that MANY, MANY plans have been proposed that aren't ready for approval. I'm sure he doesn't want children molested, but he is wise enough to avoid approval of plans that include BLOAT and other BS tacked on to them.

[rn79870]

We both know that MANY, MANY plans have been proposed that aren't ready for approval. I'm sure he doesn't want children molested, but he is wise enough to avoid approval of plans that include BLOAT and other BS tacked on to them.

And what Bloat and BS are you guessing is tacked on to them?

[AZhitman]

Feign ignorance all you want, you're not goading me into this ridiculousness.

One: Where's the rest of the article? A couple lefty sound bites ain't gonna cut it.

Two: Who the hell is Obama (or the POTUS) to devise a "plan" to protect children from sexual predators? Political posturing at its best.

Three: If I criticize a proposed plan for the supervision of sex offenders, does that then make me pro-offender? Anti-supervision? No. That's simple-minded nonsense.

[rn79870]

I agree. McCain seriously twisted the issue but the OP's title is way out of line. His statement that "McCain against protecting children from sexual predators" is blatantly false and merely trying to inflame and incite using the same sensationalism we see in the media all the time.

Actually, how can you see it as anything else? McCain is against a policy designed to protect children. McCain was pretty stupid for touching that issue, and he got caught. The title fairly describes his stance on the issue.

[rn79870]

Apparently, McCain is intent on attacking Obama now, and AGAIN, another attack backfires. I'm beginning to see that McCain really offers the "dead fish in new paper" choice.

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama told an audience Tuesday that GOP presidential nominee John McCain says he'll change Washington, but he's just like President Bush.

"You can put lipstick on a pig," he said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin's joke. "It's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still going to stink after eight years."

McCain's campaign immediately organized a telephone conference call in response and called on Obama to apologize for calling Palin a pig. Obama's campaign said he wasn't referring to Palin; he had been talking about McCain immediately before the lipstick comment.

What a whiner McCain is becoming. Obama didn't call Palin a pig, if anything, he called the old man a pig. McCain really should require literacy from his staff.

[AZhitman]

Actually, how can you see it as anything else?

I'm going to restate this:

If I oppose a plan to supervise sex offenders, am I then pro-offender? Am I supporting molestation?

No.

I oppose YOUR plan. Or HIS plan. Or HER plan.

I may have a BETTER plan.

Are you seriously only seeing the black and the white?

[Jesda]

No offense to OP, but this is more evidence that the political discourse this year is completely shallow.

We're not talking about the policy, and I don't even know from reading this thread what that policy is. We're only talking about the advertisement about that policy, and somehow I'm supposed to conclude that John McCain loves perverts and hates kids.

I need more information, but you aren't providing it because you are focused on the ad, not the issue itself.

[rn79870]

I'm going to restate this:

If I oppose a plan to supervise sex offenders, am I then pro-offender? Am I supporting molestation?

No.

I oppose YOUR plan. Or HIS plan. Or HER plan.

I may have a BETTER plan.

Are you seriously only seeing the black and the white?

Let's see what color this is. McCain runs an national ad critizing Obama's plan as inappropriate for children, and offers no counter option for protecting the children. I posted a typical comment from the public in the OP. I'm not the only one who see's this as black or white.

So Sen. McCain, what do you propose for protecting children. I'm asking becasue you seem to be silent on it, other than objecting to it that is.

[srellim234]

Actually, how can you see it as anything else? McCain is against a policy designed to protect children. McCain was pretty stupid for touching that issue, and he got caught. The title fairly describes his stance on the issue.

I'll draw you a blunt analogy as to how I can see it as "anything else".

If I am pro Megan's Law registry, for the public castration and subsequent execution of predators and for providing an armed guard to escort every child 24/7 every day to protect them, just because I don't like your education program in the school doesn't make me against protecting children from sexual predators.

Note, too, that I included laws in my stance. You are wrong in assuming that I would be against all legislation to protect kids. Only your particular plan.

Maybe changing the title to "McCain distorts and opposes Obama's plan to protect children" might be a little more accurate.

[96Qowner]

LOL, it's a retread from Alan Keyes' unsuccessful campaign against Obama in 2004.

"I remember Alan Keyes . . . I remember him using this in his campaign against me," Obama said in reference to the conservative firebrand who ran against him for the U.S. Senate in 2004. Sex education for kindergarteners had become an issue in his race against Keyes because of Obama’s work on the issue as chairman of the health committee in the Illinois state Senate.

"'Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,'" said Obama mimicking Keyes' distinctive style of speech. "Which -- I didn’t know what to tell him (laughter)."

"But it’s the right thing to do," Obama continued, "to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit....html

Now is the time for all good Democrats to come to the aid of their Party, and point out how "Rovian" this is.

But the question remains - did Obama actually promote a program to teach sexual education to grade schoolers?

But the legislation was not Obama’s, it never became law and it would have required age-appropriate information in schools. Obama has said that means warning young children about sexual predators and explaining concepts like “good touch and bad touch.”

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs...10009

Oof, yes, the game is ON.

[AZhitman]

So Sen. McCain, what do you propose for protecting children. I'm asking becasue you seem to be silent on it, other than objecting to it that is.

I think you're too busy typing to read responses.

How is this even a POTUS issue?

Assuming that it even IS, do you think Obama has a PLAN for what to do about the U.S. 1-cent piece? How about a PLAN to ensure illegal immigrants don't drink poisoned water jugs left in the desert? Where's his PLAN to make sure handwritten prescriptions aren't misinterpreted by pharmacists? How about a PLAN to prevent teenage traffic fatalities caused by texting while driving?

Obama has been silent on ALL these issues. Shame on him.

Your post title remains misleading, inaccurate, and sensationalist. Not the first time, though.

[srellim234]

96-

Alan Keyes is running for POTUS on the American Independent Party ticket:

http://www.selfgovernment.us/aip/

http://www.alankeyes.com/

I guess Obama gets to whip him again.

[Kalypso]

I like Barack,

he keeps it simple

functional healthcare system,energy independence,and get the **** out of Iraq

I didn read much of this thread, but Im voting for the boss.

[rn79870]

No offense to OP, but this is more evidence that the political discourse this year is completely shallow.

We're not talking about the policy, and I don't even know from reading this thread what that policy is. We're only talking about the advertisement about that policy, and somehow I'm supposed to conclude that John McCain loves perverts and hates kids.

I need more information, but you aren't providing it because you are focused on the ad, not the issue itself.

I assume that everyone has seen the national ad that McCain is running with respect to Obama's plan to protect children. In that ad McCain speaks against Obama's plan calling it "sex-education to kindergartners, who can't even read yet."

In fact, Obama's plan is to teach kindergartners about appropriate and inappropriate touching, as well as how, where and who to report inappropriate touching to. (There are programs in our local schools that have specially trained personnel do exactly that - so it isn't a new thing)

Obama has no plan to, as McCain suggests, teach "sex-education" to those children. No "babies come from here" talk. No nuts and bolts instructions on proper mating procedures as McCain seems to suggest with his "sex-ed" comments.

McCain has, by condemning Obama's proposal as sex-ed, ignored the fact that its thrust is child protection. Plain and simple child protection. McCain has condemned a proposal designed to protect children while offering nothing in return to protect the children. For this he is being criticized as taking a pro-abuse stance. That's not all that unfair. Stay tuned for McCain's spin doctors to clear this one up before it haunts him until November.

If McCain didn't anticipate the public responding to his comments in this fashion then either he, or his staff doesn't have their finger on the pulse of our society or the issue of child abuse. That may speak louder than he thinks.

[rn79870]

I think you're too busy typing to read responses.

How is this even a POTUS issue?

Gasp. Protecting American's isn't a presidential issue, but protecting the entrire world and freeing it from evil dictators is?

As Obama would say, that looks like old fish in new paper. Even though it is wrapped in pretty new paper, it still stinks of the past 8 years.

Assuming that it even IS, do you think Obama has a PLAN for what to do about the U.S. 1-cent piece? How about a PLAN to ensure illegal immigrants don't drink poisoned water jugs left in the desert? Where's his PLAN to make sure handwritten prescriptions aren't misinterpreted by pharmacists? How about a PLAN to prevent teenage traffic fatalities caused by texting while driving?

Is California the only state that has legislated many of those "state rights" issues. Or are you saying the federal government should usurp the sovereignty of the states in those matters (while you're professing to be for smaller government at the same time)?

Obama has been silent on ALL these issues. Shame on him.

That's probably becasue, as a constitutional lawyer, he recognizes a when something is clearly a state issue and not a federal issue. Won't an informed POTUS be a welcome thing.

Your post title remains misleading, inaccurate, and sensationalist. Not the first time, though.

Misleading, you meant to use Unwelcome didn't you?Inaccurate, hardly. You meant to use Unfriendly didn't you?Sensational. My wife calls me that all the time.

[rn79870]

Note, too, that I included laws in my stance. You are wrong in assuming that I would be against all legislation to protect kids. Only your particular plan.

What is my plan?

[wingFeather]

Please post more links referencing this issue.

Seems you insist on ignoring this request, yet cannot understand why I "guess"... self-serving, eh?

[srellim234]

What is my plan?

Obama's plan.

[wingFeather]

Obama's plan

Socialism

[audtatious]

I like Barack,

he keeps it simple

functional healthcare system,energy independence,and get the **** out of Iraq

I didn read much of this thread, but Im voting for the boss.

1) What specifically is he going to do to fix the health care system and what is the overall cost to the Gov and those who pay taxes? What is the effect to those who already are paying for their coverage? Where is the money to support this going to come from? What is the economic impact of his plan?

2) How does he propose to get energy independent? I know he is for windfall taxes and has been against drilling. Without drilling then we are stuck with foreign oil and the cost associated with it. With windfall taxes on oil companies, those who drive will be footing the bill. (not saying McCain has the solution either). The current electrical grid system cannot support all the wind and solar initiatives that are out there, the environmentalists are against building more cross-country electrical grids and land owners will have a problem with the grid as well. What is his solution to those issues?

3) Obama has stated he would immediately begin bringing troops home from Iraq (usually regardless of what the Generals say but he says different things in different interviews) but has also stated we would have support troops left on the ground (we would still have a base in Iraq). This is exactly what the Obama supporters attack McCains "100 years" statement on. Both have the same viewpoints of Iraq after the troops are pulled. So, with that said, what is he really going to do as he changes his stance, why would it be OK to go against Patreus who has been successful (and plans to start pulling more troops out anyway) and why is his plan so applauded by his supporters?

I don't care who you vote for as long as you are informed and know the answers to the above. When you find out the answers, please let the rest of us know.

[rn79870]

Note, too, that I included laws in my stance. You are wrong in assuming that I would be against all legislation to protect kids. Only your particular plan.

Which you defined as...

Obama's plan.

You do realize that Obama's plan is implemented typical to the one in Illinois and similar to one in California. Specifically, what is it that you are against in his plan to protect the children?

[wingFeather]

I like Barack,

he keeps it simple

functional healthcare system,energy independence,and get the **** out of Iraq

I didn read much of this thread, but Im voting for the boss.

Sounds like you listened to one of Obama's TV commercials, then decided to vote for him.

FYI - surrendering to & abandoning Iraq is not a good idea. Please use Google to educate yourself on the reasons we need to see this thing out.

[rn79870]

Socialism

I think you're using a concept (word) you do not understand.

America is a Capitalist/Socialist society, governed as a Republic, with Democratic elections.

Therefore, America is a Capitalist/Socialist/Republic/Democracy. No one will/can change that. Pesky little thing called our Constitution will get in the way.

[Jesda]

I assume that everyone has seen the national ad that McCain is running with respect to Obama's plan to protect children. In that ad McCain speaks against Obama's plan calling it "sex-education to kindergartners, who can't even read yet."

In fact, Obama's plan is to teach kindergartners about appropriate and inappropriate touching, as well as how, where and who to report inappropriate touching to. (There are programs in our local schools that have specially trained personnel do exactly that - so it isn't a new thing)

Why is the state involved in this? Shouldn't this be up to school boards?

[AZhitman]

Back on topic.

I'm going to restate this (again):

If I oppose a plan to supervise sex offenders, am I then pro-offender? Am I supporting molestation?

No.

I may have a BETTER plan.

OR, you may not HAVE a plan...

Follow me here.

Just because BO pulls a "plan" out of his arse, does that mean that the opponent needs to immediately formulate a "plan" to counter it within the hour? Retarded.

Here's the OTHER issue I have with this:

Obama spews the word PLAN like he knows what it really means.

I sit on a couple strategic planning committees. I've done SWOT analysis for several major programs in state government.

"Plan" includes all of these things, which he has NOT done. It includes analysis of the current condition. It includes allocation of resources (financial and personnel). It includes measurable goals and objectives.

So, Obama has NO PLAN, and his characterization of this as such is as ludicrous as his expectation of his opponent to support his "non-plan".

You, my friend, have been duped. Obama has NO PLAN.

He has an IDEA. And "ideas" and "dreams" and "hope" are wonderful, but they don't get things done.