Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=2119)

Bloggingheads 09-16-2008 10:59 PM

The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 

rgajria 09-16-2008 11:42 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Star Power day! Professor Loury and John McWhorter followed by popular blogger/journalists Ezra and Ross. What's next for the night - Mickey and Robert :)

rosh 09-17-2008 12:14 AM

Driven to Distraction
 
This is a totally unsubstantive comment, but I have to say it. Eventhough his overconfidence makes him at times unattractive, Ezra has to be the HOTTEST political pundit around (I know the competition is not exactly fierce). He simply drives a gay man to distraction. His heavy breathing in this dialog didn't help.

hankporter 09-17-2008 12:27 AM

Re: Driven to Distraction
 
That's weird, with the shadow, I thought he looked like Ramesh Ponnuru.

Hank Porter

deecue 09-17-2008 01:01 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Great diavlog! Extremely amiable in tone.
Ross was pretty generous in conceding alternative opinions while still positing his opinion and gently hemmed in Ezra when Ezra went out a little further than was perhaps met. Both made very incisive points, with Ezra especially expressing interesting views--some of it was recycled (hard to avoid I suppose), but some of it was at least a new synthesis (or at least new to me).
Those of us tending more towards the wonkish were wishing that this campaign cycle would focus on more substance and it may yet, but much to my despair it appears "there has not been enough energy pushing back against" our collective lowest denominator and it is at best unclear that such energy might magically materialize to any significant extent moving forward. We can look forward somewhat to the content of the debates themselves, but the bulk of subsequent analysis will undoubtedly be caught up in ridiculous, divisive, and hyped lowlights. Oh well. Chalk another one up for game theory.

Eastwest 09-17-2008 01:33 AM

Klein on the Lousiest Debaters on the Planet
 
I think Ezra sums up nicely the prognosis for "The Battle of the Clueless" right here, commenting on Obama versus McCain, The Debates.

EW

otto 09-17-2008 02:46 AM

Ross as Brian Lamb
 
Ross has the ability to look utterly calm - but behind it, just a tiny bit panicked - when the person he is talking with appears to be on the verge of saying something embarrassing to them both. Example here where Ezra starts talking about his friends who tell lies to get women into bed. RD would be fine on a CSPAN call in programme.

bjkeefe 09-17-2008 02:48 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
McCain can't get face time for his alleged issues-based campaign? The media's fault.

The media doesn't cover Obama on the issues? Obama's fault.

John McCain runs a summer-long campaign on nothing but smears and outright lies? Obama's fault -- for not playing along with McCain's townhall stunt.

McCain, a 72-year old man with a spotty health history and a refusal to disclose his medical records picks an unqualified wingnut for a running mate? Not his fault. He was pressured into it. (But remember -- deep down, he's still a maverick!)

Here's another long term bet for you: I bet $50 that 50 years from now, Ezra and Ross will still be squirming around trying to make excuses for John McCain.

How does it feel to be behind the MSM curve, boys?

Francoamerican 09-17-2008 04:55 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Obama is, according to Ezra, "cerebral, detached and alienating." This is a strange judgment coming from a self-professed member of the Úlite, who are generally, in their own eyes at least, cerebral and detached. In fact, this is not his personal judgment but a judgment on behalf of (or from the point of view of) the "non-Úlite," who are indeed alienated from the cerebral and detached Úlite.

But why are the non-Úlite so alienated from the Úlite in America? And why are American politicians and (some) journalists so eager to prove their non-Úlitist credentials? After all, the government of a great nation requires highly educated men and women who are capable of taking the long view of history, and above all of being "detached" from their own emotions (especially from the emotion of fear: leaders like Bush who constantly arouse fear in the population are the most irresponsible and reckless of men).

I am afraid I have no answer to these questions. But the rest of the world (I live in France) trembles to think that the outcome of such an important election may depend on the inability of American Úlites and non-Úlites to come to their senses.

johnmarzan 09-17-2008 08:05 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
ross, it's easier to be "innovative" and "fresh" if you're in the opposition party--like clinton in 92 and bush in 2000, and obama in 2008.

(but there's nothing innovative in obama other than him being black. his ideas are old style liberal answers to america's problems. he's the most liberal senator and there's scant record of bipartisanship on his part.)

Foo Bar 09-17-2008 10:51 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Kudos to Ross for acknowledging the depths to which McCain has stooped. I noticed that at his blog he was shaking his head in dismay at the "sex ed for kindergartners" ad.

Here is an as-yet-unreported story that shows just how ridiculous that ad is. It turns out that the Bush administration actually funds the same kind of "sex ed for kindergartners" right now via an organization (the NASBE) which is funded by the CDC specifically for the purpose of formulating sex ed policy. It's not just "inappropriate touching" prevention education, either. The policy that the NASBE puts out is about HIV prevention education, and it clearly states that HIV education should be taught at every level, starting at kindergarten. So it is just as easy to distort this policy funded by the CDC as it is to distort the Illinois bill.

Furthermore, this policy that the NASBE formulates is being implemented in states like Tennessee and North Carolina- hardly bastions of social liberalism.

Folks: help me break this story! If you agree that this needs to get reported, email the blogger or reporter of your choice with this tip.

benjy 09-17-2008 11:03 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
My main reaction, in concurrence with Ezra, is simple disappointment with the level of the general election campaign, with corresponding diminishment of interest in politics, which saddens me given the unaltered importance of electoral outcomes and policy differences. Hopefully a lot of people just don't watch all the nonsense that goes on, and the grassroots operation can turn them out on election. The campaign in the media has just been operating on such a low level, with obvious blame going to McCain and the MSM, but also sufficient blame if not as much dishonor to Obama, for as Glenn rightly points out not agreeing to the town halls, and generally not running a truly courageous campaign trying to lead and persuade people morally and philosophically on the rightness of his positions. Obviously he had and has completely defensible political reasons and practical realities which may make both of these things correct political calls, and both campaigns are just doing whatever they feel they need to do to win, but that doesn't change the fact that his decisions in these regards have made the election less interesting and enlightening, as have of course the media's dynamics and McCain's political imperatives and willingness to engage in low level tactics if he sees political advantage in doing so.

Honestly I think I blame the electorate most of all, as all the other parties are just reacting to their assessment of realities about the electorate and what and in which ways news is consumed. If everybody, or more specifically the people the campaigns are battling over, those who haven't already voted, wanted a more elevated political process and debate, and put the work in to know what they think and figure out what's true beyond the silly level of surface chatter in the MSM, the dominant thread of the media and candidates' rhetoric would cater to that. And if people didn't mostly just dig in and consume information from self-reinforcing sources, that would improve our national discussion. And if they were more interested in the president as a solver of the nation's problems than a reflection of themself that they like to see in the White House, there'd be more emphasis on that. And if they cared more about budgets being moral documents and an expression of our values as a society, and had values more in keeping with the person many people on the right say they believe in, a certain Jesus Christ, we'd have a debate and budgets more in keeping with social and economic justice, etc., etc. And if blah-blah-blah, the world would be better than it is now. Anyway, the fact that there's so many diverse sources of information out there only causes the nonsense we see if enough of the electorate isn't operating at a sufficiently high level to be unaffected by the chatter. Just because a statement's elitist doesn't mean its not true ;).

And btw I'm not saying that the other three foundations of morality which Jonathan Haidt discusses in his thoroughly excellent piece in Edge aren't entirely important and worthy--whether one finds them as worthy as the two more liberal foundations is of course subjective, but what's disappointing intellectually is that there's almost no explicit discussion of any of the five foundations, and elections are run on a very low intellectual level. Which comes full circle back to the fact that most people aren't intellectuals, which isn't a priori a worse way for them to be, but it does make what on its highest level one of the most interesting and deepest aspects of intellectual life and debate into a quite boring and unsatisfying one. And yes, a good candidate doesn't necessarily have to be a highly thoughtful intellectual, and other qualities can be more important for political leadership, but for the thoughtful among us aggressive unthoughtfullness is nevertheless disappointing.

The above notwithstanding, if I had to put money down, I'd still put it down on Obama . Its hard to see how things won't get at least somewhat more serious with the economy, housing and Wall Street crises this bad and the usual policy factors still give him the edge I think. So I guess I hope in four years he'll be able to do a lot more in regards to these issues and improve the level of discourse in the general debate than he's done in the election campaign, and get both sides to get to the root of the matter a little more.

(And clearly, given all these factors, disentangling race to say that's the causal factor in an Obama loss seems pretty difficult to say the least, but throwing it in there just adds to the general gloominess.)

Ray 09-17-2008 11:11 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
"Galactic History"? Futurama jokes? "Han Shot First!"?

My god, these dudes are nerds!

Amazing, then, that they didn't remark on the McCain campaign's smear against players of Dungeons & Dragons...

PaulL 09-17-2008 11:52 AM

Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
So in the future, we will look back with embarrassment at "Drill Baby Drill"?
You mean like progressives/alarmists do with the population bomb scare of the 70s/80s?
Or the Soviet Union will be the model for command economies?

AemJeff 09-17-2008 12:09 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulL (Post 91351)
So in the future, we will look back with embarrassment at "Drill Baby Drill"?
You mean like progressives/alarmists do with the population bomb scare of the 70s/80s?
Or the Soviet Union will be the model for command economies?

Interestingly random comparisons.

Who benefits if we drill? A few landowners and energy interests. Will it move us toward "energy independence?" The notion is absurd - the petroleum markets don't operate that way. Will it provide enough petroleum to have an effect on the market? The answer to that seems to be "marginally, at best - and not for a decade or more."

So, it seems to me they ought to be embarrassed already.

PaulL 09-17-2008 12:34 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 91352)
Interestingly random comparisons.

Who benefits if we drill? A few landowners and energy interests. Will it move us toward "energy independence?" The notion is absurd - the petroleum markets don't operate that way. Will it provide enough petroleum to have an effect on the market? The answer to that seems to be "marginally, at best - and not for a decade or more."

So, it seems to me they ought to be embarrassed already.

What do you think is causing the current drop in oil prices? Do you think that trend towards trying to increase US domestic oil supply had no effect? It is just a effect of the US economy slowing down?

My point was progressives show no embarrassment over their incorrect predictions. They just change the subject. Like you did.

Of course, someone could come up with a process that takes CO2 out of the atmosphere, combines it with coal and turns it to oil. Environmentalists and democrats would object to/lobby to ban it because it creates oil.

gwlaw99 09-17-2008 01:32 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Anyone read the old and new Illinois laws?

Here is the old one

"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."

Here is the new one

"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."

In other words, it is a specific and unambiguous change to the law so that K-5 are now being taught about "the prevention of sexually transmitted infections [and] transmission and spread of HIV" and not just about inappropriate touching .

zookarama 09-17-2008 01:35 PM

this ain't rocket science
 
PAULL:
"What do you think is causing the current drop in oil prices? Do you think that trend towards trying to increase US domestic oil supply had no effect?"

Well yeah, I do think that. My understanding is that the recent (small) drop in gas prices is due to simple market demand pressures. Gas became so expensive this summer that we drivers simply drove less and thus the demand for gas went down. That brought the price down a little as many market observers have noted. If/when we resume our old driving habits, the price will go up again.

I'm a 61 year old middle class guy from deepest Illinois and I don't believe for a moment that drilling for oil (i.e. handing out drilling leases,) will have any significant effect on the price of gas.
I don't think that there is a short term fix for this problem; all the fixes are long term ones and we'd better face up to that. IMO, the most sensible long term fix is a combination of conservation (enthusiastically promoted by our politicians,) and a genuine committment (that means bigtime funding,) to finding new, and continuing to improve current, sources of energy.

sirfith 09-17-2008 02:16 PM

Re: this ain't rocket science
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by zookarama (Post 91355)
PAULL:
"What do you think is causing the current drop in oil prices? Do you think that trend towards trying to increase US domestic oil supply had no effect?"

Well yeah, I do think that. My understanding is that the recent (small) drop in gas prices is due to simple market demand pressures. Gas became so expensive this summer that we drivers simply drove less and thus the demand for gas went down. That brought the price down a little as many market observers have noted. If/when we resume our old driving habits, the price will go up again.

I'm a 61 year old middle class guy from deepest Illinois and I don't believe for a moment that drilling for oil (i.e. handing out drilling leases,) will have any significant effect on the price of gas.
I don't think that there is a short term fix for this problem; all the fixes are long term ones and we'd better face up to that. IMO, the most sensible long term fix is a combination of conservation (enthusiastically promoted by our politicians,) and a genuine committment (that means bigtime funding,) to finding new, and continuing to improve current, sources of energy.

A couple of points.
You do realize that the US does other things with crude oil other than create gasoline. Such as Plastics, Heating oil, Airplane fuel, electricity generation,etc.
Perhaps you should state that the price dropped due in part to a decrease in demand for oil instead of blaming drivers. That sound a little like a city dwelling elite.
Does "continuing to improve current, sources of energy" include shale oil that the democratic congress has been blocking?
The government does not hand out drilling leases. I believe they charge for them.
I will disagree and say that increasing oil supplies by removing the barriers placed on US oil production by the environmentalist's allies in Government will lower the price of gasoline.

AemJeff 09-17-2008 02:16 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulL (Post 91353)
What do you think is causing the current drop in oil prices? Do you think that trend towards trying to increase US domestic oil supply had no effect? It is just a effect of the US economy slowing down?

What "trend?" There have been some deeply unserious discussions. In what way do you think those could possibly have affected the market? A bubble burst. Another bubble will eventually rise. Eventually supply problems will drive the price into the sky. The meager (compared to demand) resources being touted as a solution can't change that.
Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulL (Post 91353)
My point was progressives show no embarrassment over their incorrect predictions. They just change the subject. Like you did.

How have I done so?
Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulL (Post 91353)
Of course, someone could come up with a process that takes CO2 out of the atmosphere, combines it with coal and turns it to oil. Environmentalists and democrats would object to/lobby to ban it because it creates oil.

Someone could invent an engine that runs on baseless hypotheticals. Conservatives would denounce it because an economy based on something that common would be tantamount to communism.

PaulL 09-17-2008 02:30 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 91357)
Someone could invent an engine that runs on baseless hypotheticals. Conservatives would denounce it because an economy based on something that common would be tantamount to communism.

I liked my hypothetical process for the Snark value.
But However, here is a real world example I used as a base for hypothetical.
Environmentalists Oppose New CO2 Scrubber Idea
Quote:

Scientists at Columbia University are developing a carbon dioxide (CO2) scrubber device that removes one ton of CO2 from the air every day.

While some see the scrubber as an efficient and economical way to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide, many environmentalists are opposing the technology because it allows people to use fossil fuels and emit carbon in the first place.

AemJeff 09-17-2008 02:41 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulL (Post 91358)

Paul, there's a reasonable debate to be had on this topic. Articles sourced to AEI, CEI, or the Heartland Institute aren't a sufficient basis for an argument.

Leaving the questionable sourcing aside, the article cites Students Promoting Environmental Action and Save Our Cumberland Mountains and attributes that to "environmentalists." That's pretty thin gruel, even coming from Heartland, whose main claims to fame are National Organization of Tobacco Outlets supported tobacco/disease link skepticism, and Exxon/Mobil funded anti-science boosterism.

Larry Bird 09-17-2008 04:49 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
I think Ross deep down knows that there is no Obama add that is as disgusting as Mccains accusing Obama of wanting to teach pre-schoolers how to have sex. He seems like an honorable guy but the best you can hope for now a days with GOP commentators is just a little intellectual dishonesty rather then full blown crazyness which is kind of sad and scary at the same time. I almost feel sorry he has to rationalize some of this disgusting behavior.

bjkeefe 09-17-2008 06:04 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99 (Post 91354)
Anyone read the old and new Illinois laws?

Care to provide links?

I'm pretty sure the law includes provisions about keeping the material to be taught age-appropriate, and I'm pretty sure you know that, which is why you didn't give links, right?

It's a sad day when the right thinks there is anything defensible about that McCain ad. I thought you were a little more honest, gwlaw.

bjkeefe 09-17-2008 06:11 PM

Re: this ain't rocket science
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by sirfith (Post 91356)
The government does not hand out drilling leases. I believe they charge for them.

Unfortunately, "charging" is not the same as collecting.

bjkeefe 09-17-2008 06:14 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Bird (Post 91364)
I think Ross deep down knows that there is no Obama add that is as disgusting as Mccains accusing Obama of wanting to teach pre-schoolers how to have sex.

True. Evidence of that may be seen by recent responses by McCain campaign spokespeople and the "balanced" media, who keep mentioning the "100 years" ad. That one was a bit of a stretch, granted, but if that's the worst they can come up with in response ...

gwlaw99 09-17-2008 06:15 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 91368)
Care to provide links?

I'm pretty sure the law includes provisions about keeping the material to be taught age-appropriate, and I'm pretty sure you know that, which is why you didn't give links, right?

It's a sad day when the right thinks there is anything defensible about that McCain ad. I thought you were a little more honest, gwlaw.

I personally don't believe Obama wants children of that age to be taught about sexually transmitted diseases, but he voted for it which means he doesn't read the bills he votes for. The law specifically changes the provision about explaining sexually transmitted diseases from 6-12 from k-12. What is the purpose of that change? Explain what type of education on sexually transmitted diseases is age appropriate for k-5.

Here is the link to the old bill amended by the new one. The relevent part is in the first paragraph.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/full...cSess=&Session

On negative ads. Some statistics
76% of Obama's ads are negative
56% of McCain's are negative
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/...gative_ads.php

bjkeefe 09-17-2008 06:18 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99 (Post 91374)
I personally can't believe Obama wants children of that age to be taught about sexually transmitted diseases ...

Glad to hear it.

When you provide links to the laws, I'll be happy to discuss things further. A link to a blog post about negative ads is not what I was asking for.

gwlaw99 09-17-2008 06:19 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bjkeefe (Post 91375)
Glad to hear it.

When you provide links to the laws, I'll be happy to discuss things further. A link to a blog post about negative ads is not what I was asking for.

See my edit. The other link regarding the thread in general not our discussion (sorry for not being clear on that).

bjkeefe 09-17-2008 06:48 PM

Re: Ezra on sounding like a Self righteous Prig
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99 (Post 91376)
See my edit.

Thanks for the update. From that link to the law, note "Sec. 27-9.1. Sex Education." From subsection (c)(2):

Quote:

All course material and instruction shall be age and developmentally appropriate.
Also, from Sec. 27-9.2 (a) [emph. added]:

Quote:

If any school district provides courses of instruction designed to promote wholesome and comprehensive understanding of the emotional, psychological, physiological, hygienic and social responsibility aspects of family life, then such courses of instruction shall include the teaching of prevention of unintended pregnancy and all options related to unintended pregnancy, as the alternatives to abortion, appropriate to the various grade levels; and whenever such courses of instruction are provided in any of grades K through 12, then such courses also shall include age appropriate instruction on the prevention of sexually transmitted infections ...
I may not have the section citations quite right, but those will serve as search strings to get you close to the right spot. Or just search for the word appropriate, which will also lead to other areas where similar language appears.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99 (Post 91376)
The other link regarding the thread in general not our discussion (sorry for not being clear on that).

No prob.

I will say one thing about that: Ambinder doesn't link to the study he quotes, which makes it hard to say what time bracket we're talking about, so I'm not sure how meaningful those numbers are.

It's also worth noting that it has become common strategy to make an ad which airs very little or not at all, and is instead designed to catch the attention of the media, in the hopes that they'll play it themselves. So, again, hard to say what the numbers really mean.

Not a big deal, in any case. If negative ads work, then use them, I say. Sad fact of life.

The real question is this: are the ads lies? In McCain's case, that answer is often yes. Obama doesn't have to lie to create a blisteringly negative ad regarding his opponent. The facts give more than enough ammunition.

osmium 09-17-2008 11:12 PM

The Commericals are good
 
Just wanted to say, dear Bob and BhTV peoples, that I think the commercials for the books are great. I've learned about a lot of books from Bloggingheads, and that's exactly the kind of ad that's hitting home.

Also wanted to say, I listened to three seconds of Pinkerton and Hamshire, and it was too much for me. And I came to Ezra and Ross, and it felt like I came home or something. People who don't yell and tell lies when they disagree, people I feel like I could talk to and enjoy knowing. What a concept. What Bloggingheads means to me. I guess I'm like Ross: an elite who wants to hear something new.

gwlaw99 09-17-2008 11:30 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
You still haven't addressed my point that the new law specifically makes a change to the old law so that k-5 must be taught how to prevent sexually transmitted diseases. What was the purpose in making this specific change? What is age appropriate information for k-5 for the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Obviously the legislaters who voted for the bill thought there was some age appropriate material for kindergardeners related to the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases or the change in the statute would be meaningless.

Ocean 09-17-2008 11:42 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99 (Post 91450)
Obviously the legislaters who voted for the bill thought there was some age appropriate material for kindergardeners related to the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases or the change in the statute would be meaningless.

In this last sentence you changed from K-5 to kindergartners. It is meaningless to continue discussing a technicality when you don't know how this statute will be implemented. As far as I know, these kinds of statutes set required standards but allow school districts to choose what to teach. Besides, you probably know that many if not all school districts allow parents to exclude their children from this part of the curriculum if they so choose.

bjkeefe 09-18-2008 01:12 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Forget it, Ocean. Save your fingertips. I've pointed him to the relevant sections of the law. He's just being willfully obtuse now.

Step back for a moment and think about how ridiculous it is that anyone would defend that ad of McCain's. You might as well be arguing with a Flat Earther.

gwlaw99 09-18-2008 01:37 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Read the statute

"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."

It doesn't get any clearer than that. Especially since the statute previously 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."

So your argument is that the staute was changes from 6-12 to k-12 for no reason. We should ignore that specific change as if it doesn't exist. Eventhough they made that specific change, they never meant it to be implemented by anyone. They just thought it would be fun to change a few words here and there for laughs. If they didn't believe that at least some kindergardeners, first graders, second graders, third graders etc should be taught about "instruction on the prevention, transmission and spread of AIDS" then why make the change at all? Why add K-5? You keep ducking this question because there is no reasonable answer other than the legislators wanted and expected some k, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to be taught this.

Ocean 09-18-2008 06:50 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by gwlaw99 (Post 91469)
Read the statute

"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."

It doesn't get any clearer than that. Especially since the statute previously 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."

So your argument is that the staute was changes from 6-12 to k-12 for no reason. We should ignore that specific change as if it doesn't exist. Eventhough they made that specific change, they never meant it to be implemented by anyone. They just thought it would be fun to change a few words here and there for laughs. If they didn't believe that at least some kindergardeners, first graders, second graders, third graders etc should be taught about "instruction on the prevention, transmission and spread of AIDS" then why make the change at all? Why add K-5? You keep ducking this question because there is no reasonable answer other than the legislators wanted and expected some k, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to be taught this.

Yes, you're right. And they will all be handed colorful specially-sized condoms. Didn't you know?

Larry Bird 09-18-2008 08:46 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ocean (Post 91479)
Yes, you're right. And they will all be handed colorful specially-sized condoms. Didn't you know?

They hire a clown that day to make balloon animals out of them after they teach the 5 year olds to put them on cucumbers so its fun and informative!

basman 09-18-2008 11:49 AM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
These guys are good here. And that's all I have to say right now while duties call.

Itzik Basman

nikkibong 09-18-2008 02:16 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
wait, seriously, Ross Douthat is now an Atlantic senior editor? And I thought their hiring of the increasingly* incoherent Andrew Sullivan was bad enough . . .


*yes, believe it or not, his incoherence is, in fact, increasing.

bjkeefe 09-18-2008 06:03 PM

Re: The Most Disgraceful Campaign in Galactic History
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by nikkibong (Post 91519)
wait, seriously, Ross Douthat is now an Atlantic senior editor?

They pay Megan McArdle to blog. Case closed.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.