Obama fires back at Romney over sex ed remark

Well, what are the facts? Why doesn't this item tell us exactly what the age-appropriate legislation was? I'd like to know.
I do know there are those out there who believe teaching 5-year-olds about sex is "appropriate." Heck, didn't Jocelyn Elders say something to the effect that 5 year-olds should be taught about masturbation?\
Can't we just let kids be kids today? Can't we just let them know only about Disney characters, Bugs Bunny (do kids even know about Bugs and the gang today?), SpongeBob or whatever characters they get into?

So Romney is against teaching kindergarteners what kind of touching is inappropriate and what to do if you are touched inappropriately?

Romney supports child molesters? I guess we know which candidate will get NAMBLA's endorsement.

Sex education is entirely appropriate for five-year olds. Teach them to respect the opposite sex. Teach them to try to understand viewpoints differing from their own. Teach them that both girls and boys can achieve great things.

Typical Rommney type cheap immitation of a Karl Rove move. Fasten our seatbelts, it's already becoming a very bumpy ride to November 2008.

Thats how the right twists things around. If you don't support the war...then you lovethe terrorists. If you wish to provide sex education to age-appropriate students...
make up a LIE.

I've said all along that it's going to be Romney vs. Clinton. Romney also told the Tribune, his base, that he only spends $50 per haircut as opposed to the $175, $450, or $1000 plus that Edwards pays.

Romney's coming out with all of that garbage, but I like the videos that show Romney flipping like a pancake on all of the key issues. Don't worry. He'll soon be against the way the war was managed.

Jeeze, now Romney is just some creepy guy with gel in his hair.

Why is Obama making so big a deal of this? Every time someone attacks a specific part of his record, is he going to talk about the coarsening of the culture?

When I went to school, there was no sex education until the 7th grade. It is very fair to ask whether we need sex education in grade school at all, let alone the early grades. And that is true no matter how "age appropriate it is."

One might surmise that Obama has that "liberal-nanny state" mindset on these type of issues. You know, the type of mindset that cries "coarsening of the culture" every time a rival politician slams him on something or wants the government to solve social problems using the school system.

As usual with the "Swamp", it doesn't print what Romney actually said, only Obama's response.

"Swamp" reporters are known to be Obama flacks, and evidently think the only way to make him look good is to censor other points of view.

Fact is, Obama DID come out for sex ed for kindergartners:

"Barack Obama and that 'Age-Appropriate' Kindergarten Sex Ed (Updated with Romney reaction)

I can’t help but suspect Barack Obama is trying to play both sides of the fence in his recent ‘sex ed in kindergarten’ remarks.

Once he’s pressed to explain by what he means when he says he wants to see “age-appropriate sex education” as early as kindergarten, it sounds rather innocuous:

When Obama's campaign was asked by ABC News to explain what kind of sex education Obama considers "age appropriate" for kindergarteners, the Obama campaign pointed to an Oct. 6, 2004 story from the Daily Herald in which Obama had "moved to clarify" in his Senate campaign that he "does not support teaching explicit sex education to children in kindergarten. .

The legislation in question was a state Senate measure last year that aimed to update Illinois' sex education standards with 'medically accurate' information . . . 'Nobody's suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it,' Obama said. '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.'"In addition to local schools informing kindergarteners that babies do not come from the stork, the state legislation Obama supported in Illinois, which contained an "opt out" provision for parents, also envisioned teaching kindergarteners about "inappropriate touching," according to Obama's presidential campaign.

Okay, no stork talk, and a rudamentary talk designed to prepare them if, God forbid, they encounter a predator. But the problem is, what he says before Planned Parenthood:

"'Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,'" said Obama mimicking [2004 rival Alan] 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."

That sounds like catnip for the Jocelyn Elders crowd.

I can understand some hesitation or doubt about abstinence-only education. But I can’t quite grasp the furious how-dare-you rage it provokes in some quarters. If you want your child to know a lot more than abstinence-only, then go ahead and teach them more, that’s your right. What the anti-abstinence-only crowd is insisting that no parent has the right to choose abstinence-only curricula for their children; they demand that the child be taught more, whether or not the parents approve. It’s an explicit overruling of parents’ beliefs and values.

At the center of this debate is the argument, "We know better than parents." And my thought is, "Even if you did (and I'm not convinced) it's not your decision, it's parents'."

UPDATE: Romney goes after Obama on these statements. "How much sex education is appropriate for a five year old? In my view, zero is the right amount," he said, apparently addressing an audience from the set of the movie Patton"

(from www.nationalreview.com)

Maybe if Romney worked with the Chicago Public School kids in 4th grade who are sexually active and have STDs he'd understand how kids need this information. Maybe it will stop them from buying hookers like Republicans like to do.

What reality does Romney live in? This is an issue that he has flop flipped on himself. Any rational person listening to what Obama is talking about can understand the need for teaching 5 year olds about passion and climax and zygotes and cell division and embryonic development and how all that can be avoided by abstinence or using a raincoat. Otherwise you go down to the local Walmart to pick up the baby. Get real, conservatives. In a country fraught with sexual perversions of the most hideous kind, one would think that ignorance about sex plays a large part in why there are so many problems related to sex. Sex is a natural part of life and how that is passed on to children should be handled very carefully by trained educators and their parents. Even parents may not be the best people to educate children about this subject. What I think Obama is doing is telling us that as the leader of the country he would include the overarching issues concerning children will be an important part of his dialogue.

Romney is way out of his league in tackling Obama. Turns out he told Planned Parenthood in 2002 that he approves of age-appropriate sex education in public schools. Romney is following a family tradition in falling on his face while running for President:

http://ajliebling.blogspot.com/2007/07/mismatch-romney-tackles-obama.html

Apparently Wendy Vitter put away her cutlery, because as widely reported, she had threatened to pull a Lorena Bobbit on her husband, Senator David, if he were ever adulterous.

Of course, as a true Republican hypocrite, that was said back during the Clinton years in reference to impeaching Clinton for getting a blow job -- "I'm more like Lorena Bobbit than Hillary," Wendy V. bragged, "If he [Senator Hooker] does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony, trust me." But this week, Mrs. Vitter showed that what applies to Democrats -- and Hillary Clinton, in particular -- doesn't apply to Republicans.

When confronted with her husband's admission that he used a prostitution service in D.C. -- and multiple allegations that he regularly went to at least one brothel in New Orleans -- Mrs. Vitter, well, put down the knife and stood by her man.

Now if that isn't family values hypocrisy -- a blatant double standard -- then what is?

During Senator Vitter's July 16 news conference attack on "partisan politics" disguised as a mea culpa – aka standard GOP operating procedure when caught in the act -- Vitter blamed Dems for his flaming hypocrisy: "Unfortunately, my admission has encouraged some longtime political enemies and those hoping to profit from the situation to spread falsehoods too, like those New Orleans stories in recent reporting."

Wendy Vitter decided not to cut off her husband's male appendage after all because she realized Republicans only do that to Democrats. Standing next to Senator "Hooker" Vitter at the staged press "coming out" party, Wendy decided to swallow hard.

"We choose to work together as a family," Wendy Vitter said at the "God has forgiven David -- and I do to" news conference. "When David and I dealt with this privately years ago, I forgave David. I made the decision to love him and to recommit to our marriage. To forgive is not always the easy choice, but it was and is the right choice for me. David is my best friend."

"Last week, some people very sympathetically said to me," Wendy added, "'I wouldn't want to be in your shoes right now.' I stand before you to tell you very proudly, I am proud to be Wendy Vitter."
As progressive commentator Bill Press observed, "At least a prostitute is honest about who she is."

Until next week, remember our motto: So many Republican hypocrites, so little time.

Catch up with you soon.

* * *

Paul,
Dem's don't use hookers? Thats right. They don't have to..They just have their interns relieve them.

Once again Bruce proves that he is more a journalist then anyone here at the swamp. Here at the swamp all Obama issues are framed in a way that makes him look good. The swamp never brings up Rezko or the fact that Obama gave Rezkos partner's son a job in his campaign. I dont know much about ROmney bit teaching kids about sex in kendergarten is wrong. Let them be kids. Cleraly Obama states that not only will they teach kids about wrong touching but how babies are made. You Obama backers can try to spin this but it just makes Obama look bad. What is wrong with a 5 year old thinking that babies come from the stork? Why not just tell them that Santa and the Easter bunny are fake too.

Paul,
Dem's don't use hookers? Thats right. They don't have to..They just have their interns relieve them.

Sorry, Loons, but 5-year-olds do not need to learn about sex. Doesn't equate to teachig them adults should not touch them in certain ways.

Sorry, but whether 5, 6, 7, 8 years old, sex is not an issue children need to be exposed to. Let them be kids for crying out loud. Kids grow up way too fast as it is. And most kids at that age don't understand what is being told them anyway.

I'd love to know how many of you Loons out there have actually spoken to their young kids about sex?

Paul,
Dem's don't use hookers? Thats right. They don't have to..They just have their interns relieve them.

Posted by: Stu | July 20, 2007 10:56 AM

Who's for family values? I believe you all needed to impeach a popular president for a BJ. Oh I know, it was lying under oath, right? But What about Libby? You all claim no crime was committed so perjury doesn't matter, so I ask you..what was the crime Clinton committed? Was it the same thing as:
Hyde? Rush Limpbag? Newt Gingrich? Gulliani? and the list goes on...... It's just my guess, but I think the hypocricy has a little to do with it.

So now we're talking about a federal sex education program? Otherwise why are presidential candidates bothering with this? I'm gonna have to re-read the constitution.

Looks like Mitt has taken a page out of the Rove playbook.

"In an apparent violation of the law, a controversial aide to ex-Gov. Mitt Romney created phony law enforcement badges that he and other staffers used on the campaign trail to strong-arm reporters, avoid paying tolls and trick security guards into giving them immediate access to campaign venues, sources told the (Boston) Herald.

The bogus badges were part of the bizarre security tactics allegedly employed by Jay Garrity, the director of operations for Romney who is under investigation for impersonating a law enforcement officer in two states. Garrity is on a leave of absence from the campaign while the probe is ongoing.

A campaign source said Garrity directed underlings on Romney’s presidential staff to use the badges at events nationwide to create an image of security and to ensure that the governor’s events went smoothly."

Sex is icky and for loons

What is wrong with a 5 year old thinking that babies come from the stork? Why not just tell them that Santa and the Easter bunny are fake too.

Posted by: Vinny | July 20, 2007 11:10 AM

If you believe Iraq is a war on terror, then you probably do believe in Santa.

What is wrong with a 5 year old thinking that babies come from the stork? Why not just tell them that Santa and the Easter bunny are fake too.

Posted by: Vinny | July 20, 2007 11:10 AM

Vinny, I don't know about your 5 year old, but most 5 year olds are smarter than that. Most of them are aware that babies have something to do with mommies tummy, from seeing mommy pregnant with future brothers and sisters.

Do they need to know the details at that age, of course not, but the questions do come up, and teachers need to be prepared to deal with them in a simple, straight forward, honest, age appropriate way.

This isn't too much of a surprise coming from the mouth of Barack "Hussein" Obama or other dems...
They're all into sex(and abortion)...look at B.J.Clinton,he tought a young girl about sex education...in his office.

Paulo

AS usual, in an election year, we here all of the name calling, accusations, deenials and assorted other juvenile crap we will listen to from now to election. Wouldn't it be novel for a candidate to do nothing but stick to what they plan to do, and ignore the crap. PEople who act like our esteemed politicians have no trouble flaming out if all they can do is what is written above. Wow, it will be a long time til Novemeber, when we get another lump of flesh sitting in Washington for 4 years. I think it is becoming God HELP America. not God Bless America.

Are you serious, Raving Loon?

Republicans are hypocrites (I suppose Democrats aren't) because this person didn't actually cut off her husbands appendage as promised?

Come on!

I like reading this site, but you are insulting the intelligence of those who read your posts. The length and effort you put into your post is an embarrasment.

Little Johnny Dumschitz,have you spoken to your cats about the birds and bees?

We have to deal with a coarsening of the culture and the over-sexualization of our young people. Look, I've got two daughters, 9 and 6 years old," Obama told the Associated Press. "Of course, part of the coarsening of that culture is when politicians try to demagogue issues to score cheap political points

5 year old do need to learn what amounts to "inappropriate touching." Why? Because there are so many Republicans out there. What if your kid runs into a Mark Foley type, or what if Jeff Gannon gets a job as the school bus driver, or what if Tedd Haggard gets a job as a guidance councilor at their school?

We have to protect our kids from the GOP (Gay Old Party.) I know Romney doesn't like this; he probably gets loads of NAMBLA money and probably has a secret dungeon in his house that he keeps stocked with boy slaves.

Who writes his stuff? Or is this him? If it's Obama, great job at thinking on your feet to BS from the conservative right who will find every fault having nothing to do with the presidency. Romney you don't have a chance, or should I say the Republicans don't have a chance. They offer no hope, they don't have a plan for the future nor do they have a vision if all they can do is take cheep shots. I'm a Republican. Where's the beef boys!!! Amazing comeback.

We have to deal with a coarsening of the culture and the over-sexualization of our young people. Look, I've got two daughters, 9 and 6 years old," Obama told the Associated Press. "Of course, part of the coarsening of that culture is when politicians try to demagogue issues to score cheap political points

Um - no one is advocating giving 5 year olds a banana and showing them how to use a condom, or any other "explicit" sex topic.

5 year-olds should at least be aware that their mom and dad make a baby together, what the differences between a boys body and a girls body are, and that "your area" belongs to you ,and if anyone tries to do something in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable, that's not right and you should kick that person in their area.

Also, to Vinny -

"The Swamp" is titled so because Washington DC lies on a swamp - indicating that this blog is about things happening that are DC relevant. The Rezko issue is more Chicago relevant, because it's still a fairly local issue, in that all the reporting for it pretty much has to be done here in Chicago - which the Tribune at large pretty much handles exclusively.

And I would say that Bruce would likely be a better right-wing blogger than The Swamp guys would - not a better journalist.

By age 5, kids should know what gender they belong to and that there are differences between boys and girls. Their parents may choose to tell them what those differences are (many do). They don't have to know the details about where babies come from, but it's a good idea they're not harboring illusions of having been picked out of a cabbage patch or delivered by a stork. There IS "age appropriate" sex education that would include 5-year-olds. That people would think automatically that it means teaching them to masturbate or show them graphic illustrations is just plain disgusting and hysterical, but entirely typical of the John D ilk. And having them know about their bodies has no more to do with not "letting them be kids" than knowing their address and phone number, knowing their first and last name, knowing that if they put their hand on a hot stove they're gonna get burned, and knowing how to play fair with their friends does. Honestly, get a grip! Maybe if John D.'s parents had taught him more about sex, he'd be living with a wife and family instead of cats and dogs.

Where does Mitt "The Great Flip-Flopper" Romney get off telling anyone about where he stands on an issue against someone else?

This guy was pro-abortion only a couple years ago, in fact if his "party" told him they were now pro-abortion for everyone he would switch his platform on a dime in order to lockstep with the faithful Wingnuts.

I'd love to know how many of you Loons out there have actually spoken to their young kids about sex?

Posted by: John D | July 20, 2007 11:22 AM

I have!!!!!

I'd tell the kids that they should just pay for the same hooker over and over again like I do.

Unfortunately, Christi does another terrible job.

What did the legislation proposed about what grade level the sex education should begin?

Oh, I guess we're going to have to find out for ourselves. Nice reporting.

This isn't too much of a surprise coming from the mouth of Barack "Hussein" Obama or other dems...
They're all into sex(and abortion)...look at B.J.Clinton,he tought a young girl about sex education...in his office.

Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | July 20, 2007 11:52 AM

Will someone please -- please! -- make the ultimate sacrifice and provide Paulo with his first oral copulation? Maybe once that happens he'll stop fixating on Clinton's sex life.

BTW Paulo: Monica was an adult, not a "young girl."

"...or should I say the Republicans don't have a chance. They offer no hope, they don't have a plan for the future nor do they have a vision if all they can do is take cheep shots."

*****

Posted by: MG | July 20, 2007 12:25 PM

So tell me, MG:

If you are a Republican, and you don't think Republicans have a "plan for the future," are you suggesting the Democrats have such a plan? I keep hearing the Democrats have a "plan," but no one seems to know what it is. If you know what it is, would you like to share it with the rest of us?

They're all into sex(and abortion)...look at B.J.Clinton,he tought a young girl about sex education...in his office.

Paulo

Posted by: Paulo | July 20, 2007 11:52 AM

Too bad your not into sex. Or is it just women you don't like.

I have been reading the Swamp now for only a couple of months and I have yet to see Paulo come up with a constructive, thoughtful comment. I can't believe that he actually thinks his sarcastic little quips are humorous.

John D,
We fully informed our son at about age 7 onward, and repeatedly. Why? He started to ask 'questions'. Seemed the right time for short, simple, explicit answers.

Gave him a pack of Trojans at age 15 when we spotted him sporting around town with a 15 going on 23 year old 'Layla' look alike.

GO OBAMA.

sex ed in kindergarten is an appropriate thing for 5 year olds. I'm in high school, and talking to kids of the younger generation was outrageous. They get the wrong idea of sex, and they think it would be "really, really cool" (yes, i actually heard that from a elementary school child, and they were younger than 3rd grade). It's crazy how much the modern culture has really affected kids...