DAVIS: Can an honorable man run a dishonorable campaign?

Another Davis attempt at norming - redefining "honorable". It is the campaign season and to be expected. McCains ads are no less honorable than the Democrats bringing up the issue of closet racism because McCain won't and trying to shame us into voting the liberal social conscience over the Obama issues of an environmental energy plan that doesn't produce energy until 10 years from now, a tax and spend "patriotic" economic plan when the economy is struggling to stay afload and a Clintonisque foreign policy plan founded in "principled diplomacy" - consensus without compliance or cut and run, and Joe Biden's experience.

Mr. Davis, your bias is showing. I will NOT be voting for Obama, and your proxy slams for the Obama campaign is not going to change my mind.

Editorials like these would be so much more believable if they mentioned all the lying Obama has done. If you try to act like it's all on one side then they whole thing becomes unbelievable and it's just manipulation.

This analysis/opinion is big on emotion but real low on logic. Libs love having it both ways, which Obama and Democrats insist upon. Obama may indeed have had his name on legislation protecting exploited children. BUT HE ALSO DID SUPPORT SEX EDUCATION FOR KINDERGARTEN. Sorry, just the truth. Liberals cannot fathom that perverting our youth and then trying to protect them somewhere else is just plain stupid. The list is too long to go into here. But the author of the above rant is too weak minded to understand that protecting a child in one piece of legislation but destroying all of our childrens innocence in school programs does not make Obama some kind of Messiah. Just the opposite. And those who argue for Obama are high on something other than common sense.

Davis: Can a Liberal make sense or even a remotely convincing argument in a column even if it IS in a conservative newspaper? NOPE!

The federal government, under President Bush, already funds a policy which calls for HIV education starting in kindergarten. These policy guidelines have been adopted by boards of education in places like Alabama, Tennessee, and Wyoming. Don't take my word for this- just follow the links (many of which are to government websites) which I supply later in this post. If you go to this CDC web page: http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/partners/ngo/nasbe.htm ... you'll see that the CDC funds an organization called the National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) for the purpose of "providing HIV-related information and guidance to state boards of education and other education stakeholders on policies that promote effective HIV prevention for kindergarten through 12th grade students in schools across the nation. " Here is the model policy the NASBE wants the states to follow: http://www.nasbe.org/index.php/component/content/article/78-model-policies/120-policies-concerning-students-and-staff-with-hiv-infection It says the "goals of HIV prevention education are to promote healthful living and discourage the behaviors that put people at risk of acquiring HIV. The educational program will be taught at every level, kindergarten through grade twelve;". Here is the policy of the Tennessee state board of education as of 2003. It echoes the NASBE language verbatim, calling for HIV education to be taught K-12: http://www.state.tn.us/sbe/Policies/5.300%20HIV_AIDS%20Policy%20for%20Students%20and%20Employees.pdf Here is the policy of Pickens County, Alabama, a dry county of 20,000 people. It has the same K-12 HIV education language. http://www.pickens.k12.al.us/Other%20Resources/Policy%20Manual.doc So just as easily as one can try to twist the language of the Illinois bill (which never passed) into sounding like something inappropriate, I could take the language of the policy (already in place) of the board of education in Pickens County and make it sound like this county that won't let you buy booze is pushing inappropriate AIDS education on kindergartners. How plausible is that? Here is the Wyoming policy as of 1998: http://www.k12.wy.us/hs/hivpolicy.pdf It echoes the NASBE language. Here is a press release demonstrating that the CDC, via NASBE, gave grants earlier this year to Tennessee, North Carolina, and Oregon for K-12 HIV education: http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS214774+28-Feb-2008+BW20080228