For years conservatives have complained that sex-ed should be left up to the parents. Fair enough. But once their "Godly" president got into power, they immediatly threw their own belief system out the window. This is less about effective sex-ed to me so much as it is about double standards. "It's okay if we're the ones doing it." We see this in a lot of things conservatives do. If Clinton bombs Iraq, he's "wagging the dog" to distract from his sex life (something else that wouldn't have been an issue if conservatives hadn't made it one) but if Bush does it then he's "protecting us from the terrorists". If Clinton cheats on his wife, then he must step down for the moral integrity of the country, if David Vitter bangs a hooker, he is applauded on the floor of the senate for standing up to those evil democrats and their nosy interefering (the only one they actually cut loose was Larry Craig and that was just because it involved that icky butt sex!). "Abstinance only" is still a form of sex-ed, just because it doesn't work, doesn't mean it isn't the same type of thing. And like all things republicans do, it's a failed pipe dream that usually makes things worse then the problem it was trying to fix.

What kind of neo-con mea-culpa is it if they don't even blame liberals for everything? Remember, that's the most important part of being a neo-con, blaming liberals for undermining your efforts when things go wrong.

it makes capitalism look stupid! What are you, a commie?! Don't you know how things work in America?

it's about the AGENDA. Success is less important then getting the message out there that sex is evil. The instigators of this program even admit as much. The book "Kingdom Coming", which I think was written by one of Salon's own has an example of this.

I doubt it matters to these people how many kids are born out of wedlock just as long as they have domination over the message. They probably believe in short term losses for long term gain. If they repeat the same message over and over agin through govenrment reinforcement, people will start to believe it true or not. And hopefully it will change the dynamic in the long run.

I'm not saying this is a sane thing to do, just that this probably their thinking.

How do you explain all those Calvin pissing on-insert thing you don't like here-stickers?

Clinton is literally handing McCain the White House while staying in the race.

I'm sure this time will be different...right?

this is exactly what Pelosi should have said the day she took office. As for the republicans, remember that most of them were elected by people who still think that global warming is a "myth" and that the Earth was created in six days. People tend to vote for others like themselves. Out of touch doesn't beign to describe it.

That's the way the republican party works.

is because most of them are probably written by blind Bushies who, if pressed, couldn't give you a good reason for why we are over there anymore then...well...the administration itself.

You did the right thing by writing your own. As for all the haters (and yes, that's what you are) the military is a necessary part of any country. Just because the repubican party in this country wants to abuse them does not put the blame at the feet of everyone in the military.

Is every enviromentalist a terrorist just because some of them set fire to SUV dealerships? Following your logic they are. Is every pot smoker selling drugs to kids? Again, following your logic they are. Guilt by association is a republican trick, and we're supposed to be better then them.

Not everybody in the military is a child killer just like not every cop likes to arrest stoners. Get it? Some of these people actually signed up wanting to actually protect people. Wow, what a concept! How about we do what the republicans refuse to do and actually judge people individually?

Which is part of the reason these things are so unbelievably stupid. Though I'm with the author, this doesn't really surprise me.

This is the way republican voters are. Lecture you about "morality" on one hand, do whatever it takes to win on the other. It's called hypocracy and it's how the right has done things for at least 30 years. Even if McCain himself would never officially sign off on such tactics, I'm sure he wouldn't try very hard to stop them either.

BTW: Don't you have to be a veteran to be "swiftboated"? I could be wrong about that.

There is an interesting conspiracy theory circulating that might answer that question for you: The theory goes that sometime in the late nineties or early 2000s, record executives started pushing up and coming talent to back off of more topical issues (like say, fucking tha' police), to make the albums more sellable to the rest of the population. Thus not rocking the boat or questioning things like how blacks are treated in America. Matt Tiabi touched on this in one of his Rolling Stone articles.

The "slippery slope" excuse the hate groups throw around to justify their bigotry doesn't hold water (for one thing, animals can't consent!). The American people are smart enough to make a distinction between two consenting adults and THE WHOLLY SEPERATE ISSUES of things like bestiality and pedophilia and incest. I guess liberals believe that people are smart enough to tell the difference. Too bad conservatives still think people are stupid.