The Barack Obama campaign is now in the business of brainwashing children.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Kids for Obama.
In the words of Senator Barack Obama, the “Obama for America Campaign is a different type of campaign”. For the first time in campaign history, children ages 12 and under, have a place to go and actually vote—through their voice. What a great way to be introduced to politics and to express your support for Senator Obama.
Check out the Kids for Obama Starter Kit!
Below you will find a list of activities children 12 and under can do to get involved. To start, print out our Logo Coloring Sheet, color it in and display at your house or in your school.
10 WAYS KIDS FOR OBAMA CAN GET INVOLVED:
Create a Kids for Obama Group on My.Barackobama.com. For example, Chicago Kids for Obama or DC Kids for Obama and throw a party!
Write a letter or editorial to your local news paper, expressing “Why Barack Obama should become the next US President”.
Find a Pen Pal – it could be in your school, city, state, or another state. Write and discuss different ways you can get involved.
Draw a picture of Senator Barack Obama or “an expression of Democracy”. For example, the Senator sitting in the White House or working on Capitol. Hill. You can send your drawing to the Obama for America Campaign Headquarters in Chicago and it will be posted for the Senator to see.
Implement T-Shirt Thursday. Get friends to wear an official Obama for America T-Shirt to school.
Take an adult (voting age) to the polls on Election Day and encourage them to vote for you, by voting for Senator Obama.
Post an official Obama for America Campaign sticker/logo on your school bag.
Wear an Obama for America Campaign button and/or clothing.
Host a Senator Barack Obama House Party or sleep-over.
Contribute to the Kids for Obama Blog.
This really is new ground for a Presidential campaign: specifically targeting children, to get them to influence their parents. I’m sure the leftists will try to make excuses for it, but this is one of the most disgusting, unethical tactics I’ve ever seen in politics. And that’s saying plenty.
Via Dr. Slogan, with whose comments I completely agree:
Is this all so bad? Is it bad at all? Shouldn’t kids be involved? Aren’t they entitled to their opinions? Is it wrong to reach out to them to open their eyes, so that they could change opinions of their parents? There are two way to answer these questions. One is simple ethics. Make no mistake: this is not about reaching out to the supporters. Sen. Obama openly goes after the kids of people who don’t plan to vote for him. He and his staff see the minds of children as a backdoor to get to the voting parents and grandparents. So, yes, it is bad. It is wrong. It is despicable. And there’s no excuse for this.
There’s another way to answer the question. What does our government think about this? Are they ok with targeting children with propaganda? As it turns out, they are not. When it comes to commercial advertisement, government bodies such as FDC and FDA have been going after marketers who target children age 12 and under. Yes, it’s exactly the same age group that Sen. Obama targets so explicitly. Just last year FDC along with its European counterpart pushed Masterfoods to stop marketing of its products (e.g. Snickers, Milky Way and Twix) to kids. Apparently, from the government’s perspective, kids age 12 and under are not mature enough to figure out whether Snickers are good or bad for their health, and thus can be misled by advertising. But of course, figuring out where a presidential candidate stands on taxes, abortion, education and national security is much easier. So why would the government have any problem with that?
(Hat tip:Chuckles)
Tags: Barack Obama, Ethics, News, Politics
I will be honest, the reason we have such horrible turn out at elections is because we are told it doesn’t matter and our votes don’t amount to anything from a young age. I applaud the efforts to get young people involved, to teach them so that hopefully when they get older they get out there and vote.
Terra – getting young people involved is wonderful. I just wish they would want to learn about who they are voting for before pulling the lever just because MTV told them to.
If people know that Barack is the infanticide candidate and they still vote for him that’s one thing (must not have a problem with infanticide), but…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGSOjx5Mh7w
That is quite odd, and sad (the you tube stuff). It shows a fair amount of inability to research. Very sad, I would have been more interested if the same thing would have been done in both camps rather than just one. (I have heard a lot of things that are similar the other way to.)
Although the infanticide comment actually suggest that you might not have done your homework either. Obama doesn’t support such a thing, he doesn’t support partial birth abortions and that is one of the primary reasons that the right to choose area doesn’t support him 100%.
Perhaps you are pro-life completely and see all abortions as infanticide in which I concede the above point, and retract the statement.
Terra,
You appear naive concerning Obama’s position with respect to the abortion issue. There isn’t an abortion that Obama is against as this fundraising letter from 2004 attests:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2008/05/michelle_obamas.html
And for a real jaw dropper of what goes on behind the curtain that Obama will not support, listen to the nurse that the left, more specifically the Obama rubes, continually tries to vilify as a crack pot:
http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/2007/09/stanek_on_the_o.html
I don’t care how fooled the masses are, Obama is a charlatan who will do and say anything to get elected. And anybody that is party to him is as well.
You can see what you want to see. I am not going to change that, I don’t have that ability. I however, know the language in the bill and that language was not good for pro-choice, and I am pro-choice.
He really doesn’t support partial birth abortions, nor this kind of killing of babies. However, that lack of support isn’t going to show up without the right wording. That is just the way it is…
You do not have to support this view, you do not have to agree with me. As a student in this area (legal), I know where he is coming from and I support the position he took.
You do not have to support this view, you do not have to agree with me. As a student in this area (legal), I know where he is coming from and I support the position he took.
Then let us all hope you interpret the meaning of your legal reviews better than you did his campaign letter that specifically states his position. If the wife’s request in writing doesn’t represent Obama’s real position, then I don’t know what does.
But if you wish to be party to killing babies legally in the most brutal of all forms to the most innocent, who is to stop you? Everything else your candidate represents is evil. I don’t know why his supporters shouldn’t follow along.
I debated on if I should respond, I obviously angered you. That was not my intention and for that I am sorry…
Now let me tell you about me; I have had 0 abortions, I have had 4 children. I do not believe abortions should happen (personally) unless the life of the mother is in question, rape, incest and so on…
First child – born when I was 17, I kept this child
Second child – born when I was 19, I gave this child up for adoption
Third child – there were major complications and he died when he was 3 months old – I was 21
Fourth child – substantial complications and my life was in danger from giving birth – I was 23 – this child is with me.
After the 2nd child I was not supposed to be able conceive, after the 3rd my insides were messed up enough that I wasn’t able to even carry my 4th to term.
Politically I am pro-choice, as for me it isn’t a position on abortion, it is a position on privacy. Who should decide if those abortions go on (rape, incest, health) should we allow any part of the government to go through our private information in order to tell us if we met those requirements? You are on the side of yes they should, I see it from the side of no they shouldn’t.
I have full faith that neither of my children will ever have an abortion, and I think that is where that should stay. It was up to me to teach them right from wrong, not some law to say it is right or wrong.
Killing of innocent children after they have been born don’t fit into this. I do not support that. You can continue to see that letter as totally being for this procedure, I see it as in the words that say without the health of the mother taking into consideration this bill reduces the privacy issue.
This is to say that if the health of the mother isn’t included, then the privacy issue is void as the state can get involved.
Terra,
You didn’t anger me. And I am sorry for your loss. I just think your logic circular and called you on it.
First, the issue of rape, incest and the mother’s life in danger is the ultimate red herring thrown out by the left to justify murder. Since this represents a very, very small minority of abortions performed (less than 1%), the argument quickly becomes dishonest.
Second, I don’t buy the argument of “it isn’t a position on abortion, it is a position on privacy” because it ignores the essence of the debate – that is, is it a baby or not? When you have figured that out, the answer becomes very obvious and privacy unimportant when one’s heart is right.
Finally, this statement with respect to Obama’s positions doesn’t square either “killing of innocent children after they have been born don’t fit into this.” Because Obama’s past votes, including forcing the issue to the highest court after George Bush signed the ban does support partial birth abortion (more correctly called intact dilation and extraction) which takes a viable baby, moves all but the head outside the birth canal, stabs scissors in the back of the skull, and then removes the contents to shrink the head. If that is not the same as killing a child, I don’t know what is…
For you to defend Obama as being anything but the most radical form of “pro-choice” is intellectually dishonest. He has no problem supporting the position of George Tiller, the infamous late term abortionist located in Wichita, KS. And if you are supporting Tiller the baby Killer, you’re as radical as they come.