Question:
Why do you think the government is qualified to manage this – after everything you outlined above? MW
Who else has the infrastructure in place to do such things. The government is us. We vote, we don’t go beyond verbalising our complaints about the system. We don’t act. Also, many people who you don’t want to pay for their kids can’t afford to get criminal records check done on their care givers. Perhaps the people wishing to engage in that line of work should pay for their own criminal records checks, etc.
Response:
Ironically, even though we live collectively we are becoming more and more isolated from each other.
You really need to ponder that and try to figure out what it means. Free clue: "There are no contradictions." Billy Anthology http://www.mindspring.com/~wjb3/free/essays.html
Response:
computer exploded and left behind a pile of letters in the following pattern … Why do you think the government is qualified to manage this – after everything you outlined above? MW Who else has the infrastructure in place to do such things. The government is us.
Uh no. We vote, we don’t go beyond verbalising our complaints about the system. We don’t act.
I don’t know what you do – but I most certainly *do* act. Also, many people who you don’t want to pay for their kids can’t afford to get criminal records check done on their care givers.
Thats too damn bad for them. Maybe if people did have to be responsible for the expenses of raising *oh gosh* _their_ children they would be more responsible. Perhaps the people wishing to engage in that line of work should pay for their own criminal records checks, etc.
Thats a good solution also. I think a private company could run quite a good business with screening Nanny’s and daycares. Look at the work of the BBB. I believe that is a non – governmental organization in every community. Me – I am thinking of buying some of those cameras – that you can hide in toys and VCR’s and hiring out the cameras to parents who are wondering about the quality of their child care. Where I see an opportunity for private citizens to provide a valuable service to other people – and create work for themselves…. You see only a NEED for even more governmental involvement in people’s lives. Wonder why that is? MW
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I remember my youth very well, even though I am probabbly older than most of you out there. Yes it does take a village, not a city, not a government. I think that everyone is taking a vague concept out of context because of the source. When I was growing up on a dairy farm, everyone helped everyone else. Being the only son, I had to go to other farms or households to play with other kids. The kids I played Little League Baseball with I knew all my life. I was in Cub and Boy Scouts with the same kids. I guess that what I am saying is you cannot raise children in a vacuum. If you try, then you are doing them a great dis-service. How do you people expect them to develop interpersonal skills or deal with different ideas? I take the village concept to mean the extended family as well as neighboring households – not government. The only thing I am seeing now is kneejerk reactions. The "Village" that Hillary is referring to is not the same as yours and mine. It’s goverment daycare, the ACLU and a host of other government funded child advocacy groups. In other words, Big Brother. They’ll have the kids monitoring their parents for things like smoking and they’ll be helping the kids to sue their parents. They want all the little ones marching in lock step into the brave new PC world over that bridge to the 21 Century. No individuality or competition to sully the dream of pure equality. Of course these mind dumb robots will need leaders, and guess who will be there to do it. No thanks Hillary. WNO
I’m not a mind dumb robot. I live in a country with government licensed and standardised daycare. I can assure you, few Canadians I know lack individuality. We live in a collective society. If you don’t like that then become a hermit (I do know a couple). Ironically, even though we live collectively we are becoming more and more isolated from each other. In 1991 68% of mothers with young children worked in the US. Divorce and single parent families more than quadrupled in the last ten years. Sadly, poverty often begins with single parenthood. Bin there done that. Know what it’s like to live in nob hill and suddenly bang, out comes the rug, three people living in a shabby one bedroom apartment who can’t affor to eat decent. I have seven years post secondary education, but couldn’t get decent daycare, and could not leave my children home alone to look for work. Not only that, if there is no standerds then you don’t know that the woman who’s minding the kids isn’t married to a convicted pediophile. In Canada everyone who lives in the house of a licensed home daycare gets criminal record checks before licensing. I agree that the childcare pendulum has swung too far to the left. I see many parents who are afraid to discipline their kids because they fear Social Services breathing down there necks. I consider myself an excellent mother. My kids were not accidents. Before my first child was born I took courses and read everything I could. Since my second child I have taken four more courses, attended and helped organize many seminars. I have two sisters and a best friend who all have their degrees in social work or psych. And I have also been the subject of four (and counting) social service investigations. Investigation #1 my daughter threw a fit in the grocery store and was kicking and hitting me (she was 3 & 1/2 years). She had on a pair of coveralls so I just picked her up by the back and carried her out of the store. Apparently someone reported that I was spanking her. Investigation #2 my daughter was playing at a friends and said mommy’s boyfriend sips coke through a straw (she was talking about pop). Investigation #3 my son told his teacher that he slept with his dad on one of his weekend visits (big deal the kids both regularly crawl in with me and my second husband). Investigation #4 my daughters teacher and I had a conversation about Social Workers, which I loathe, and because of my attitude she felt we should be investigated. Does this resemble any previous times in history–like say witch hunting days. So I agree, with part of what you say. Last year I ghost wrote two articles for a prof at a local university on meta research (comparing studies). In one of the articles he explored 400 research papers and "experiments" in the feilds of the social sciences. Not one single study adhered to any kind of scientific process. Most were observational studies with fewer than 20 subjects–non employed the use of control groups. Yet, people are calling this science, and making life altering decisions based on findings from these types of expereiments. Also most academics know that the social sciences were originally called the "Moral Sciences." In essence what we have are peoples morality being passed off as science. If that isn’t enough, the only social science study I’ve ever seen that did use a control group (The Cambridge-Summerville Youth Study & 30 year follow up) showed that "at risk" kids who recieved intervention faired poorer than their counterparts in personal relationships, crime, work, and family. In other words intervention had an effect opposite to its purpose. But, that doesn’t mean we don’t need standards where day care is concerned, especially when the number of lone parent families is at an all time high, especially when the majority of mothers work. The days of the Cleavers are gone and as a society we must adapt and accomodate.
Response:
says… I’m not a mind dumb robot. I live in a country with government licensed and standardised daycare.
Paid for by taking money at gun point from people. I can assure you, few Canadians I know lack individuality. We live in a collective society.
Yeah – its the shits aint it. If you don’t like that then become a hermit (I do know a couple). Ironically, even though we live collectively we are becoming more and more isolated from each other.
You don’t have to be a hermit to regard individual rights as sacrosanct. In 1991 68% of mothers with young children worked in the US. Divorce and single parent families more than quadrupled in the last ten years.
Because Social Assistance programs give irresponsible mothers the idea that Breeding for Greed will work for them. Sadly, poverty often begins with single parenthood. Bin there done that. Know what it’s like to live in nob hill and suddenly bang, out comes the rug, three people living in a shabby one bedroom apartment who can’t affor to eat decent.
I am also a single parent – and I resent every goddamn dime that is taken from me by the government to support OTHER PEOPLES KIDS! I have seven years post secondary education, but couldn’t get decent daycare, and could not leave my children home alone to look for work.
Wow – some great system we have here – eh? Not only that, if there is no standerds then you don’t know that the woman who’s minding the kids isn’t married to a convicted pediophile. In Canada everyone who lives in the house of a licensed home daycare gets criminal record checks before licensing.
If *you* don’t want to spend your money on criminal checks on the people minding your kids – thats fine – why take money from my pocket that would have afforded me the option of doing this on my own???? I agree that the childcare pendulum has swung too far to the left. I see many parents who are afraid to discipline their kids because they fear Social Services breathing down there necks.
Yeah – aint that Nanny State Great – eh? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I consider myself an excellent mother. My kids were not accidents. Before my first child was born I took courses and read everything I could. Since my second child I have taken four more courses, attended and helped organize many seminars. I have two sisters and a best friend who all have their degrees in social work or psych. And I have also been the subject of four (and counting) social service investigations. Investigation #1 my daughter threw a fit in the grocery store and was kicking and hitting me (she was 3 & 1/2 years). She had on a pair of coveralls so I just picked her up by the back and carried her out of the store. Apparently someone reported that I was spanking her. Investigation #2 my daughter was playing at a friends and said mommy’s boyfriend sips coke through a straw (she was talking about pop). Investigation #3 my son told his teacher that he slept with his dad on one of his weekend visits (big deal the kids both regularly crawl in with me and my second husband). Investigation #4 my daughters teacher and I had a conversation about Social Workers, which I loathe, and because of my attitude she felt we should be investigated. Does this resemble any previous times in history–like say witch hunting days.
Wouldnt it be nice if the Nanny State wasnt around and encouraging people to make such claims? So I agree, with part of what you say. Last year I ghost wrote two articles for a prof at a local university on meta research (comparing studies). In one of the articles he explored 400 research papers and "experiments" in the feilds of the social sciences. Not one single study adhered to any kind of scientific process.
Wow – thanks for being so honest about that 
Most were observational studies with fewer than 20 subjects–non employed the use of control groups. Yet, people are calling this science, and making life altering decisions based on findings from these types of expereiments. Also most academics know that the social sciences were originally called the "Moral Sciences." In essence what we have are peoples morality being passed off as science.
Yes – and thats the problem with putting these people in government jobs and allowing them to dictate what we *must* do with our lives and our money. If that isn’t enough, the only social science study I’ve ever seen that did use a control group (The Cambridge-Summerville Youth Study & 30 year follow up) showed that "at risk" kids who recieved intervention faired poorer than their counterparts in personal relationships, crime, work, and family. In other words intervention had an effect opposite to its purpose.
Should say something about these programs that they rob me at gun point to pay for. But, that doesn’t mean we don’t need standards where day care is concerned, especially when the number of lone parent families is at an all time high, especially when the majority of mothers work. The days of the Cleavers are gone and as a society we must adapt and accomodate.
Why do you think the government is qualified to manage this – after everything you outlined above? MW
Response:
I remember my youth very well, even though I am probabbly older than most of you out there. Yes it does take a village, not a city, not a government. I think that everyone is taking a vague concept out of context because of the source. When I was growing up on a dairy farm, everyone helped everyone else. Being the only son, I had to go to other farms or households to play with other kids. The kids I played Little League Baseball with I knew all my life. I was in Cub and Boy Scouts with the same kids. I guess that what I am saying is you cannot raise children in a vacuum. If you try, then you are doing them a great dis-service. How do you people expect them to develop interpersonal skills or deal with different ideas? I take the village concept to mean the extended family as well as neighboring households – not government. The only thing I am seeing now is kneejerk reactions. — Mark Bradford I do not speak for Northern Telecom or any other entity living or dead. Nobody living or dead wants me to speak for them anyway.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -I remember my youth very well, even though I am probabbly older than most of you out there. Yes it does take a village, not a city, not a government. I think that everyone is taking a vague concept out of context because of the source. When I was growing up on a dairy farm, everyone helped everyone else. Being the only son, I had to go to other farms or households to play with other kids. The kids I played Little League Baseball with I knew all my life. I was in Cub and Boy Scouts with the same kids. I guess that what I am saying is you cannot raise children in a vacuum. If you try, then you are doing them a great dis-service. How do you people expect them to develop interpersonal skills or deal with different ideas? I take the village concept to mean the extended family as well as neighboring households – not government. The only thing I am seeing now is kneejerk reactions.
The "Village" that Hillary is referring to is not the same as yours and mine. It’s goverment daycare, the ACLU and a host of other government funded child advocacy groups. In other words, Big Brother. They’ll have the kids monitoring their parents for things like smoking and they’ll be helping the kids to sue their parents. They want all the little ones marching in lock step into the brave new PC world over that bridge to the 21 Century. No individuality or competition to sully the dream of pure equality. Of course these mind dumb robots will need leaders, and guess who will be there to do it. No thanks Hillary. WNO
Response:
Well put, Mr. Griffin. But your thoughts are anathema to socialists like the Clintons. Gun control is putting the first round on target.
Gun control is having a steady hand, or Gun control is using both hands! Remove NOSPAM from address to e-mail /ayne //ann "First of all, I didn’t know about it. To the best of my recollection I didn’t know anything about his having that job until I read about it in the press. And I can’t imagine who could have ever arranged to do something improper like that and no one around here know about it. It was just not–we did not know anything about it, and I can tell you categorically that that did not happen. I knew nothing about it, none of us did before it happened. And I personally didn’t know anything about it, ’til I read about it in the press." – President Clinton News Conference 01/29/97
Response:
says… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I remember my youth very well, even though I am probabbly older than most of you out there. Yes it does take a village, not a city, not a government. I think that everyone is taking a vague concept out of context because of the source. When I was growing up on a dairy farm, everyone helped everyone else. Being the only son, I had to go to other farms or households to play with other kids. The kids I played Little League Baseball with I knew all my life. I was in Cub and Boy Scouts with the same kids. I guess that what I am saying is you cannot raise children in a vacuum. If you try, then you are doing them a great dis-service. How do you people expect them to develop interpersonal skills or deal with different ideas? I take the village concept to mean the extended family as well as neighboring households – not government. The only thing I am seeing now is kneejerk reactions. The "Village" that Hillary is referring to is not the same as yours and mine. It’s goverment daycare, the ACLU and a host of other government funded child advocacy groups. In other words, Big Brother. They’ll have the kids monitoring their parents for things like smoking and they’ll be helping the kids to sue their parents. They want all the little ones marching in lock step into the brave new PC world over that bridge to the 21 Century. No individuality or competition to sully the dream of pure equality. Of course these mind dumb robots will need leaders, and guess who will be there to do it. No thanks Hillary. WNO I’m not a mind dumb robot. I live in a country with government licensed and standardised daycare. I can assure you, few Canadians I know lack individuality. We live in a collective society. If you don’t like that then become a hermit (I do know a couple). Ironically, even though we live collectively we are becoming more and more isolated from each other. In 1991 68% of mothers with young children worked in the US. Divorce and single parent families more than quadrupled in the last ten years. Sadly, poverty often begins with single parenthood. Bin there done that. Know what it’s like to live in nob hill and suddenly bang, out comes the rug, three people living in a shabby one bedroom apartment who can’t affor to eat decent. I have seven years post secondary education, but couldn’t get decent daycare, and could not leave my children home alone to look for work. Not only that, if there is no standerds then you don’t know that the woman who’s minding the kids isn’t married to a convicted pediophile. In Canada everyone who lives in the house of a licensed home daycare gets criminal record checks before licensing. I agree that the childcare pendulum has swung too far to the left. I see many parents who are afraid to discipline their kids because they fear Social Services breathing down there necks. I consider myself an excellent mother. My kids were not accidents. Before my first child was born I took courses and read everything I could. Since my second child I have taken four more courses, attended and helped organize many seminars. I have two sisters and a best friend who all have their degrees in social work or psych. And I have also been the subject of four (and counting) social service investigations. Investigation #1 my daughter threw a fit in the grocery store and was kicking and hitting me (she was 3 & 1/2 years). She had on a pair of coveralls so I just picked her up by the back and carried her out of the store. Apparently someone reported that I was spanking her. Investigation #2 my daughter was playing at a friends and said mommy’s boyfriend sips coke through a straw (she was talking about pop). Investigation #3 my son told his teacher that he slept with his dad on one of his weekend visits (big deal the kids both regularly crawl in with me and my second husband). Investigation #4 my daughters teacher and I had a conversation about Social Workers, which I loathe, and because of my attitude she felt we should be investigated. Does this resemble any previous times in history–like say witch hunting days. So I agree, with part of what you say. Last year I ghost wrote two articles for a prof at a local university on meta research (comparing studies). In one of the articles he explored 400 research papers and "experiments" in the feilds of the social sciences. Not one single study adhered to any kind of scientific process. Most were observational studies with fewer than 20 subjects–non employed the use of control groups. Yet, people are calling this science, and making life altering decisions based on findings from these types of expereiments. Also most academics know that the social sciences were originally called the "Moral Sciences." In essence what we have are peoples morality being passed off as science. If that isn’t enough, the only social science study I’ve ever seen that did use a control group (The Cambridge-Summerville Youth Study & 30 year follow up) showed that "at risk" kids who recieved intervention faired poorer than their counterparts in personal relationships, crime, work, and family. In other words intervention had an effect opposite to its purpose. But, that doesn’t mean we don’t need standards where day care is concerned, especially when the number of lone parent families is at an all time high, especially when the majority of mothers work. The days of the Cleavers are gone and as a society we must adapt and accomodate.
I think you have hit the point. When you say that "In other words intervention (by a government agency) had an effect opposite to its purpose. Indeed recent stories from that liberal Just Society (read socialist) Canada indicate that children supposedly supervised by child care workers are dying at an alarming rate. Investigations are underway and last week another child worker was charged with criminal negligence. The excuse was that the new Conservative Provincial Government had cut funding for these programs to such an extent that proper in home supervision could not be carried out. All they need is more money to prevent children dying while under government in-home supervision. 40 years of government spending on billions on welfare, poverty, sex education, and the rest has only made things worse. The only time welfare shrinks is when the money is cut off. This has happened recently in the US and Canada, where promised cuts and stringent rules have resulted in a huge shift to the workplace. It is always lost on liberals that many people have to force themselves to go to work to maintain their lifestyle. If the lifestyle can be maintained at government expense, why go to work? We are not talking about career minded individuals here, but the vast number of the underclass who labor in hard unrewarding low skilled jobs. There is a real problem of some person working the night shift and having to clean out dirty ovens or toilets, if that person can make more money bying staying home and watching Oprah. Yes, some assistance is needed by some families and will always be provided, but the system should be firm. Welfare money given should be considered charity, not a right, with strings attached. It must be mointored carefully. The money should not be used to subsidize a tragic lifestyle. Repeated destructive behaviour and habits must be penalized by having well funded institutions set up to deal with rehabilitation. Children must be removed from such people and placed in similar well funded institutions where they can be free to learn and grow. No more free money for parents to buy booze and drugs and abuse their kids. And no more funding for the poverty pimps who watch them do it. It just doesn’t work. WNO
Response:
You obviously don’t have children. Haven’t you ever heard of the term "One person can bare a child but it takes a community to raise the child" Just <snip writes… Well, I have three children. My wife and I have raised them without daycare workers. Doctors don’t help raise children. Arguably teachers can have a profound influence on children. Swimming and piano instructors don’t raise children. No extended family helped raise my children– not even to babysit. Other parents?
<snip Well put, Mr. Griffin. But your thoughts are anathema to socialists like the Clintons. Gun control is putting the first round on target.
Response:
says… You obviously don’t have children.
I however do have a child. He is 3. He has more logical thought process than you do. Haven’t you ever heard of the term "One person can bare a child but it takes a community to raise the child"
Yes I have – however I think that is a collectivist notion and just another variation on the theme that "the state is the great fiction whereby everybody trys to live off of everybody else" (Bastiat) Just try to imagine rasing a child without daycare workers,
I don’t need the government to take care of my child. doctors,
I don’t need the government to tell doctors how to practice medicine. teachers,
The government can’t manage to add and subtract – to balance a budget -so why are you willing to let it manage your children’s education? swiming
I am a privately certified lifeguard. My son swims very well without the government’s help. or piano instructors,
(Is this really nesseccary for a child? – so nesseccary that you are willing to use the government to pick my pocket to provide it for other people’s kids?) extended family,
How is the government nesseccary for my parents and siblings to take part in my kids life? and other parents. Or do you plan to keep you child locked in your house his/her entire life.
Of course not. I just don’t want his mind locked up by brain butchers like you. Even then, don’t let them watch TV or listen to music, or speak to anyone who might have any social influence upon the child,
And I might add – that I spend a good deal of my time as a parent filtering and correcting much of that *social influence* – from the likes of your kind of message. because YOU DON’T NEED A COLLECTIVE.
Thats right – I DONT need a collective. How are you going to work and support your child without aid in the child’s card?
Whats the matter – did you lose your connection to the collective mind – and this non sequitor that came dribbling out is the result? My child is an individual first – and its *My* job to provide his needs – NOT SOME BLOODY COLLECTIVE. Now quite your leeching bleating whining and take care of YOUR kids instead of expecting everybody else to be forced to by the State. Freedom
Response:
At first, I though this was a message about Hillary’s football aspirations, however, the thought of her as a tight end is a contradiction of terms. But since this is about her notion how to raise children, it doesn’t stand to reason that she has anything to brag about! Chelsea going stag to her own prom! Really now! Bill ought to be able to lay better presidential pipe than that!
Someone rumored that Johnny has "high bloodpressure", which is triggered by certain even imaginativ events, sometimes. So better don
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.