When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday – at 4:30 in the morning.

Now I wasn’t too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I’d fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I’d complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, “This is no picnic for me either, buster.”

(snip)

I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn’t fit in.

So I wasn’t always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I’m not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.

But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our First Lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn’t have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.

He left out the part where her dad was a cog in the Chicago political machine. I think that had more to do with what kind of schools she went to, don’t you?

Besides the references to the typical lefty agenda (talk about new energy technologies and “protecting our environment”, and fighting “poverty and homelessness…and discrimination”), it was a basic, boilerplate speech that one would expect a normal politician to give to students. But B. Hussein Obama isn’t a normal politician, is he? He’s the most liberal president we’ve had since FDR, and he’s got an ideological axe to grind. The fact that he was able to restrain himself and keep this on the level is remarkable.

And, just so we’re all clear on this, it wasn’t the speech that was ever the problem…it was the companion lesson plan they were going to hand out to the kids. You know, the “how you can help Obama” stuff.

Update: Well, harumph-harumph!!!, that was then, this is now!

For the record, I agree with GayPatriot. If it hadn’t been for the ruckus the right kicked up over this, you can bet Obama would have made a super-partisan speech. As it was, he was “caught” in a bind, so he scrapped what he more than likely intended to say and instead delivered a rather benign “stay in school” and “It’s all about me” speech.

And, again, it wasn’t the speech that conservatives had the problem with, it was the “educational” materials the administration was planning on sending along with it.

Authorities say the girl and her mother were shopping Monday when the toddler began crying. The police report says Stephens approached the mother and said, “If you don’t shut that baby up, I will shut her up for you.”

Authorities say Stephens then grabbed the 2-year-old and slapped her. The child began screaming and Stephens was arrested. Police say an examination showed the girl’s face was slightly red.

Quite simply, you don’t EVER lay a hand on another person’s child, especially if you don’t even know them.

Was there a better way to handle this? Of course. And that goes for both the a-hole who did the slapping and the mother of the child. He should have, at the very most, asked her to quiet the child down or take her outside/to the restroom until she calmed down. The mother, really, shouldn’t even have to be asked to do this. It’s common sense (and common courtesy) to take you disruptive child somewhere private where they can finish their tantrum and quiet down.

I’m a father of two (boy and a girl) and, believe me, they’ve had their fits in public. We’ve always handled the situation so as not to bother other people, but there are times when the only thing you can do is just leave.

I’d have to say that if you think there are more and more incidents like this going on (crying/disruptive kids bothering you at every turn), you’d probably be correct. I don’t have the statistics, of course, but I’ve noticed that more and more often kids throw a fit in a store and the parents basically stand by, helpless to do anything about it. You know why that is? Because they’re afraid to do anything about it.

Think about it. You swat your kid on the butt for acting out, just how soon do you think it will be until someone calls the social worker police on you? Pretty damn quick in this day and age. So, naturally, parents refrain from correcting their kids. I’m not saying we should be beating our children, by any means, but a smack on the hand or butt never hurt us when we were growing up, did it? It got our attention and made us stop doing whatever it was we were doing, didn’t it? Damn straight it did.

But in this day and age, you don’t dare lay a hand, however lightly, on your child in public because someone, somewhere, will turn you in for “abuse”. Kids aren’t stupid, you know…they learn rather quickly what they can and cannot do, and if they act out at Wal-Mart (or anywhere else, for that matter) and nothing bad happens to them, then they know they can do it at will and get away with it. Especially if a parent, in their efforts to quiet the child, give in to whatever demand they’re making (“But I want THAT toy! Waaaah!”).

To recap, this clown who slapped a complete stranger’s child should have the book thrown at him. But the mother isn’t totally innocent, either. She could have done something to stop it from getting that far. But, given the fact that parents aren’t allowed to be parents anymore, I can certainly understand.

As children across America go back to school, President Obama will deliver a national address directly to students on the importance of taking responsibility for their success in school on Tuesday, September 8th at 12:00 PM EDT at Wakefield High School in Arlington. In advance of this address, the Department of Education is providing resources developed by and for teachers to help engage students and stimulate discussion about persisting and succeeding in school.

But knowing how liberals constantly go after our kids, you know it won’t be anything “innocent” at all. If Mr. Hopenchange wants to have a pep talk with our school children, telling them how important it is to stay in school, great.

But I have a hard time thinking that he’ll stick to that subject. He very well may tell them how terrible it is that THEIR parents oppose his health care plan and, before you know it, grade school children across America will come home and, later that night around the dinner table, ask their parents why they hate America so much. Wouldn’t put it past him at all.

You want to give kids a talk they need? Tell them to a) stay in school, b) keep their pants on (for you tea-smokers, that means abstain from pre-marital sex), and c) stay away from drugs. Do those things and you more than likely won’t be poor and mooching off the American taxpayer.

I’ve said it countless times, and I’ll say it again: Beware the politician that says “It’s for the children”, because it sure as hell isn’t. It’s about them and their agenda, not our kids. That goes for both parties, by the way.

It’s not even the speech itself that’s the problem. It’s the lesson plan they wanted to send out in advance of the speech, asking kids how they can “help Obama”. Not the country, not their parents, not their communities, not themselves, but Obama. So much for JFK’s “ask not what your country can do for you” speech, eh?

A multi-million pound initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies more than doubled the number of girls conceiving.
The Government-backed scheme tried to persuade teenage girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.

But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the programme, at a cost of £2,500 each, were ’significantly’ more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programmes who were not given contraception and sex advice.

A total of 16 per cent of those on the Young People’s Development Programme conceived compared with just 6 per cent in other programmes.

Experts said the scheme failed because it introduced girls ‘at risk’ of becoming pregnant to promiscuous girls they might not otherwise have met.

Because of peer pressure, the more timid teenagers were more likely to have sex and become pregnant.

I’d say that those explanations are valid to an extent, but they don’t go to the heart of the problem, that being the mixed message you are sending kids: “We don’t want to see you get pregnant, but if you were going to get pregnant, here’s how you’d go about it, wink-wink, nudge-nudge.”

Safe sex is a myth. There’s no such thing. Oh, you can take the pill or slap a condom on but, sooner or later, it’s going to fail. And with the STDs we’ve got in this world today, it’s like playing Russian Roulette by handing a kid a condom and telling him to go at it. Seriously, would YOU have sex with an STD-infested partner — knowing full well that they are diseased — with only a thin sheet of rubber between you and God knows what? No sane person would, yet that’s exactly what these pointy-headed liberals want kids to do. Their excuse is that “well, they’re going to do it anyway”. Call me crazy, but you can use that excuse for any number of things. It doesn’t make it acceptable, and we sure as hell shouldn’t be letting the left get away with crap like this.

I’m not saying for a second that kids shouldn’t get some kind of sex-ed in their lives, but I don’t think the schools are the proper place for it. That’s the parent’s job, and it’s about damn time parents reclaimed that right and responsibility. Otherwise, we’re going to have more liberalism-inspired teen pregnancies and yet another generation of Americans stuck in poverty and misery. But hey, at least the abortion clinics will be doing ok, right?

Remember, this is the kind of kook stuff the left is trying to teach here in this country!

This is an ad that is running in New York City (courtesy of the A.V. Club). Is that not pathetic? And, if you’re like me, the first thing that pops into your head is “how did they get this kid to cry”? Well, wonder no more:

Quit Victoria executive director Fiona Sharkie told the Today show that the child actor from Melbourne named Alexander had shed real tears after losing his mother during the shoot.

“Our intention was that he would act in that manner, but when it came down to it when the mum went away, he did get upset. I mean, they’re real tears.”

They planned to make him cry anyway (nice, huh?), but it was just gravy when his mom got away from him and he really started to cry. And, worse yet, they’re HAPPY that he cried:

Quit’s media manager Edwina Pearse said her organisation was delighted by the New York reaction.

“If people are talking about the ad, it will be cutting through to smokers,” Ms Pearse said.

What’s next? Making anti-domestic violence ads showing women getting raped or beaten? Where do you draw the line? Should you even HAVE to draw a line?? I would think it’s common sense, wouldn’t you? Not these people, apparently. What kind of pathetic, heartless, manipulating bastards makes a kid cry just to get a political agenda point across?

Think about it. If you saw a kid start crying because he lost track of his mom, would your first thought be “get the camera!” or would it be “let’s find his mom”? I’m betting it would be the latter.

I’m a parent of two kids. Whenever one of them starts crying, my first instinct is to find out what is making them cry, fix it, and getting them to stop crying. I don’t care so much about what made them start crying, I just want it to stop, period. As Bill Cosby once said in his famous “Himself” concert, parents want quiet.

These people, they went so far as to exploit a child for their own agenda. That’s pretty routine for the left, btw. Remember the SCHIP debate?

Speaking of exploiting children for an agenda, how about this latest one? As I’ve said, countless times, beware the politician (or anybody, for that matter) who say anything along the lines of “think of the children”. You can bet your last nickel that they’re not really concerned about kids. They’re only concerned about themselves, meaning, increasing their power and passing their agenda of the moment.

For the record, I was once a smoker. Yes, it’s a nasty habit and yes, you really should quit because it’s not good for you and the people around you. Plus, it’s a massive drain on your wallet (even more so with all these taxes they keep passing). But scaring people into quitting doesn’t work. If anything, it makes smokers even more defiant.

One morning last September, Melanie Leavey’s six-year-old daughter, Savannah, insisted on wearing a Halloween cat costume instead of normal clothes. She wore it all day long, and the next too. Eventually, she agreed to take off the costume so it could be washed, but the minute it was laundered, she pulled it on again. Weeks passed, then months. It wasn’t until February, almost six months later, that Savannah finally decided to put the cat costume to rest.

But at no point did her mother try to make Savannah stop wearing it, says Ms. Leavey, who lives in Burlington, Ont., with her husband Brandt, Savannah and Sebastian, age 4.

Getting Savannah dressed in the morning had long been a battle. “I tried all the mainstream parenting guru advice, but nothing worked,” she says.

So, Ms. Leavey began to practise consensual living, a set of principles designed to help family members understand each other’s feelings and meet one another’s needs.
Ever since her daughter got the chance to assert her autonomy in her clothing choices, Ms. Leavey says, helping her get dressed in the morning has been “a piece of cake.”

In the consensual living model, father doesn’t know best. Neither does mom. Instead, parents and children are equal partners in family life, according to the principles laid out at consensual-living.com.

Parents and children are equal partners in family life? Uhm, yeah.

But wait, it gets better:

If she had a doctor’s appointment but her daughter was feeling grumpy, for example, Ms. Hollett would not force Kahlan to wait with her to see the doctor. Instead, Ms. Hollett might cancel the appointment or arrange alternative child care, she says.

Listening to her child’s feelings doesn’t mean that every last thing is negotiable, such as being strapped in a car seat, she says. But if they have to go somewhere, she adds, “I’ll do everything I can to make the car-seat ride more comfortable.”

(snip)

Echota Keller, a mother in Langley, B.C., says that she creates boundaries with her three-year-old son, Kiernen, while “giving him the space to be his own person.”

In daily life, she makes a practice of letting him know what her intentions are, she says, “and asking him if that’s going to work for him.”

Recently, the principles of consensual living have helped her cope with her son’s hitting stage, she says.

When Kiernen strikes another child, Ms. Keller asks him what he’s feeling and whether he’d like to express his anger or frustration in another way, such as using words or hitting a pillow.

She tells him it’s not okay to hit others, but she and her husband, Josh, do not force Kiernen to say he’s sorry. “If he’s going to apologize, we want it to be authentic,” Ms. Keller says.

Oh, heaven forbid he not tell the other child he’s sorry if he doesn’t mean it! When I was a kid, part of your punishment for doing something like that was the humiliation of having to apologize for doing it. No, you weren’t being sincere, but you were embarrassed as hell to have to say “I’m sorry” to the kid you just punched, especially if your mom was the one standing there making you apologize.

What a bunch of horse-hooey. You have an appointment and you ASK your kid if it’s ok for you to go to it?!? Talk about role-reversal, asking for your child’s permission to go somewhere. What parent in their right minds bow to the demands of their children like that? It’s not healthy for the parent, it’s not healthy for the child, and it sure as hell isn’t healthy for the overall family.

I’ve seen families that operate like this (hell, who HASN’T seen a family like this?), and it’s a wonder the parents haven’t stuck a gun in their mouth and pulled the trigger. These people are frazzled, you can see it plain as day. The kid says “jump!” (not literally) and the parents say “how high?” And then they wonder why they can’t get their kids in the car when it’s time to leave. Idiots.