Big Government Is Everyone’s Parent . . . Including Your Child’s

So I’m all set to launch a new non-political feature (some sort of “behind the scenes” posts in which I’ll ramble about random things that catch my interest–yes, I am interested in things other than politics, imagine!, but I intend to “flag” such posts in the title so anyone not interested can skip them), but then I find that I’m so outraged that I have to postpone said launch to . . . rant.

Big Government Is Everyone’s Parent . . . Including Your Child’s

Oops, did I say, “your”?  Scratch that.  “Your” kids are not yours, you big silly.  They belong to the community, to the collective!  Yep, that’s what they actually believe:

h/t Newsbusters via Gateway Pundit

You didn’t build that taken to a whole new, but completely and logically-linear, level.  If you didn’t build your business, then your kids are not your own.  How do we get there? Simple:  You didn’t succeed because of you, you did it because of teachers, roads, and other public workers/works/loans/etc.  Your business–indeed your money, thus, “belongs” to the state, for without the state, it would not exist.  Your own role is dismissed as inconsequential because anyone can get lucky in business (so says our fearless Dear Leader), anyone can do what you did because it was really done by the community, the collective, the village.  Likewise, you, yourself, are a subject of and product of the state, anything you produce–be it a business, profit, or a child–belongs to the state.  Simple, right?  No man, woman, or child is an island, and the collectivist bell tolls for thee.  And thine.

This is the frightening direction that rabid collectivism takes.  Always.  Stalin, Hitler, Mao . . .  all laid claim to the children in the name of the state.  As does Obama.  He’s already got his Alinsky “summer camps” going for our nation’s youth (they’ve been running non-stop since 2007, btw); he’s already working toward a youth “mandatory volunteerism” program (and has been doing so since at least 2009).  The next step is convincing parents (the kids, he believes, already understand that they belong to him–he enlists them to “convince” their parents of how wrong they truly are, after all).  And that begins with ads like the one above.

Where it ends . . . is up to us.

And so far, we are doing pretty much nothing when we aren’t busy telling ourselves that “it can’t happen here.”  It IS happening here.  And it is happening now.  What can we do about it?  That, I just don’t know, but it has to start with taking back our own children, fighting to ensure that our kids remain ours and not Obama’s minions in a collectivist fantasy that is doomed not only to failure but to much death and despair on the path to that failure.  How do I know that the state “owning” children leads to death and despair?  Because I read history.  Lots of it, all the time.

And without the doom and gloom, do we really want government responsible for our children?  I’m talking about a government that is so inept, so incompetent that it pays dead people social security and stimulus (the jokes tell themselves), sends unemployment checks to prisoners, can’t adhere to a budget (indeed, can’t even pass one for the past four years), and that resorts to intimidation and thuggery to get its way.

I have all of one (okay, maybe three, if you count my unhinged commie stalkers) leftist readers, but I ask leftists in general:  What if government were conservative?  What if your child was being forced to learn the Bible in school or to pledge allegiance to the flag and to the republic for which it stands?  What if your child was deemed the ward, essentially, of a conservative state; taken from you in all but name and forced to read the founders, to learn about freedom and capitalism as positives, taught that America is exceptional and great?  What if your child was told by state authority that abortion is wrong, that being intolerant (yes, even of those whom you deem intolerant) and that hate (yes, even hating those you think are “haters”) is wrong?  Would you be so gung-ho for statism then?  Or is it only your own brand of oppression and propaganda that is acceptable?

See, as a constitutional conservative, I have an answer for that: I don’t want the nation’s children to “belong” to any collective, be that leftist or right-wing.  Can leftists say that?

Quite obviously not.

As conservatives, we often imagine that leftists are “for” big government, but we forget that the only government they worship (and it is a form of mindless, fawning worship, of slavish devotion to their “Lord and Savior”) is leftist government: Totalitarian.  As in, we know what is best for everyone, we work for the “The Greater Good” so you don’t have to, government.  Themselves like children, they seek and need a strict parent, one who will tell them how much soda they can consume and when/how to “get moving,” and that parent, for them, is leftist government.  They crave a Big Daddy–ironically, they mock, hate, even fear, people who believe in God–a Big Daddy who will tell them what to eat, read, think, say, believe, and do . . . all while handing them apparently unlimited goodies from some magical “Obama stash.” Obama, [or insert any regressive "leader"], is the one, true God, and the one to whom they gladly hand over their own liberty, their own minds, their everything, including, of course, their children.

It would be sad if it weren’t so dangerous to our country, our children, and our souls.

16 thoughts on “Big Government Is Everyone’s Parent . . . Including Your Child’s

    • How is homeschooling going? Have you developed a network of other homeschooling moms/dads? I’ve been toying for years now of getting rid of cable, and I’m getting closer. I hardly ever watch television, but I do like to check in on news without having to boot the computer. I’ll get there. It is a goal.

  1. “We can’t control you … your children will then be the collective’s … Ours.” If you can’t raise your children to be good liberals, by golly they can … AND WILL!

    Who said our schools aren’t in trouble? Why just listen to this openly communist in the video. The libs have our schools right on schedule.

    • They are becoming much more open about their agenda, obviously. And conservatives still seem to think that it’s not happening or that it will stop of its own accord. Then again, what can we do besides work to get constitutional conservatives elected . . . or at least not full-blown commies. Yes, I’m still PO’d about the last presidential election. This ad would never have been made if Romney were president. They’d be too busy bashing his every word and move. That would have given us time to get our ducks in a row for 2014. Now, they are just full-steam ahead into communism as fast as they can. It sickens me.

  2. Is the rabid progressive from MSNBC really concerned about the children? Or does she merely offer them up as an excuse for advocating a bigger, fatter public education system that’s long been an ally of the radical left. Public education isn’t just an indoctrination tool. Its unions provide revenue streams and worker bees for progressive Democratic Party politics.

    • Heyas Doug! No, she is not concerned with the children; no regressive is ever concerned about what they use, the pawns they manipulate, to get their way. They are only concerned with achieving their regressive “utopia” in which every citizen is a subject of, beholden for everything to, the state.

      And oh, yes, there is no doubt at all that public ed, with its gov’t and union interests, is at the heart of this particular plea. It won’t be long before we start hearing that home schooling needs to be abolished . . . for the children. It’s already happening in several countries in Europe and will soon start here, too.

  3. If you really want to be scared, check out California’s public school system. It’s one of the most expensive and least effective according to standardized testing (and other indicators). Brilliant stuff out there.

    I remember when I was a kid in K – 6th in SoCal we used to have these political seminars occasionally: sharing food with others because the starving in Africa was the cause du jour at the time, and the “let’s all be a racial minority for a day” thing– something so insulting it kind of leaves me speechless now that I look back at it. I suppose there’s some hope to be found in the sheer idiocy and incompetence of the programs. It didn’t do a real good job of converting me.

    As far as MSNBC hosts go, they only preach to the choir– which is a handful of people.

    • I’m not surprised that CA has one of the most expensive and ineffective public school systems. Not surprised at all. It takes time to teach kids about gay penguins, masturbation, proper condom placement, sit-ins and other protests, writing protest signs, learning about Sharia, and pretending to be a racial minority for a day. There’s no time left to teach anything of actual value with all the regressive nonsense they cram into a school day. I must be older than you–or perhaps Floridian schools weren’t then infested with this nonsense because I never had to endure anything so ridiculous or insulting.

      Your point about your not being affected by the programs mirrors my own (and your) experience in higher ed–even though I was subjected to a barrage of crazed leftist lunacy, it never changed what I actually thought. But it did affect the way I taught (at least at first, heh), especially all that “feminist” nonsense. We, though, are clearly the exception, not the rule. When we taught American exceptionalism, etc. it clearly didn’t affect everyone as it did me or we wouldn’t be where we are today. The goal isn’t and doesn’t need to be 100%. They can win–are winning–with, say, 60% (and it’s probably a lot higher than that). Granted, people who actually identify with regressives/far left ideology still account for only about 10% of voters, but even that doesn’t matter. Too many people are herded to vote “Democrat” (i.e. communist) and never question it at all.

      • Point taken, but I still don’t believe it’s all that effective in getting people to think a certain way. It’s more of a method of throwing out misinformation and then using these “facts” to push forward some kind of agenda– and if some of their methodology actually sticks and pushes kids into the Leftist fold, well that’s a bonus for them.

        Really it seems more about getting students to not think critically and to think passively– again a hallmark of Marxism. You can’t have people thinking for themselves and rocking the boat. Just ask Mao.

  4. What kind of university professor refers to her students (most probably in the age 18 to 25 demo) as “children”?

    From her blog:

    “When the flood of vitriolic responses to the ad began, my first reaction was relief. I had spent the entire day grading papers and was relieved that since these children were not my responsibility, I could simply mail the students’ papers to their moms and dads to grade! But of course, that is a ridiculous notion. As a teacher, I have unique responsibilities to the students in my classroom at Tulane University, and I embrace those responsibilities.”

    http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/04/09/why-caring-for-children-is-not-just-a-parents-job/

    Even for a “progressive,” this elitist is just plain strange.

    • The kind who believes that “children” to the age of 26 should be on their parents’ health insurance and that “adults” aged 12 and above should have free and unrestricted access to abortions.

  5. Pingback: DANILE GREENFIELD: THE WEEK THAT WAS PART 2 | RUTHFULLY YOURS

  6. Pingback: Daniel Greenfield article: Friday Afternoon Roundup – Words Don’t Matter… | Jericho777's Blog

What say you?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s