Mandatory Preschool / Day Care

So it's not enough that Hillary wants to force you at gunpoint to buy health care "insurance" from Uncle, even though you are a millionaire who is healthy as a horse.

No, she also wants to force you to put your kid in a day (don't) care center. Let's not kid ourselves here. We're not talking about pre-kindergarten, we're talking about babysitting. A 4 year old who has spent the first 3 years in day-care is going to be about as functional as a home-kept (actually day (do) care) 2 year old.

Yes every kid is different. My 4 year old is reading and my 5 year old is reading at about 2nd grade. I'm sure your snowflake is a genious as well. But I have also seen day-care centers in action, first-hand. I have heard reports of 3 year-olds in diapers in walkers, unable to speak. And we're going to put these kids in school? No, friends, pre-k for average 4 year-olds is day-care. 4 year-olds are barely kept in control by *some* parents. How do you expect some "teacher" to get a whole classroom full of babies to behave for classes all day? Not.

Nevermind all the stories of kids neglected to the point of serious injury and death. How many times have you heard about a kid left in the day-care bus and forgotten, broiled alive in the summer sun? My personal favorite was a kid left outside on the playground. Not even a toddler, a very baby. On the blacktop. In the summer. Without skin on hands and knees after crawling on the boiling-hot macadam, screaming in pain, unheard by the jerks inside who neglected to get a head-count after recess. Yeah, let my kids at 'em. Sure, your "learning center" is different. Right. Try to at least act like you care when you hear about the next kid killed or seriously injured by not-parents, when one of the parents could have foregone some "stuff" and stayed home for a few years.

Yes, yes, some people have circumstances that require the kid to be in day-care. Most don't and I'm not even going to argue with you about it. About 90% of the families with babies in day-care just want to unload the little screamers and keep working so they can have a bigger plasma TV or that next vacation. I can hear them whining already and it falls on deaf ears.

YOU can care for your children better than a day-care center can. If you had a choice, would you rather spend YOUR first 4 years with Mommy, Nanny, or Day-care worker?

THEN WHY THE **** ARE YOUR KIDS IN DAY-CARE! You only get one shot at rearing them and you're opting out. It's only a few years of sacrifice, get over yourself already.

Hillary's a communist folks. Or a socialist (even the communists have trouble keeping their name stright). She thinks your children belong to the government, or else she wouldn't have the audacity to call for them to be cared for by someone other than you.

If her "mandatory" 4 pre-k is the same kind of "mandatory" as her health care, I'm going to say it looks like she wants to steal your children from you. My wife is happy at home, training our children to be Good People. We'd rather not show them the other uses of bananas until they are old enough to understand what the banana represents, thanks. We'll teach them about having 2 mommies when they can understand that it's not the way to be 'normal'. We'll also keep them several years ahead of their peers by training them at home, or in a private school, instead of a government indoctrination center.

Why can't I vote for Duncan Hunter?

Because we don't have a national primary election.

This is a problem with both the major political parties.

When a canditate in Chicago can get his message to the electorate in Miami instantlyWhen candidates no longer need to take trains on whistlestop tours of the United StatesWhen the "later" primary dates are completely superfluous in races that end up not so closeWhen voters tend to go for a certain candidate because they have "momentum" after a caucus that has nothing to do with anything and then the other candidate(s) lose support even though they could have wonWhen highly credible reports arise of certain candidates encouraging college students to go to another state to vote in a Caucus

We need a national primary election date for each party. Preferably, for all parties.


I was for Hunter, then I was for Thompson, Then I was for Giuliani. Now I am stuck with McCain or a socialist 'democrat', or a wasted vote in the Presidential election this November. And by the way, I haven't had a chance to say which candidate I prefer. Texas' primary is in a few days.

How is this fair, exactly?

Why does a corn farmer in Iowa determine who will be on my Texas primary ballot?

I call on the people to influence the national party leadership to reform this outdated and broken system. Let them make rules if they like, to limit or promote equal amounts of money for pre-primary advertisements (not the Federal government, the party government) to allow non-super-rich candidates a chance to make themselves known. Let there be a 6 or 12 months informing period so that the voters can intelligently select a candidate to go for on primary day, then

let there be A DAY when everybody votes for their candidates.

non-residents couldn't go across that many state lines to voteCandidates wouldn't lose support due to a loss of "momentum"Candidates could use the rest of the time till the election getting their stuff together against the other parties' nominees

And people wouldn't come out of their caves sometime in the end of February and be surprised to learn that the candidates have been selected before several scores of millions of voters have even had a chance to cast a ballot for or against anybody.

For crying out loud already.

A guy shoots an apparently random 8 people in los angeles. Man, that sort of thing should be illegal.

Oh wait.

Maybe they should do something to prevent people from getting guns in california.

Oh, wait.

Maybe then they shoud do something to get rid of violent offenders, to deter those who would contemplate such actions.

Hm. They don't seem to like to do that.

Oh well. Maybe we should just abandon California then.

I sure left as soon as I could once the Navy let me go.

Well maybe you should stay. Crime isn't that bad after all. The taxes are low, environmental regulations aren't onerous and the government is very easy to work with.

Oh wait.

Re: The Photo of Obama the Evil Black African Muslim:

So Barack Hussein Obabma went to Africa and dressed like an African. So did Both Bushes and at least one notable Clinton and IIRC a Reagan. When in Rome. Everybody is saying it's an attempt at a smear from Hillary's campaign, playing the race and mooslim cards.

Hold on there.

It seems to me that this could be a net positive for Obama. He gets sympathies from people who can actually think about the context of the photo. Also, and more importantly, he has people buzzing about a non-issue. This of course means that nobody is buzzing about the more substantial reasons to be unhappy about Obama as a potential presidential candidate.

Sure somebody in the Clinton camp probably dug this up and tossed it out. Maybe even she didn't know about it in advance. I'm just saying, if we never find out who and why exactly the image came out, it could as easily be from the Obama campaign.

Just sayin', that's all.

Calling Al Gore

. . . have you noticed how the arctic is is back?

t3h global warming is R34L!!!!!1!

(if you believe there was at least one ice age in the past)

Anthropogenic, not so much.

According to this letter from the Secretary of the Interior, rule changes are under way to allow folks to carry weapons in National Parks Services and U.S. Fish & Wildlife lands.

Good.

The Secretary says that times laws have changed and the new rules should be ready for public comment by April 30. This is progress folks but don't miss one important thing:

It took more than half of the Senators and a lot of public pressure to even get them this far. When the rules come out,

comment.

Don't slack off when you see things starting to swing the right way.

A Million Schoolbooks for Liberia . . . Because?

President Bush has gone to Africa to make nice with the good people of Liberia. Fine.

We have given them most of a billion-with-a-B dollars to prevent them falling back into bloody strife. Okay, maybe I can go for that.

And now we're apparently going to buy a million schoolbooks for the Liberian skulls full of mush, as well as pay for 10,000 desks for the same. Hold on there.

I'm for kids going to school. I'm for the local economy making the furniture. I'm very much in favor of having textbooks in schools. But why is it my responsibility to pay so a kid in Liberia has a schoolbook? What's the big deal, it's only a few million dollars, right?

A few million here, a few million there, pretty soon you're talking about real money.

Surely this is a local concern. As long as the teachers have a chalkboard and a piece of chalk, they can teach. Make the kids pay attention and expect results and the kids will learn. They don't need textbooks at our expense. The job of educating children in Liberia falls to the parents and government of Liberia. Not me.

Get out of my pocketbook, thanks.

Heartless? No. Make the people stand on their own feet. Start with the children.

Disclaimer that would not have been necessary 50 years ago:

Nothing on this blog is intended to be hateful. If you see it and think you are seeing something hateful, you are reading it wrong or taking the wrong meaning. Just because I may disagree with and denigrate you, does not mean I hate you. It just means you are wrong.

If you perceive a threat of violence, your perception is wrong. You may be mistaking a warning or a promise for a threat.

Some of the things discussed may be dangerous. Do not attempt to do the things I do.

If you think I told you to do something illegal, you are reading it wrong. Always obey the law.

This disclaimer is subject to change at any time without notice.