Senator Wants To Help Children By Relieving Parents Of Their Duties
from the the-nanny-state dept
Children must pay a lot in taxes and have excellent lobbyists because there’s no end to the parade of politicians looking out for them. And if you thought that it was just Republicans who got outraged over indecency on TV and videogames, think again. Hillary Clinton intends to seek federal funding to study the effects that video games and “media saturation” have on youth. Clinton claims that parents need help in this area, though it seems pretty easy to avoid paying the $500 it costs for a new game console. If the result of these studies were simply that parents should control their kids habits more that might be okay, but in reality they’re likely to bolster calls for more regulation. Then, the parents can rest comfortably knowing that the government has taken care of everything, and that they needn’t bother teaching their children about responsible videogame play, television watching or internet use. Strangely, that doesn’t sound very “pro-family”.
Comments on “Senator Wants To Help Children By Relieving Parents Of Their Duties”
Another vast right wing conspiracy?
You would have thought that Senator Clinton would have learned her lesson from the Universal Healthcare fiasco.
Ever see how successful government housing works?
I can’t begin to tell you how thrilled I am that my tax dollars are going to be spent on such an important project.
After all it takes a village to raise a child. The parents have nothing to do with it.
I just wish “the village” didn’t have to spend millions of dollars on a project which will reinforce the opinions of those who believe video games are the cause of certain behaviors while the other side will claim the government project was flawed or biased.
Net effect: A big fat zero.
Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
Perhaps Hillary should return home. I heard her village is missing their idiot.
Re: Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
I laughed so hard a little pee came out!!!
Re: Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
Do you often hear weird things?
Re: Re: Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
Weird as in voices? or just music?
Re: Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
oh yeah. Talk about an idiot, Bush ,the brain with the C average . At least Hillary has a brain and can think and speak in complete sentences. Unlike a President I know. Even 9th grade honor students in High school refer to him as the President with the C average in school . What a great way to teach our future leaders (our children now) to study and work extremely hard to get great grades , or maybe dont work hard in school and grow up to be ,a what, President…….
Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
You can always tell who the spoiled brat suburban, too young to know what time it is types are by inane comments like this. If you really knew where that “it takes a village” thing comes from, you would know that passing down knowledge of the tribal traditions is primarily the responsiblity of the child’s parents, but the village acknowledges its responsiblity, not to assume the parent’s role, but to augment it.
What’s even funnier is that these same people (like the mental giant who originally posted this morceau de merde) will look down their noses at stay at home moms who “lack ambition” or “don’t contribute to society” or “are weak willed women being subservient to male opression”. If they have kids, most of lamebrains agreeing with this joker probably spend, MAYBE 30 hours PER WEEK with their children and that’s assuming that they’re not being super-yuppie and working more than 45 hours per week. So who’s raising the kids of every uber-yuppie household in America? It’s the day-care center and probably the illegal immigrant nanny, but you can bet in all likelihood that the jackass that posted this is not raising his own kids, and if he isn’t then hopefully we can prevent him from further contaminating the gene pool
Re: Re: Another vast right wing conspiracy?
Wow! You’d think that someone who knows what a “morceau de merde” is would recognize sarcasm.
I’ll use smaller words and eliminate the sarcasm. My point was that this study will not solve anything. It’s a waste of time and money better spent. (I vote for ways to antagonize the French.) Senator Clinton is going for the cheap political points. Her book was also on par with cheap political points. Senator Clinton isn’t exactly known as the “stay at home” Mom who baked cookies. I think her disdain for stay at home Moms who baked cookies was made clear. More power to her. She has a right to her opinion and run her family in the way she sees fit.
How about an analogy (sorry I don’t know the French word for analogy): Would you let your children play in traffic? Then you shouldn’t let your children be on the Internet or play video games or watch TV without supervision. I do not need a government study to tell me that playing in traffic is dangerous (but I’m sure there is one out there).
Mangez Moi, my mother was a teacher but only once myself and my two brothers were in school because …wait for it: that way she would be home when we were. We were a one income family and spoiled isn’t exactly how you would describe us. (“Brats” maybe, but not spoiled.)
My wife and I had a serious discussion when we found out we were “enceinte” (I looked that one up for you.) Who would stay home with the baby? It went something like this:
“My bursting flower of loveliness, what would you like to do once your maternity leave is up? Would you like to go back to work?”
“Why would I want some stranger to raise our child. Are you insane?”
“Mon femme trophée, that’s debatable. I know we always said that one of us would stay home to raise the children.”
“And you thought you would stay home? You are insane.”
End of discussion. I was happy to go back to work and she was and is happier than I’ve ever seen her raising our children (we have two now and would like one or two more). We see our friends and what they go through for day care. I’m not going to compare my children with others (it wouldn’t be fair), but I believe that the only people suited to raise children are the parents and I don’t need a government study to tell me that. My wife realizes that a video game or the television is not a substitute for her influence. We have one Television set and we do not own a video game consol. (Mainly because I would be playing it all hours of the night.) I realize that some families have no choice and I’m grateful for a thriving business that allows my wife to stay home with our kids. Will she go back to work once our kids have reached school age? I don’t know, I’m sure she’ll let me know. It is my intention to earn enough that she can stay at home if she chooses. It’s hard work taking care of our kids, house and yes, she takes care of me as well. She may want to take a break and only work 40 hours a week at a job.
Re: Re: Re: ... and another thing
I’ll try to keep this brief. At least brief for me.
I meant to comment on this but got sidetracked. I did read most of Senator Clinton’s book. Aside from the fact that most of it was unremarkable, there was a lot I agreed with – it’s not just parents, but grandparents, pastors, ect.(nothing new there.) However, Senator Clinton is taking the same tack as with her Universal Health Care plan. The “village” in this case is the Federal Government. I can’t remember much from the book, but I do remember this part thanks to Mangez Moi: She was in favor of a Universal Pre-school program for children as young as three, similar to the system used in France. Big Brother is now Big Momma (my apologies to Martin Lawrence). Mangez Moi, do you want the Federal Government raising your kids?
Socialism is working so well for France right now. Can you imagine trying to pay for such a program? Can you imagine the type of job the government would do?
Why is it that Senator Clinton’s name is always associated with the world “universal” when it comes to a government program?
Clinton & Gore together again?
Maybe the Senator from New York can hook up with Tipper Gore to also study the effect that music lyrics have on children?
Money spent: Millions of taxpayer dollars
Net effect: A warning label on “Media Distribution Devices” and Video Game Consols:
“Warning: Watching or playing this device may result in damage to you and your childs brain. Please limit your exposure to less than six hours a day. For this and other important messages on how to raise your child, please call 1-800-it takes a village or visit our website: http://www.ittakesavillage.gov“
Problem solved!
I need parenting help.
I totally agree Moneyguy, there’s no way this study will come to any conclusion other than videogames + children = bad. How about a study that studies the increase in violence by youth, the degradation of moral values in America, the disintegration of education in correlation with the rise of the feminist movement.
Re: I need parenting help.
“there’s no way this study will come to any conclusion other than videogames + children = bad”
Why do you think this? Is it, perhaps, because you feel this is true?
I’ve seen other studies like this result in “we have found no evidence that X causes Y.”
I’m not saying it WILL come ot that conclusion. I’m just saying it’s possible. Just being logical.
Now, before you respond, I must ask that you step away from the cynicism button…slowly…
Re: Re: I need parenting help.
The first questions to ponder are who requested
the study, who funded it, who has something
to gain or lose depending on the findings?
When you answer those questions I believe
concluding the study will find “videogames +
children = bad” is not cynical but most reasonable.
Being a lawyer and a politician she would never
ask for a study unless she was assured of the findings.
Re: Re: I need parenting help.
Th emore statistics you learn the more you realize that you can easily make the data say whatever the hell you want it to. Have you ever noticed an s]astoundingly high correlation between studies showing some seemingly useful data and the sponsoring company just happens to be in that line of business. Don’t let off your cynicism bitton too quick.
Why waste our time/money on a study like this?
I’m getting a wee bit tired of people bending over backwards to help parents avoid the parental role they’re supposed to play in their children’s lives. I was horrified by a commercial for Dish Network which was advertising it’s Dish Family plan. The mother in the commercial says that “With Dish Family, we don’t have to monitor what our children watch because we know that they’re watching the shows they love on channels we trust.”
Funny how the first channel listed in the commercial of available channels is Fox News…not exactly a channel I’d want my children watching.
Why do so many parents (allegedly) want to pass the buck and have everyone else raise their kids? Instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on a pointless study, why don’t we find better ways to spend it?
Re: Why waste our time/money on a study like this?
Has anyone noticed that on the DISHFamily commercial the teacher in the commercial has her blouse unbuttoned and you can actually see her black bra in full view? How wholesome is that?
Re: Re: Why waste our time/money on a study like t
I cant believe no one else noticed it, including the editor
Personaly I think that the government should help a lot more than they are. Take away nearly all of the parent’s abilities to raise the kids.
In case you haven’t noticed the vast majority of parents are doing a rahter horrible job of it. Why not let someone else try?
Re: Re:
“Why not let someone else try?”
Ever see the stats on the War on Drugs, the War on Terrorism, the War on Crime, the War on Homelessness, the War on Poverty, among many other wars? The War on Horrible Parenting will be lost even worse than those and likely contribute to all the above wars. No thanks.
And “the vast majority” aren’t doing a horrible job of raising their kids..that’s a vast overstatement. There are some that are doing a horrible job but not nearly as many as you are trying to imply.
What we need is a video game czar. I volunteer.
They don't -want- us raising them
The government doesn’t -want- us wasting time at home raising our children. That time is more wisely spent at work putting in hours and hours of overtime so we can earn the highest possible income and pay the maximum amount of tax.
Is there nothing else we can spend money on?
Is there nothing else we can spend money on? I understand the government has a huge surplus of cash (now that we got rid of that huge deficit) but if I think there is too much indecency on TV or in a videogame then I pull my parenting rank and I don’t allow my child to see these things, I don’t need the government to tell me what is appropriate and what is not.
As a father I understand just how difficult it sometimes is to avoid the “indecency on TV and videogames,” but as a father it is MY responsibility to monitor the effects TV, internet, and videogames have on my child, not the government. Or do we now live in China???
Feminist movement means mothers can work.
Economy grows and lifestyles change.
Dual income becomes the norm to be able to support a family.
Moms aren’t home as much with children.
When current parents were children, schools could dicipline, therefore the assumption is made that schools can effectively teach right and wrong.
The fact is that schools don’t dicipline (or can’t), children are less supervised with more resources available than ever (100’s of cable channels, internet, e-games, txt messaging, cell phones), and parents play a lesser role in the development of their children.
Bottom line – parents should be parents first, or don’t have children
the reason that the study will come to the vidogames+children = bad conclusion, is due to the people behind the study, not the fact that there is a study in and of itself.
If it were being pushed by a university research department or something then I’d say maybe you’re right, however, since this one is being pushed by Senator Clinton, I have to agree that I see no way that this could come to any other conclusion, thus being a complete waste of taxpayer dollars.
Ahh yes
Excess regulations and passing the buck… so much easier than parenting…..
"We have found no evidence ..."?
Back in the Nixon days, the government spent considerable time and money studying marijuana. It concluded that the drug was no big deal (and less harmful than alcohol). The administration simply refused to believe what the scientists said and escalated the war on drugs. In other words, the government will do what it wants in spite of the evidence (current administration is a perfect case in point).
Unfortunately the sad truth is too many parents don’t parent. Given their lack of interest and involvement, makes you wonder why they had kids. Social pressure? Image?
They let their children do things they shouldn’t rather than be the only parent who doesn’t (according to their children).
The concept of age appropriate activies seems to be beyond the comprehesion of many parents.
There are a lot of things wrong, but legislation isn’t going to solve the problem.
Parenting Help
The problem is “bottom line” – the parents. YOU, not the government, your neighbors, community, church, or anyone else are responsible for how YOUR children are being raised. You’re supposed to bring your children up and teach them the common sense (what’s right and wrong), responsibilities, how to interact with others, the “LIFE SKILLS” etc that are necessary as they grow up. It’s not the games they play, TV they watch or people they associate with. If you don’t instill in them the good qualities that all parents should be teaching – then you are at fault. Stop trying to pass the buck and blame others for your ineptitude – and raise your damn children.
Whole new approach. Put a small tax on the sixty billion dollar game industrys profits. Say 2%, put that into creating games that get your serabellum some exercise.
Good point Jezsik, one thing though. The AMA research arm did a study between 2001-2002 at the request of Bush, when it came to the same conclusions the study was, well I guess that it got lost with the real reports on WMD.
Re: Solution=another tax
No. Just… no.
Government says:
Spanking your child = physical abuse
Raising your voice = mental abuse
Afterall, they’re only little people.
Oprah’s audience say:
Spanking your child = I told you once already, but you didn’t listen.
Raising your voice = Next step is spanking.
Afterall, they’re only little people and need guidance.
Re: Bravo
My mother had what I called “the look of Death”. If I was misbehaving she would give me that look… and it was enough. Why? Because I knew that swift and painful retribution was near at hand if I did not shape up and quickly.
Spanking was an option, but I knew that it was possible – with that look it was rarely necessary.
I don’t see that often these days, but when I do, I like to give a word of encouragement to the parent for doing it right. On more than one occasion I have backed up a parent who was spanking a misbehaving child (reasonably, IMO) when someone else was threatening to report them.
Too many parents let their children get away with murder when they are small and “cute”. When they are grown it is too late.
There is already no argument in the social psychlogical community over the effects of media – TV/movie – violence on children, it does cause a tendency towards real-life violence. The good news is that for the most part this can be cognitively overcome.
That being said, there is realtively little research on the effect of video-game violence on children… I see nothing wrong with this, yeah, it MIGHT lead to something, then again, it might NOT lead to anything… We simply don’t know yet. Wait for the research results, THEN get angry.
Perhaps spending more on education would be more benificial as educated individuals will be less likely to engage in violence.
Getting upset about sex is stupider than getting upset about violence. May as well declare United States a Christian State.
For a good argument on why video games are good for your mind and actually develope problem solving and complex sstem analysis abilities, check out the book “Everything Bad Is Good For You”.
Also, please realize that Clinton is doing this for political power, not because she actually thinks that she can do any good on this crusade.
and this person is the democratic frontrunner for 2008? my retarded cousin billy could get 60% of the popular vote running against that idiot. when is the democratic party going to learn that net-net, hillary is dead weight…
Mandatory condom use.
http://www.trojancondoms.com/freestuff/product/