Archive for January 19, 2011

Fresh off of yesterday’s 60’s post we have this gem via Robert Stacy McCain concerning a young lady that I’ve never heard of:

“My mom left me at home when I was 14 with a credit card and a box of condoms and the keys to the car and said, ‘Don’t get pregnant and don’t drink and drive'” she explained. “I had to be responsible for myself.”

Think about that for a moment. Here is your 14-year-old daughter and your parenting consists of negative rules that are in effect positive permissions as follows:

  • Spend what you want
  • Have sex with whatever guy you want
  • Drive where you want to go
  • Drink what you want

This is what we call in the Italian Catholic world the “Parenting is such a drag and I don’t want to do it.” method.

I’m sure this young lady does well financially but I’ve got to tell you I really would be mortified if either of my sons brought this young lady home. It’s certainly possible that she might rise above that nonsense but I think I’d be very worried about her raising my grandchildren.

We are not rich, my 17 year old son doesn’t have his permit yet (as his grades don’t yet warrant it but this report card might change that) My 18 year old son was given a copy of my credit card and writes me a check each month for what he spends. My boys have the combination of the very Catholic influences of my now 86 year old mother (who retired when they were 1 and 3 perfect timing for me) and my three basic rules that I’ve been drilling them with since before they were teens:

  • No Booze
  • No Drugs
  • No Sex

Whenever I would leave the house I would say: “What are the rules?” I’ve asked them this question in front of their friends. They know these rules. And they choose and keep their friends accordingly. Kids coming into this house KNOW that if I find drugs with them they are out and the cops are called.

Answer me this: I don’t know if they will ever make anything near what that young lady makes and there is no guarantee that they will turn out in better shape in the long run that this woman, but tell me. Which ones do you want parenting your grandchildren?

If you are going to be a parent BE A PARENT, raise your children and take charge.

You will find it the most rewarding thing you do.

The myth that “you can’t stop your kids from doing X” is just that, a myth. It’s an excuse to not parent. Where would the Jets be this week if they bought the “You can’t stop Brady” stuff? Those Judeo-Christian values and rules were rejected by the 60’s generation had the expected result.

In only two generations the social ills that had been dodged to a great extent are now common.

All of this has happened in my lifetime. If you are 60 or above you have seen this change in front of you. Can you honestly say this cultural change was worth it?

In the long run the right thing is usually the smart thing. If you don’t want to do something because it is “right” according to people you don’t like, then do it because it is smart.

Hey lets have national heathcare here too!

Posted: January 19, 2011 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: , ,

This story from London was bad enough:

Officials from the South London NHS Trust have apologised to the family of Derek Sauter, who later died in hospital of pneumonia.

The 60-year-old did not receive a “proper and professional standard of care” when he was admitted with a chest infection in June 2008.

A formal investigation is being conducted into his death, after it was found his oxygen levels went unchecked for 11 hours and were 35% lower than recommended.

But this in comments was particularly interesting:

The problem was, when I noted what they did wrong, my boss quickly got with me to tell me that the hospitals do not like change on their reports. Basically, I found that the hospitals would break the contract with my employer if I gave them bad scores…and get another third party to cover their ass. Basically my job was fake, and I had to give out fake scores so I quit. The things I saw were unimaginable. How educated doctors and nurses could act that way is unbelievable.

This is just a blog comment and one would need to investigate to find how reliable this is, but consider. If a company worried about its bottom line is willing to play with data (and I’m sure our friends on the left would certainly concede that possibility) imagine how much more an inspector for a government agency empowered to direct millions of dollars of taxpayer funds or to affect the political future of someone who votes on said appropriations?

Repeat that nationwide and you get the picture.

…don’t worry Susanna Fleetwood has the one stop post on the subject titled 4 Reasons Why the MSM Botched the Tucson Massacre, and Why they Owe the Victims and Sarah Palin an Apology.

You see, a lot of liberals have good intentions. They think that if they ban Happy Meals, then there won’t be anymore obese children. However, what they don’t realize (and what I learned on my pediatrics rotation in medical school) is that most obese children have obese parents, and consume the majority of their fatty foods at home.

Liberals also think that if they ban guns, then crime will automatically go down. However, what they don’t realize is that criminals still will find a way to get guns, and then 76 year old men will become defenseless prey to street gangs.

So therefore, it’s only natural for liberals to also think that if they can control what people, say, watch or listen to, then that will somehow stop paranoid schizophrenics from going on murder sprees.

That’s from reason #2 on the botched coverage but check out the entire essay and particularly the clip from the daily show about Happy Meals in San Francisco.

She also echos Micky Kaus’ statement concerning “meanness”.

I think that this has hurt the media and the far left long term. I also think that the left and the media deep down believes that Sarah Palin DOES have a chance to either become president or to influence the direction of the country for years. This, more than anything else is why the attacks never cease.

Update: Of course we could be all wrong and (via Glenn) it could have happened like this.

…in an attempt to stop Obamacare. In a broadcast by 73wire with Stacy McCain and Ali Akbar (Brown’s new media guy) we talked about the healthcare bill and there was an interesting exchange. I stressed how important this election was because it was necessary to stop obamacare BEFORE it was passed prompting the following:

Ali: “And if it does pass, we will repeal it!”

DaTechGuy: “No we won’t.”

It was very telling that Ali (who is a really smart young man) didn’t argue the point with me and changed the subject.

Well Scott won, but the democrats realizing that the only chance to get the bill passed now was for the house to pass the version that had already gone through the senate did so avoiding both a conference and the chance of a filibuster.

So the repeal bill is now coming up and we will find out who was right. I think Ali knows the its very hard to repeal a law once passed. He knows businesses and government have already adjusted their plans based on it. A lot of favors were done for a lot of people in that bill and those lobbyists who had those favors inserted want them preserved. Most importantly as a rule it’s easier to stop something than to do something in congress. A determined minority and frustrate the majority every time.

Yet there are real reasons to think he might be right. The left and the media are declaring that effort dead and phony but are doing their best to discourage this vote. If my original thought was right why would they bother? After all the senate is still a majority democratic institution. Very little chance on any change there is there?

The dirty little secret is until the house passes this bill the senate doesn’t have to even pretend to care, but once it IS passed than it is before the Senate. There are quite a few democratic senators who are in a tough spot. They either ran against Obamacare (WV) live in states where it is unpopular (MO) or face uphill reelection fights (Va). The retirement announcement of Kent Conrad in ND actually hurts the repeal effort because he can now vote to preserve it while the democrat who does run in his state can claim opposition.

However there is another factor involved. Every single democratic senator was the deciding vote to the passage of Obamacare this means that every vulnerable senator on the democratic side has that vote hanging around their neck. Those senators desperate to retain their seats and the power and privileges thereof will not want to run on Obamacare. A repeal vote would give them a chance to vote against it saying they’ve “reconsidered”.

Harry Reid might, in order to increase the chance of holding his senate majority allow a vote. If a democrat filibuster blocks it then vulnerable dems can clam they voted against said filibuster and if he allows it to reach the floor he can either “Fishbait Miller” the vote (let the three most vulnerable dems vote against it) or allow it to pass and let the president veto it.

This is the position that the White House least wants to be in. The president casting a very prominent vote to preserve a law that he pushed for against popular opinion. This would be a great gift to Republicans going into 2012 and represents (along with the rising price of gas and oil and high unemployment) the best chance for this president to lose re-election.

This is the importance of the house vote. It turns 2012 into a referendum on Obamacare. The closer these actions come to election day 2012 the worse the situation gets for democrats. The second best move for them would be to allow a Senate vote ASAP and get this whole thing over with early. The best option for democrats? That I’m not saying until the day after the presidential election.

Obamacare will not be repealed before the 2012 election but this vote might be the first step to insuring its repeal with a new person in the White House.