Opinions?

POSTED BY: Wulfenstar
UPDATED: Friday, August 14, 2009 01:42
VIEWED: 11555
PAGE 2 of 2

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2

FREMDFIRMA

Tuesday, August 11, 2009 10:36 PM

Also, regarding this - while I am okay with offering parenting training, and grudgingly okay with payin for it via my tax dollars, especially given how much it saves at the other end when these kids don't wind up cycled through our justice and correctional systems, which when you think about it, is a very high return on a comparatively small investment - there's a LIMIT to the level of interference I would be willing to tolerate, especially in light of the FLDS fiasco and just where that can go.

And TRUST ME ON THIS - it can go some damn scary places.

This is an excerpt from John Ringo's "The Road to Damascus" involving POPPAs use of such things to indoctrinate the population, which ended disastrously - I *highly* recommend the book, once again.
http://www.webscription.net/chapters/0743471873/0743471873.htm?blurb

Quote:
"What's up?" Simon asked, keeping his voice carefully devoid of negative emotion.
"This." She handed over a printout of the letter.
Jaw muscles flexed when he reached the contents of paragraph two: Pursuant to section 29713 of the Childhood Protection Act, stipulating childcare arrangements for dependent children with both parents drawing paychecks, you are hereby notified of the requirement to remand your daughter, Yalena Khrustinova, for federally mandated daycare, to begin no more than three business days after receipt of this notification. You will enroll your daughter in the federal daycare center established on Nineveh Base before April 30th or face criminal prosecution for violation of the Children's Rights provisions of the Childhood Protection Act. Prosecution will immediately result in full termination of parental rights and Yalena Khrustinova will be remanded for permanent relocation to a federally mandated foster care program.
Pursuant to statute 29714 of the Childhood Protection Act, in-home child welfare inspections will commence one week from the date of Yalena Khrustinova's enrollment, to ensure that she is being provided with the federally mandated level of financial and emotional support necessary to her welfare. We look forward to caring for your child.
Have a nice day.
Simon looked up from the letter, met Kafari's eyes. He was still as death for a space of seven pounding heartbeats. "They're serious."
"Yes."
Jaw muscles flexed again. "We have three days."
"To what? Ask the Concordiat to reassign you to Vishnu? Or Mali? Or somewhere else? We're trapped, Simon."

Scary, yes?

Ponder THIS.

Quote:
"It's outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

The bill says that the government agents, "well-trained and competent staff," would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."

http://www.creators.com/opinion/chuck-norris/dirty-secret-no-1-in-obam
acare.html

For the record, I consider Chuck Norris to be something of a jerk, but he's got a damned good point there.

While I *DO* realize, very much so, the need to do something about our healthcare system, whenever I look at the Obama administrations agenda, what I really see is POPPA, and that fekkin frightens me.

-Frem

PS. For the record, I am no fan of Ringo's other work, given his swift slide down from there into complete lunacy, but out of the mouth of madness, occasionally comes the real truth; something PN happens to be our living example of.

RUE

Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:01 PM

There is another way to change people - it involves a process so subtle and effective I'd rather not point out what it is, since I, in fact, am doing it.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:57 PM

Thanks Frem. While I may disagree with your conclusions, I appreciate your candor.

Maybe I was wrong. Maybe people like Rue, know how bad things are... but just want to cover it up since it doesn't fit within their agenda... lol

Or not. Who knows? Maybe twirling in blissful ignorance is fun? God knows I need a break with reality too... Telling the truth, showing the horror, can get pretty tiring.. Whats that they say about looking into the darkness and it starting to look back? lol

But...

Actually my purpose in posting this was to find out what people thought of it.

I figured most would call it racist, but that some might actually LEARN from it.

Maybe someone will actually see if the things stated in this article are true for themselves... and DO something about it.

Who knows?

Change (real change, the good kind, for the better, not like Obama has conned) can actually happen after you know the truth of things.

Once you have the truth, you can work to make things better.

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:19 AM

Or, ya know, you could just go around shooting anyone you don't agree with.

Right, Wulfie?

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 12:46 AM

WULF

You must learn to approach subjects as if you are addressing a black audience, or an audience of unknown racial makeup, and be on the lookout for any appearance of racism, because chances are you *are* addressing a black audience, since there are more than 9 americans on this forum.

Additionally, some people actually know people who are black, I know this may sound surprising, but it can and does happen. I was surprised recently when a rural redneck like myself announced to me that his wife is black. Having known his wife for several years, it never occurred to me that her very dark skin and strong african features made her 'black', I mean, she's a prominent local lawyer, now I have to wrap my head around the concept of "Black lawyer."

Almost too much for a white redneck brain.

Then, it got even worse. I overheard my neighbor mention that he was also black. Knowing the man for 15 years since meeting him at the local NAACP meeting, I was surprised to learn that he was black. Sure, I can see it now, by looking at him, but lots of local hicks have dark skin, and turn out to be from weird places like countries, some of them in Asia. Now I find myself wondering if the minister is black. I mean his skin is very dark, and he speaks in a sing-songy voice, and only recently moved here from his native Nigeria.

Now I'm beginning to think this black thing my be spreading. I had to run to the mirror to check and make sure that I was still a white guy. To my great relief, I was, but that was quickly followed by the disappointment that I appear to have gained a lot of weight.

(actually, a friend of my brother's got a letter from the armed forces instructing him "You are no longer a negro" which is from whom I stole the rush to the mirror bit, but otherwise the above is really pretty factual)

All of that said, and provided you do not take me in a manly fashion, I disagree with the article. I don't think those reforms go anywhere near far enough.

Peace out

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 1:40 AM

Quote:
"You are no longer a negro."

THAT. IS. PRICELESS.

Seriously, if I got my hands on something like that, I would frame the hell out of it.

'Course, the real tragedy of it is that the Army thought they were really doing black people a huge favor by sending that out. And the bigger tragedy is that many blacks probably agreed. It's as if they'd just been some upgraded status - not EQUAL by any means, but at least "people" of some sort.

Oh, and DT? Ummm... I hate to admit this, but I kinda lost those avatars you posted for me. I can't find that dang thread anywhere. And I've been looking for quite a while, thinking I know where they went - but I don't.

Do you remember? I'm thinking I need to - at the very least - get the pics off them so I can swap out when the mood takes me.

Mike

Sweeping generalizations are always wrong!

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Mike, Frem

You are forgetting something - there are not enough living-wage jobs in the country for everyone.

With roughly 10% unemployment real unemployment may be in the 15-20% range, since unemployment figures only count people who are currently receiving unemployment checks.

Our economy is BASED ON there not being enough jobs to go around. If you want to change welfare, you have to change the economy.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

Whoa, Rue - I almost let this get lost in the shuffle, what with all the brouhaha going on the last couple days! Oh, and by the way, apparently you and I are the same person now, so I probably don't even need to respond to you, since I'd just be talking to myself. At least that's what one or two of our sanity-challenged "friends" here are whispering. ;)

Okay, anyhow, enough preamble. Living wage jobs. That's a problem. There aren't enough of them to go around no matter how you slice it. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try new things, though. How's about starting with a living wage? Maybe we can start encouraging companies to actually keep jobs here, to manufacture things here, to do business HERE, in THIS country, instead of selling the jobs off to the lowest overseas bidder.

Thing is, we've seen real-world unemployment as low as 5%, which essentially means that if you want a job, you've got one. The trick is to make sure those are actually jobs worth having and work worth doing.

ANTHONYT

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:46 AM

Hello,

Of course, it behooves me to point out that not everyone can have a nice rewarding job, or one that pays a decent wage. It inevitably occurs that some people are so unskilled or inexperienced that they must endure for a time in occupations that are sub-par.

One might consider the people who stand with signs on the street corner, holding up advertisements for shops. Or those who hand out pamphlets about a cheap oil change. Or the now apparently nonexistant paperboy who used to bicycle around the neighborhood tossing newspapers at houses.

Not one of these provides a living wage, or probably much job satisfaction. In each case, however, they are jobs that exist for the objectively least skilled and desirable employees. While we may all frown at these sub-par occupations, they are sometimes the only sorts of occupations available to the people who have them. Without these sub-par jobs, and their ugly wages, the people who hold them would be even worse off.

I consider it a fantasy that everyone should be able to get a good living wage and job satisfaction. There will always be people at the abysmal bottom of things. The hope is that they will eventually be able to work their way up as they accumulate job experience and seize opportunities.

I think the only place I've seen where everyone has a rewarding job experience and enough resources to meet all their needs and desires is in Star Trek, as a citizen of the Federation. Not coincidentally, it is a socialist ideal. The Federation is the model society for those who would give to each according to their needs, and require from each according to their ability.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 1:54 PM

Black, white, red or brown, it all boils down to one thing:

This is UNACCEPTABLE.

Noone is our country should have to live or learn in a place/culture like this. NOONE.

But who is to blame, whats the solution and can (or should) outsiders fix it?

Those to blame are the parents, and the children themselves. The solution is a major cultural shift, away from ignorance and blame, to one of hardwork and valuing intelligence.

And no, outsiders cannot fix this, or do it for them.

And, it is just my opinion, but I think those who worked so hard to secure voting rights, and desegregate things, are probably disgusted with their progeny. Wouldn't you be?

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Ponder THIS.
Quote:
"It's outlined in sections 440 and 1904 of the House bill (Page 838), under the heading "home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children." The programs (provided via grants to states) would educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills.

The bill says that the government agents, "well-trained and competent staff," would "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive, language, social, emotional, and motor domains ... modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices," and "skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development."

http://www.creators.com/opinion/chuck-norris/dirty-secret-no-1-in-obam
acare.html

Somehow I don't find this scary at all. Most parents won't need this, but there is enough unintentionally awful parenting out there. This probably comprises something like one or a few visits where the most important mistakes are talked about and people have a look at the home to make sure there are no obvious sources of danger, maybe they'll speak about post-partum depression, ways to encourage bonding, breastfeeding, reading, etc. There are children out there who would, indeed, benefit if their parents received some personal consultation.

I don't see how this is supposed to be scary. :-/

KWICKO

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:53 PM

Quote:
And, it is just my opinion, but I think those who worked so hard to secure voting rights, and desegregate things, are probably disgusted with their progeny. Wouldn't you be?

No more than the founding fathers would be disgusted by you or me...

Mike

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 2:55 PM

Rue,

Not going to get into it, but examine our tax structure and you'll see why this is so.

Wulf,

Maybe so, but it kills your argument to say so. It's like sometimes powerful zionists behave in a way some might call "evil" (like calling for the nuking of civilians in Iran) but it's very difficult to say so without sounding anti-semitic.

If you want an attitude change, you should probably find a different angle. Just like I look for non-Nazi regimes to compare bad policy to, maybe you should look for other descrimination (anti-latino) or something that people are willing to accept.

I was just ranting about the war, re: the overuse of nazis. You just can't discuss anti-white, we're programmed or something. The reality: a couple hundred million people were killed in the war, about half of them were civilians, about half of those were white, the rest mostly asian. So, probably over all, and I could add this up, about 50 million caucasian civilians slaughtered, undoubtedly more christian caucasians than jewish ones. My relatives that died there were jewish, but I'll freely admit that they were about 10% of the exterminated when you take into account russia and eastern europe, the use of poles for slave labor. The fact is, most of the exterminated were some oppressed minority, it's just american views of racism are pretty simple.

Here's one for you: American image: Black=poor. Go to an inner city. Check out the incomes and cost of living. Then go to a trailer park. compare. Poor whites seem to be on average more numerous and more poor than poor blacks, by a healthy margin. But because we just say "white/black" and define that as "rich/poor" we don't see it.

This is why I got so offended in the last election. I'm not going to defend any politician, but the whole thing with Sarah Palin was a total set up, and it was an attack on Mat-su, Wasilla et al. Part of the joke here was "boyfriend drives a pick up truck, has a shot gun" etc. If you live in the country, are familiar with truck guns animals and plants, then *you* were the butt of the joke on Sarah Palin. If you're in that population, and you were joining into the kicking of yourself.

The fact it the level of ethnic discrimination undertone to the attacks on Sarah Palin was fever pitch, to the anti-Obama low murmer. If there was bigotry in the politics against Obama, it was anti-muslim.

Oh, and "that one" was not racism, it was John McCain actually forgetting his opponents name, which should be to any voter, a scarier notion.

Ah yes, we're at war with "that place."

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 3:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

This is why I got so offended in the last election. I'm not going to defend any politician, but the whole thing with Sarah Palin was a total set up, and it was an attack on Mat-su, Wasilla et al. Part of the joke here was "boyfriend drives a pick up truck, has a shot gun" etc. If you live in the country, are familiar with truck guns animals and plants, then *you* were the butt of the joke on Sarah Palin. If you're in that population, and you were joining into the kicking of yourself.

As an observer, I always felt much of it was backlash against her anti-city, anti-"elite" rethoric, though. The term "real Americans" being thrown around and such. Am I completely off-track?

RUE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 3:42 PM

"Of course, it behooves me to point out that not everyone can have a nice rewarding job, or one that pays a decent wage."

Why not ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

RUE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 3:44 PM

"Noone is our country should have to live or learn in a place/culture like this. NOONE."

So, who is to blame for the slums ? Who is to blame for the bad schools ? Who is to blame for the lack of jobs ? WHO IS IN CONTROL ?

I see you never answered my other question, so I suspect you will be equally UNABLE (read: you are an idiot) to come up with and answer for this one either.

***************************************************************

To reiterate the previous question just so people know what basic level of honesty it is that you're ducking:

You spend an awful lot of time blaming 'them' for your life. I'm guessing you've been doing it since you were small. And with your piss-poor ability to learn anything new, you'll do it till you hit your grave.

So, let me ask you this - and see if you can answer.

If you get to blame 'them' for everything that went wrong in your life - who do they get to blame for everything that went wrong in their lives ?

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 4:47 PM

Ok Rue.

Its easier for you to throw insults than it is to tackle the problems I've shown? So who, EXACTLY, is the idiot now?

Before you start typing, I know your answer will be me. You are incapable of looking at things objectively, and still harbor a deep grudge at the times I've ripped into you. I get it. No problem.

Now, unless you have something to add that is constructive, how about you just go rant at someone else.

As to who is in control... I think each of us, as individuals, control our own lives. We may not have the power to control what affects us, but rather we control how we deal with the adversity we face.

That too, Im sure, youll have some snarky comment for.

RUE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 5:00 PM

Actually, the answer is NOT you.

Which means you haven't bothered to read my posts.

TRY to answer my questions. Both, or either one.

YOU blame others for everything bad in your life - who do THEY get to blame ?
WHO is in control of our mutual circumstances ?

You might gain something from it.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 6:00 PM

Maybe instead of looking for someone to blame, we take the initiative on ourselves.

See the truth. Accept the truth. Look to glory with one eye, and hope with the other. And work to fix those things that need fixing.

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 6:50 PM

Quote:
I think each of us, as individuals, control our own lives. We may not have the power to control what affects us, but rather we control how we deal with the adversity we face.

Wulf, you seem to have a hard time even controlling your OWN responses due to YOUR upbringing. You have still reflexive violence, righteousness, and racism to root out of your soul.

In other words, we control zilch.

UNABASHEDVIXEN

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:17 PM

Quote:
Wow, I expected more of an uproar over this.

I'm sure you did. Why else would you post an overtly racist piece of writing by a man who reports for the US News & World Report and who claims to work to have men and boys treated equally?

I have neither the time nor the inclination to even dignify this garbage with an actual response, except to say: there are all kinds of places to post crap like this. Why not go away and find some other community, so we don't have to put up with this nonsense?

*
People before profits

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:33 PM

BTW- I read the originally posed article and meant to reply earlier but didn't have the time. Forgive me if I tread old ground, but there're too many posts for me to read, so here's my take:

My first question was Is this real?, or is a bitter rant? My answer is: Yes, it IS real. I've seen videos of a school that looks and sounds just like this. OTOH, that school was widely known as being out of control, even compared to other black schools in the area. So while the post could be real, it sounds like its not typical.

So I started thinking about the kids, and why they are the way they are: predatory towards each other, callous towards themselves, totally unaware of the larger world around them, and that they are in a hell that... while perhaps not of their own genesis... is certainly well within their power to stop. IF they change their collective behavior. (But yanno what? We can't even get a neighborhood of white privileged grownups to change their behavior collectively, so it's unrealistic to expect kids with limited vision to change theirs, dontcha think?)

And what it all boils down to is a hellhole created by a combination of poverty, racism, and capitalism. A misery of dog-eat-dogism, where everyone can and will be taken advantage of, and any tender feelings or bonds of loyalty are weaknesses. Where kids feel they're worth nothing... because they ARE worth nothing.

Been up close a personal with dysfunctional black families and culture. Moms drag their kids around like so much meat, or leave them at home to fend for themselves. Grups hardly ever talk to kids except to bark at them. Anyone who has money or resources is immediately mooched off, with no expectation of repayment. You grow up thinking of yourself and ONLY yourself. You CAN'T put yourselves in someone else's shoes and therefore you CAN'T imagine anything different.

In order for these kids to learn, the FIRST thing they have to do is learn to think about others. Putting the promise of a reward in front of these kids is just a taunt which will be rejected. Instead of showing kids who things can be better, I think they need to bond with someone who has it WORSE. Someone who is defenseless and on-threatening. It's like girls who are abused by their fathers... they put up with it until and then he started on my little sister. Once that emotional barrier ir cracked, THEN they can start to learn.

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:00 PM

Part of the problem is that our society relies on FAMILIES to raise their children. By problem, I mean SOLUTION.

PLAINJAYNE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:01 PM

First of all, let's be really clear on this: I could give a good goram what color anybody happens to be. That part don't matter to me in the least. I DO have a problem with STUPID, though. I totally own that.

That being said, I think we'll be a lot better off once we decide to quit spoon-feeding people. Our problem is culture (or lack of it), yes, but it's the entitlement mentality thats got us in the bind we're in. Somebody owes me something because I'm this, that, or the other. I'm poor. I'm on drugs. I have ADHD. Whatever. No one owes you jack shit, my friend. You got a problem, you better get to dealing with it yourself.

We've graduated generations of people who can't wipe their own asses. We've got a system that cares about how things look on paper (i.e., we don't need a vocational program in school; look, all our kids are taking calculus--they can't add or subtract, but they're in calculus and it's the teacher's fault if they fail) and how much money they can suck out without getting busted for embezzlement.

Anyways, ranting again. I'll be in my bunk...

Day late an'a dollar short...Story of my ruttin' life!

PLAINJAYNE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Part of the problem is that our society relies on FAMILIES to raise their children. By problem, I mean SOLUTION.

That would mean mom and dad would have to give up on their busy social lives to take care of the kids. What are you? Mental?

Kidding, man, I totally agree.

Day late an'a dollar short...Story of my ruttin' life!

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:11 PM

Problem Plain, to many of these kids dont have a Mom AND Dad... they just have a Mom... usually bitter at the way life turned out.

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:12 PM

.... and you can thank all those feminists for that....

SIGNYM

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:41 PM

OMG. Like feminists had anything to do with it....

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:44 PM

Really, Sig? Really? Feminists teaching young girls that they dont need a man, and the aftermath of that... has nothing to do with todays society?

Really?

Sweetie, you are smarter than that.

RUE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:48 PM

"Maybe instead of looking for someone to blame, we take the initiative on ourselves."

That is something you need to learn then, as you seem to spend all of your time looking for somebody to blame.

You blame blacks for your problems ... and theirs. You blame feminists. In fct, you blame - and hate - pretty much everyone who is not a white man like you.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Really, Sig? Really? Feminists teaching young girls that they dont need a man, and the aftermath of that... has nothing to do with todays society?

Really?

Sweetie, you are smarter than that.

I doubt it was feminists that told all the boys that they don't need to take responsibility for their actions, like being a father to their children.

Obviously, at some point someone told all the young boys that they don't need a woman, right? As they seem quite eager to avoid committment?

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:06 PM

Scuse me a moment
*smacks Wulfie on the back of the head*

The mens conduct in many of those cases doesn't help the damn problem neither, when they cut and run as soon as the cake they baked starts rising you know.
And there's a big difference between those fighting for feminine equality* and what I call feministas, who are more about bitterness and revenge, neither of which I feel properly represent the concept of human rights as a whole, but can and should be referred to as different things cause they are.
Try to thin your brush a little, and you'll come off as less offensive, neh ?

*Human rights;
If you're gonna stand up for human rights, then do THAT.
Not just for your color, sex, religion, race, culture or creed, cause that's just elevating yourself by stomping on those not like you and widening the divisions between us in a nonproductive way, driving wedges into the us-n-them dynamic that's just so goddamn destructive, and in essence it's an ultimate hypocrisy cause you're doing the exact same thing you're blaming everyone ELSE for, ironic innit ?

Human rights are HUMAN rights, so if you're gonna stand up for em, then do so for ALL humans, or don't freakin bother.

That said....

AgentR

Quote:
Somehow I don't find this scary at all. Most parents won't need this, but there is enough unintentionally awful parenting out there. This probably comprises something like one or a few visits where the most important mistakes are talked about and people have a look at the home to make sure there are no obvious sources of danger, maybe they'll speak about post-partum depression, ways to encourage bonding, breastfeeding, reading, etc. There are children out there who would, indeed, benefit if their parents received some personal consultation.

I don't see how this is supposed to be scary. :-/

I find the whole non-voluntary part of it offensive.
I am ALL FOR making some level of basic mutually-accepted and scientifically proven parenting training available, and even ok with taxpayer funding for it.

But my concern is a mandatory program co-opted by folks with their own political, religious or social agenda operating in a fashion destructive to the very goals the program was meant to achieve, and I have both established precedent and good historical cause for that very concern.

Not sure if you were here for the truly epic discussion of the FLDS fiasco, and my organisations involvement in it, going from indirect assistance to actual on-site, hands-on as the Gov and it's cronies took it further and further off the deep end, finally culminating in some nasty backroom dealings and a VERY sudden complete reversal and abandonment of the whole issue just prior to those DNA results coming back.
(We *did* actually manage to get the 'internal housecleaning' done in the end, but that's a long story for another time.)
What happened down at YFZ is an offense I never, EVER want to see repeated by the State against it's own, and had it's roots in the concept that us citizens and our kids are the property of that State rather than sovereign individuals who collectively are the authority the State answers to.

I will do all in my power to prevent that belief, or even a whiff of it, from entering any such parenting program cause it's just so terribly dangerous in a long term fashion.

And I got another bit to say, but that needs it's own post cause it references one above, frighteningly so.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:12 PM

So, (smacking Frem right back) it comes right back to parents actually raising their progeny... in a good, wholesome manner...

Wow... who'd have thunk it?

For reference however....

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:21 PM

Ok, now this bit.

Imma post a further excerpt from John Ringo's The Road to Damascus which follows on the previous one, cause something came to my attention to that REALLY unnerves me, and it oughta unnerve you too.

Quote:
Kafari was fixing Yalena's breakfast when someone knocked at the front door. Loudly. Startled, Kafari sloshed milk onto the counter. Nobody ever came to their house without calling ahead, first, to make sure Sonny wouldn't shoot them as an intruder. Not even Kafari's family. And with spring planting taking up everyone's time, nobody in her family would be calling on them this early in the day, anyway. Simon, who had just strapped Yalena into the toddler seat, exchanged a startled glance with her.
"Who—?" he began.
"Trouble, that's who," she muttered, wiping her hands on a towel and striding purposefully through the house.
She opened the door to find a tall woman with pinched nostrils and a prune-shaped mouth, whose socially correct skinny frame was all hard angles and jutting bones. She was staring down at Kafari from a pair of steel-rimmed glasses of the sort preferred by POPPA bureaucrats. It was part of their "we're all just people" persona, which dictated that no one on the government payroll was better than anyone else and therefore should not look it.
With her was a hulking giant whose intelligence looked to be on the simian level, with muscles capable of breaking a small tree in half. He definitely did not subscribe to the "thin is in" mentality sweeping the civil service and entertainment industries. No, she realized abruptly,he's the enforcer. Just what were they here to enforce, at seven a.m. on a Tuesday morning?
"Mrs. Khrustinova?" the woman asked, her voice as warm as a glacier.
"I'm Kafari Khrustinova. Who are you?"
"We," she jerked her head in a gesture both abrupt and menacing, "are the child-protection team assigned to Yalena Khrustinova."
"Child-protection team?"
"Trask, please note that Mrs. Khrustinova is apparently in need of mechanical augmentation, as her hearing is plainly substandard, which directly jeopardizes the welfare of the child in her custody."
"Now wait just a damned minute! I heard you, I just couldn't believe what I was hearing. What are you doing here? I'm a full-time mother. You don't have jurisdiction."
"Oh, yes we do," the woman said, eyes and voice frosty and threatening. "Didn't you read the notice sent to every parent on Jefferson last night?"
"What notice? What time, last night? Simon and I checked the messages just before bed and there wasn't any notice."
"And what time would that have been?"
"Ten-thirty."
"Trask, please note that Mr. and Mrs. Khrustinov keep a two-year-old child awake far past the hour at which a child that age should be in bed."
"That's when Simon and I went to bed!" Kafari snapped. "Yalena was in bed by seven-thirty."
"So you say." The derision and disbelief beggared the limits of Kafari's patience.
Simon spoke just behind her shoulder in a voice as cold and alien as the day of Abraham Lendan's death. "Get off my property. Now."
"Are you threatening me?" the woman snarled.
Kafari's husband was holding Yalena on one hip. His smile was a lethal baring of fangs. "Oh, no. Not yet. If you refuse to leave, however, things could get very interesting. Somehow, I doubt the Brigade would take kindly to having an officer's home invaded by petty officials attempting to enforce a dubious rule that I haven't even seen, let alone determined the legality of. This house," he added in a deceptively gentle voice, "is the property of the Concordiat. Its computer terminals are connected to military technology that is classified as sufficiently secret, no one on Jefferson has the clearance to access it. That includes any so-called home inspection team. You, dear lady, do not have a military clearance to come within a hundred meters of my computer terminal.
"If I were you, I would seriously reconsider the wisdom of trying to force the issue. I am a Bolo commander. In the building next door, a thirteen-thous

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:22 PM

Quote:
So, (smacking Frem right back) it comes right back to parents actually raising their progeny... in a good, wholesome manner...

What constitutes a good, wholesome manner, in your opinion?

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

AgentR
I find the whole non-voluntary part of it offensive.
I am ALL FOR making some level of basic mutually-accepted and scientifically proven parenting training available, and even ok with taxpayer funding for it.

But my concern is a mandatory program co-opted by folks with their own political, religious or social agenda operating in a fashion destructive to the very goals the program was meant to achieve, and I have both established precedent and good historical cause for that very concern.

I figure it might be mandatory for all parents in order to ensure that the people who might need it the most participate?

I honestly can't see how a one-time visit by a parenting advisor could be abused in such a way as to make it terribly harmful. I don't think it's meant to be a program in any long-term fashion, but really a box of advice when they are just starting out. Like a person-shaped, interactive brochure. I think it might be really helpful in referring the clueless to further help, those who wouldn't think to get help in the first place.

I mean, when terrible things happen to infants or toddlers, we always wonder how it might have been prevented, and something like this might help.

WULFENSTAR

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:27 PM

LOL

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:39 PM

Care to elaborate on that?

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:43 PM

Quote:
I honestly can't see how a one-time visit by a parenting advisor could be abused in such a way as to make it terribly harmful.

I can, oh believe me I can - it'd take a day and more for even a basic LIST.

Look at what one little phone call, that everyone involved KNEW at *at the time* was bogus, did to the FLDS - many of those kids are still suffering far worse psychological trauma due to their treatment at the hands of the State, complete with eight mental health professionals full court depositions testifying to the abusive conduct and conditions.

PTSD is something that is VERY resource intensive to treat or mitigate, and despite being the cause, the State has made little effort to assist in mitigating the damage they caused, besides which the victims are quite rightfully too damned suspicious of their victimisers to accept aid of that nature from them, leaving us in a hell of a bind finding resources for them, I don't know where we'd be without the unofficial help from the folks at Baylor U and the Child Trauma Academy, honestly.

Oh, and one of the WORST things you can do to a girl raised in such a culture (we can discuss whether the culture itself is harmful at some other time) is a forced medical exam of extremely personal nature - it constitutes the EXACT form of abuse that the State was accusing FLDS of and in my opinion not only qualifies as a form of sexual abuse itself, it merits prosecution of those who committed it, and those who ordered them to.

We've been working with the FLDS to try and set things right, but the aftermath of this, the cleanup, as it were, is a long and ongoing process.

And here's me, sitting in the dark pickin up the friggin pieces just like I said from the beginning, grrr.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:
I honestly can't see how a one-time visit by a parenting advisor could be abused in such a way as to make it terribly harmful.

I can, oh believe me I can - it'd take a day and more for even a basic LIST.

Look at what one little phone call, that everyone involved KNEW at *at the time* was bogus, did to the FLDS - many of those kids are still suffering far worse psychological trauma due to their treatment at the hands of the State, complete with eight mental health professionals full court depositions testifying to the abusive conduct and conditions.

I'm a little confused at your comparison there.

You think if a parenting advisor came to visit the family with the newborn infant and found truly endangering conditions, like chain-smoking, filth, violent behavior or obvious signs of abuse or mental illness, the first response would be to try and harm the child?

Obviously something like an oppressive sect would be quite a special case, requiring a very special approach.

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:58 PM

What I am saying is that without a really strong, tight leash, there's every chance they will engage the machinery of the State against folks who's parenting, beliefs or practices, they do not agree with, or for partisan reasons of their own.

The FLDS thing was sparked in great part due to friction between Baptists and Mormons, as what amounted to a religious battle using the machinery of the State as a weapon.

And once it is engaged, the damage it can cause if misused is incalculable.

I would much prefer a more pro-active use of such parenting programs by making them part of the current high school curriculum, although I have a really low opinion of public schools, adding that human element might have a positive effect, and bring to light that EVERY SINGLE OTHER THING they learn in that social environment is in direct contravention to the things they would have to teach in that class, innit ?

They'd *have* to resolve it, at that point, hopefully by creating and supporting a more positive social environment rather than the prison yard pecking order which is what we have now.

Much like the whole discussion of abortion, my solution is to head the problem off BEFORE it gets to that point, you see ?

Sure beats coming in like gangbusters after the damage is already done and then compounding it, does it not ?

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:07 PM

*Sigh* The FLDS... Being that I live in Utah, I have a bit of a different perspective on all of this than most of the rest of the US might.

I may not be Mormon, I'm not personally a polygamist, and I'll decry abuse the same as anyone. You really shouldn't be trading little girls among old men and I can tell you that a lot of politics goes along with that, and it's disturbing and disgusting how that has become a status symbol among some polygamous enclaves.

But you will not find me saying that polygamy is inherently an abusive system. If it's consenting adults, everyone else should keep out of it.

I think so long as it can be agreed that there hasn't been abuse, parents should be free to raise their children how they see fit and with what beliefs they see fit. I do think there isn't just One Way that every family and child must conform to, in fact I see attempts to "standardize" children and education as an effort to force everyone to conform, make everyone that much easier to control.

In specific, AR, say the state has certain types of parents it considers... undesirable. Picture them sending in a medical professional under the guise of offering advice, recommendations, etc. Whether or not these professionals are invested with the power to declare the parents unfit for taking care of the children and immediately remove them (as has happened on a number of Native American Tribal Reservations), there's still plenty of damage that can be done by offering poor advice for the parent's situation or even cultural mindsets, such that the parents are set-up to either not understand or fail later. And that's if, IF they don't do anything sneaky like what was done to certain Australian Aboriginal tribeswomen to discourage future pregnancies.

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
What I am saying is that without a really strong, tight leash, there's every chance they will engage the machinery of the State against folks who's parenting, beliefs or practices, they do not agree with, or for partisan reasons of their own.

Obviously we envision very different things when we things about such a program.

The way I see it, a tight leash could very easily be put on it from the start without hampering its efectiveness overtly. I don't see them as bloodhounds out to inspect every inch of someone's place or life with the predetermined goal to tear apart families, but as a personal one-time consultant focused on giving advice or prividing contacts for further education. In most cases where something is actually wrong, a referral and additional parental counselling (anger management, ddepression counselling, a health class, maybe cooking or budgeting or, hell, rehab) would be far more beneficial and I don't see why THAT should not be the focus. Be a gateway for all the channels of help that may be available.

In cases where danger is imminent and parents are completely unwilling to amend that, well, I'd rather they have the authority to contact someone in order to protect the child.

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:23 PM

The problem is, AR, that it's easy to trump up reasons why parents may be unfit, and there have been instances the state has behaved that way in the past on account of politics, race, class, or religion.

It makes for a scary precedent, especially if the process is mandatory.

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
In specific, AR, say the state has certain types of parents it considers... undesirable. Picture them sending in a medical professional under the guise of offering advice, recommendations, etc. Whether or not these professionals are invested with the power to declare the parents unfit for taking care of the children and immediately remove them (as has happened on a number of Native American Tribal Reservations), there's still plenty of damage that can be done by offering poor advice for the parent's situation or even cultural mindsets, such that the parents are set-up to either not understand or fail later. And that's if, IF they don't do anything sneaky like what was done to certain Australian Aboriginal tribeswomen to discourage future pregnancies.

Poor advice? Well, if you already assume incompetence, I see why you'd oppose the whole idea, but that sort of presumes that there is actually no fact-based advice to be had about parenting infants or toddlers, at all. What would constitute poor advice if we do NOT assume that it's all about nefarious purposes from the start?

I don't think I can or should try to further argue against the combined force of you and Frem, as I already know how he - and I guess you - view everything government related. I disagree with your presumption that every possible potential for abuse will not only be fulfilled but not even attempted to guard against, and I see a great deal of benefit that might arise from such a program. I don't disrespect your opinion about it, though, as I understand it better now. Thanks. :)

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:41 PM

Aw, I don't mean to chase you away, and I actually like the stuff you're saying about families this could help.

I just... yeah, they're government. <_< Even if they're not trying to be malicious, incompetence could definitely be a factor, or they might not understand or be willing to understand a minority culture, and all of that could lead to accidents or abuses of the system. And it's not like there aren't historical examples of similar ways child protection/parenting programs have gone wrong.

I'll admit that some of those programs have maybe done more good than harm, like for example, my mom used to volunteer for a foster care review board, and some of the parents and foster parents and abuse she saw? Eugh. In some cases, it's good to get children out of those environments.

But when you make something mandatory, not just volunteer, not just tip-offs, there's a tendency to turn it all into a witch hunt. Like everyone's a potential criminal. Because sometimes the signs of abuse can be hard to spot, you know? And sometimes, it's not abuse.

RUE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:57 PM

"I find the whole non-voluntary part of it offensive."

Eh ... it IS voluntary. You KNOW that, right ?

Is this just another replay of that 'vaccination squads' BS ?

"What happened down at YFZ ..."

Was that roughly 10% of the men are now facing charges for participating in underage marriage - as a matter of POLICY of the community. Children are not the 'property' of their parents either, to dispose of as they see fit without larger social concern.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:16 PM

No, AgentR, don't run off - the idea of these arguments isn't "winning" it's to pound out the imperfection in the iron of the idea or concept and turn it into a nice fine steel - sure the forge is hot, but the work is often worth the reward.

Despite being an Anarchist, I am well aware of the fact that most folk want some level of Government, and I can accept this, so long as there is this understanding.

Government is large, powerful and dangerous tool, you see?
That's not to say it isn't a *USEFUL* one at times...

Or, like a gun, a really big gun, like a Pfeifer Zeliska.
http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/html/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=
display&pid=32

Useful for some jobs, but potentially VERY dangerous, especially in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing, or doesn't observe proper safety precautions, or tries to use it for something radicially out of it's intended function (driving in nails, for example).

But WITHIN it's intended and specific function, ultimately the best tool for the job.

That being understood, most of my issue with Government isn't what it is, it's with the bloody fools who do not see the hazards and potential risks of what they are doing, and make no effort to mitigate them, before engaging it.
And my response is similar, depending on what level of effect it might have on me.

Operating a jackhammer with no hearing protection ? poor you.
Driving a bulldozen down my street while stoned out of your mind and rockin on an MP3 player ? imma be pissed.
Pointing your weapon AT me while inspecting the chamber at the firing range ? bad bad BAD idea, imma get a bit psychotic.

Same thing with stuff like this, I tend to come on harder as the risks and danger go up, because of those very dangers - it's really hard to repair the psyche of a child, and their innocence can never be replaced, it's a damned precious thing and I think that we should spare no effort to minimize obviously present risks rather than assume they'll be handled, when talking about programs like this.

I do value your opinion on this, AgentR - even when I disagree you tend to offer insightful and thought provoking comment, and while I do have something of an "agenda", it never was and never will be the kind of us-n-them lunacy where driving someone away would be seen as a benefit.

-Frem

PS - Ok, there *IS* such a thing as "too much gun" apparently, who in their RIGHT FREAKIN MIND would *want* that horrific thing ?
You have to love the comment "There won’t be any permanent damage inflicted to your wrist."
*twitch*

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"I find the whole non-voluntary part of it offensive."

Eh ... it IS voluntary. You KNOW that, right ?

"What happened down at YFZ ..."

Was that roughly 10% of the men are now facing charges for participating in underage marriage - as a matter of POLCY of the community. Children are not the 'property' of their parents either, to dispose of as they see fit without social concern.

Bullshit.

First off, show me a cite.

Second, explain how you have any credibility when you were shown repeatedly to be a fucking liar, and caught out on it, and didn't even have the damn decency to do anything but fucking gloat as you celebrated a goddamn witch hunt that left a lot of damaged children in its wake for next to nothing - most of the internal cleanup happened with the willing assistance of that community outside of the particular legal system that went axe grinding.

Do NOT fuck with me about this, Miss - I can and will pull the thread up just to show all your lies, obfuscations and celebration of the personal destruction of folks you didn't agree with, an ugly side of you I have far from forgotten and probably never will.

You should me proof of FLDS internal policy documents outlining that as the policy, which is no more than you and others have asked those disputing "birthers" - or you can very well shut your goddamn mouth until you have some evidence of your claims, which I have no more patience for than Rozita Swintons, because they so far have had no more value and even less substance.

And while I have issues with the idea of children as property in general, just because they are not the "property" of the parents doesn't mean they are the "property" of the State neither, a distinction you have, in your vicious, witch-hunting blindness, forgotten I DO make.

Shall I get you a white sheet and some torches, cause your behavior towards "others" is no different, you just pick different "others", is all.

I've been nice, I've been polite, but if you think I have forgotten, think again - especially when you raise a shoveljob of the same sort that spawned that horror show in the first place, despite having been called out on that kind of lie repeatedly, and here you are, shovelling again without a care in the world what kind of damage it can do, so long as it happens to people YOU don't agree with.

And every time I see again in my mind, the image of that little girl rolling into a twitching, howling ball of misery cause a stranger came near her, I think of people like YOU, gleefully egging on the witch hunt without a thought to the damage they cause - burning the village to save it like good little jackboots.

do. not. push. me.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:34 PM

I see some quick ninja-edit work there, once again.

Show me where "vaccination squads" ever got type by me, ever, anywhere ?

Once again you lie through your teeth because you disagree with me on an issue.

Did or did not Gov Perry push for mandatory vaccination with Gardasil ?

Did or did not serious safety and side effect concerns come up, including deaths and injuries reported to the VAERS database proportionally far in excess of any other vacc ?

Did or did not serious concerns about the quality of the research and it's effectiveness come up as well ?

All of these things you called me a loon and a liar about, then denied you did, and here you are again, after saying you never did and never would, once again, here you are.

And I have valid safety, ethics and efficicency questions about Baxter too, not the least of which is their proven violation of BSL-3 procedures in at best, a grossly criminal and negligent fashion.

But you're too busy foaming at me that you're forgetting whatever you shovelled last time and trying to "call me out" with as-usual, unproven and overblown claims that later turn out to be pure fiction - for your reference it was PN or Out2B going on about that sort of thing, who might have made the comment, take it up with then, instead of trying to stir up a witch mob against ME cause I happen to be all too damned good at turning your sacred cow of State-worship into the nice juicy cheeseburger it deserves to be.

It's a TOOL, not a Diety!

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:36 PM

And just for the record, in advance of the passionate denials in hopes of the thread (and proof of the actions in question) being long gone....

Here's the whole flakin thread, every nasty bit of it.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=33401

-Frem

RUE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:37 PM

"Bullshit.
First off, show me a cite."

Matter of public record, but here's a news cite

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705303588/Former-wife-wants-child-s
upport-from-FLDS-ranch-leader.html

The YFZ Ranch leader is facing criminal charges accusing him of performing an illegal marriage ceremony by wedding his 12-year-old daughter to Warren Jeffs. He is one of a dozen FLDS men facing criminal charges.

That is roughly 10% of the men there.

"Do NOT fuck with me about this, Miss - I can and will pull the thread up just to show all your lies, obfuscations and celebration of the personal destruction of folks you didn't agree with, an ugly side of you I have far from forgotten and probably never will."

Bring it. And I will show them YOURS. Ready ? Let's go.

"And every time I see again in my mind, the image of that little girl rolling into a twitching, howling ball of misery cause a stranger came near her, I think of people like YOU ..."

And every time I see the stories of women and children who had to put up with demeaning abuse - I think of YOU - an aider and abettor - who will excuse anything - ANYTHING - because of a personal vendetta against government.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

PLAINJAYNE

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Problem Plain, to many of these kids dont have a Mom AND Dad... they just have a Mom... usually bitter at the way life turned out.

Moms are perfectly capable of raising decent human beings, dads too. Nowhere does it say you have to have 2 parents to be brought up decent. I just had a mom, even though dad lived in the same house he really wasn't involved. I was lucky to have grandparents that cared enough to make me behave myself, so my mom didn't go it totally alone.

While me and my sister lived at home, we were my mom's number 1 priority. We had food and clothes and shelter, even if it meant she didn't get to do some of the things she would have liked to. That's my biggest point. Your kids are your priority; if you can't devote yourself 115% to being a parent, don't have kids. And if you do have kids, put them up for adoption. They deserve better than what they are getting these days, and if you can't step up you should step out.

BTW--this is why I don't have kids. Don't want any either. Don't like'em. I would be a crap parent, even though I was raised better. I'm very self-centered and that's not a good thing when you're talking about parenting. Neither is a really short fuse and a tendency to swear. I'll stick with cats, thanks.

Got no problem with people wanting to have kids, but they come with some mighty big strings attached and it might behoove folks to think about that for a minute before they go signing on. It's not like it is on tv. It's goram hard work. If you arent willing to do it, be like me and have cats (dogs, ferrets, whatever floats your boat).

Day late an'a dollar short...Story of my ruttin' life!

SIGNYM

Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:49 AM

Frem, you seem to be of two minds. On the one hand, you think that children shouldn't be thought of as the property of their parents, but as full human beings with fully human rights. OTOH you seem ot think that parents "should' be able to bring up their children however they want. But when parents are negligent or abusive those two thoughts collide.

So how do you propose to ensure children's rights when parents won't, without public intervention??? And no, I don't mean in the distant future when we're all better community members, I mean now. What do you propose? 'Cause I'm not hearing it.*

It's very much like the healthcare debate. Most everyone agrees that the current for-profit health INSURANCE system sucks. But they don't want government either? So... what's the plan?

*ETA what I AM hearing is: Parents should be allowed to raise their children however they see fit as long as they have MY (Frem's) approval.

KWICKO

Thursday, August 13, 2009 12:53 AM

Man, I leave a thread alone for just a few hours, and the whole place goes to hell...

Okay, time to start catching up.

Quote:
AgentRouka wrote:

As an observer, I always felt much of it was backlash against her anti-city, anti-"elite" rethoric, though. The term "real Americans" being thrown around and such. Am I completely off-track?

In my view, you're completely ON-track. Palin and the rest of the neo-con hordes have a deep-seated hatred for ANY kind of "intellectualism". Seriously. They're on the same level as Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, if not in actual DEEDS, then clearly in intent, which is WHY I dubbed them the Khmer Rove in the first place. It wasn't because it was a cutesy moniker; it was because it fit their idea of what they wanted to do to America, to knowledge, to learning, and to critical thought, not only to dissent.

For the life of me, I've never been able to figure out why intelligence and education are supposed to be feared, scorned, mocked, or killed. Unless you're actively trying to suppress knowledge of what you're up to, that is...

Mike

KWICKO

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
BTW- I read the originally posed article and meant to reply earlier but didn't have the time. Forgive me if I tread old ground, but there're too many posts for me to read, so here's my take:

My first question was Is this real?, or is a bitter rant? My answer is: Yes, it IS real. I've seen videos of a school that looks and sounds just like this. OTOH, that school was widely known as being out of control, even compared to other black schools in the area. So while the post could be real, it sounds like its not typical.

So I started thinking about the kids, and why they are the way they are: predatory towards each other, callous towards themselves, totally unaware of the larger world around them, and that they are in a hell that... while perhaps not of their own genesis... is certainly well within their power to stop. IF they change their collective behavior. (But yanno what? We can't even get a neighborhood of white privileged grownups to change their behavior collectively, so it's unrealistic to expect kids with limited vision to change theirs, dontcha think?)

And what it all boils down to is a hellhole created by a combination of poverty, racism, and capitalism. A misery of dog-eat-dogism, where everyone can and will be taken advantage of, and any tender feelings or bonds of loyalty are weaknesses. Where kids feel they're worth nothing... because they ARE worth nothing.

Been up close a personal with dysfunctional black families and culture. Moms drag their kids around like so much meat, or leave them at home to fend for themselves. Grups hardly ever talk to kids except to bark at them. Anyone who has money or resources is immediately mooched off, with no expectation of repayment. You grow up thinking of yourself and ONLY yourself. You CAN'T put yourselves in someone else's shoes and therefore you CAN'T imagine anything different.

In order for these kids to learn, the FIRST thing they have to do is learn to think about others. Putting the promise of a reward in front of these kids is just a taunt which will be rejected. Instead of showing kids who things can be better, I think they need to bond with someone who has it WORSE. Someone who is defenseless and on-threatening. It's like girls who are abused by their fathers... they put up with it until and then he started on my little sister. Once that emotional barrier ir cracked, THEN they can start to learn.

And THIS is precisely the point at which we have to start working to change the attitudes and perceptions. These are kids who are brought up to think ONLY of themselves, and to view any weakness as an opportunity to be taken advantage of. We have to find a way to alter that thinking and start turning it around. A community that's down below the lowest of the low can still band together and lift up ONE of its people, who can then stretch a hand DOWN to the others and start pulling them up with him or her, and the cycle continues. Everyone who gets lifted or pulled up has an obligation to do the same for others.

And if it's done right, this is a golden opportunity for the churches to get involved. They CAN help here, and without all the proselytizing, if they decide they'd rather help people than indoctrinate them.

I tried to do it on my own, on a very small scale, by talking with neighborhood kids about what I was most comfortable talking about - working on cars. They were older than they should have been when I got to working with them, but I might have helped a few of them out in my own tiny way. I told 'em I'd teach them everything I knew, help 'em work on their Hondas, and all I asked in return was that they not go street-racing, but take it to a track, and that they pass the knowledge on to others down the road, and teach them the same way.

Frem does the same thing, but on a much grander scale, I think, and he has my admiration and gratitude for giving so much of himself to do it.

It's said that a person can't help, that it takes a collective effort,

KWICKO

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Part of the problem is that our society relies on FAMILIES to raise their children. By problem, I mean SOLUTION.

And maybe a FAMILY isn't enough anymore. Or, to be more accurate, maybe FAMILY isn't who you're born into, but rather the family you make for yourself. If your own family isn't doing the job, you surround yourself with people who add value to your life.

Mike

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:30 AM

Rouka

Yes, I think so. Much of Palin's rhetoric was canned, and her botched interview with Couric was staged. Couric and Obama are colleagues, which is why Katie had already gone to great lengths to bury Lara Logan's hardball interview of Obama, and replace it with her own. Ironically, Logan is also a liberal and also works for CBS, but she asked Obama real questions, and tough ones, which made it clear that Obama was not willing to cater to the liberal vote.

Palin was a stunt, she was there for McCain, who had no folksy credibility at all, to try to gain some. She was picked for her lack of experience, given no preparation, and handed a script and then fed to the wolves.

Whether you like Sarah Palin or not isn't the point. Palin's political stance was a written script, as were her talking points.

Now if I can theorize: The design was to have Palin fail. Palin is a moderate, probably to the left of McCain, or was until suddenly being tapped for VP. The GOP was constructing a new image, and part of that image was to present a face that represented their constituency to a tee, and then to have them watch her torn down by the leftist media like a pack of wild dogs. Sarah herself was an unwitting sacrifice. The GOP was trying to save its image, and carve a new one, different from Bush, while not losing its Bush base.

I'll go a step further: McCain consistently throughout the election made absurd statements, painting socialism as "spreading the wealth around," a more flattering image of socialism than even its die hard supporters would claim. (I think the usual term supporter use is "a safety net.") He painted Obama as better than he was, because he wanted to lose the election. The GOP wanted to lose.

They knew the mess that they had created under Bush, and that the whole house of cards was about to collapse. It was time to get out from under, and let someone else take the blame. (I'm talking strategy here: I know someone people will say "But Obama *is* to blame" well, sure, in part, but this house was already coming down, probably starting back as far as at least Clinton, but Bush set in motion what caused the house to collapse, and the republican party knew it.)

What I object to in the Palin attacks isn't that the media bought a trap hook line and sinker, or that a moderate if slightly corrupt politician was sacrificed, but that the whole thing came out with such class bigotry. It was stunning. It was everything that we thought we had defeated by electing a black president, still going full blaze.

The fact it, most bigotry is carried out not with malicious intentional hatred towards a group with intentional bias, but with total ignorance that a bias is being applied.

I'm not about to jump on Wulfie's train and suggest that the new target is whites: There are many new targets, but they aren't usually colors: We have muslims, immigrants, the rural lower class, asians, and most recently, shamelessly, south asians, but to no small degree, the chinese. (Every corporate lack of oversight was blamed on 1.3 billion people?)

Racism is as alive and well as it is in star trek, where all humans are created equal, but klingons are stupid and evil. No wait, that's not right, it's romulans who are evil. Oh, sorry, that's racist. Cardassians are evil. And Ferengi are cheaters and crooks...

So, I apologize for the occasional slight against the new xtians. They're just folks. Moving on.

KWICKO

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
.... and you can thank all those feminists for that....

EXCUSE ME?

You wanna run that by me one more time, sparky? Care to explain why Dad being a deadbeat and running away from his responsibilities has ANYTHING to do with feminists? That's the most cheese-dicked copout I think I've ever heard.

Let me guess... That's going to be your defense when you try (and fail miserably, I might add) to take a shot at our elected leader, as you've alluded to more than once? "Why'd you do it, son?" "Because my MOM was a FEMINIST!"

I thought you were done trying to lay blame for your problems, and wanted to actually try to DEAL with them and GET PAST them. Guess I was completely wrong about you.

Well, at least I know I never, ever have to take you seriously about anything ever again...

Mike

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:49 AM

Frem, it is very entertaining to watch you rant and fume.

My two cents:

The FLDS is a church, and old one, an institution of the United States, which avows freedom of religion. They set rules for their society, which all consenting persons capable of caring for themselve can choose to abandon, and leave, just like any other free and functioning society.

The specific rules of that society are no more our concern as those of Iraq, Iran or Japan. As long as the are not harming anyone else, and are not a danger, then they have that right.

Now take a moment to examine "mainstream society."

Our "proper" mating ritual is to consume toxic amounts of drugs and alcohol and then have sex with strangers.

Our educational strategy is that we mandate imprisonment and punishment for children for 13 years until they conform to a constructed set of beliefs

Our occupational strategy is that we "purchase" further "education" to ensure "employment" which puts us in permanent debt, which amounts to perpetual slavery.

Our generally accepted child rearing practice is to maintain slave-wage employment, drowning in taxation*, and never actually see our children to ensure that they are raised by the media-state through institutions such as the public school, television, and much more sinister ones Frem has alerted me to, all to create dysfunctional dependent citizens unable to fight back, and beholden to the system that brought them up.

*taxation: the right to pay interest on the loans taken out for a war planned by unelected unofficials in back rooms and think tanks for some nefarious purpose, put into action through manipulating their toadies in office. This will eat half your income if you're luck, but probably more.

Okay, that's not a cynical look, I haven't even gotten warmed up. I'm just saying...

Anyone here currently living in a utopia not ridden with mandates, inescapable labor systems, debt, disease, war, and completely dysfunctional decay, feel free to attack whoever you want for their shortcomings.

Myself, the only society the US can probably look down on with moral certainty is Saudi Arabia, though we do lose out on the disease issue. A few others are suspect, sure, but they, like the former USSR, could throw a few back in our faces.

Oh, did I forget to mention our drug problem? Oh, I did. What a pity.

KWICKO

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

Or, like a gun, a really big gun, like a Pfeifer Zeliska.
http://www.pfeifer-waffen.at/cms/html/index.php?module=htmlpages&func=
display&pid=32

Useful for some jobs, but potentially VERY dangerous, especially in the hands of someone who doesn't know what they're doing, or doesn't observe proper safety precautions, or tries to use it for something radicially out of it's intended function (driving in nails, for example).

But WITHIN it's intended and specific function, ultimately the best tool for the job.

Ok, there *IS* such a thing as "too much gun" apparently, who in their RIGHT FREAKIN MIND would *want* that horrific thing ?
You have to love the comment "There won’t be any permanent damage inflicted to your wrist."
*twitch*

Okay, in general, I'm one of those "no such thing as too much gun" kind of guys. I'm a large - FREAKISHLY large - human, and most weapons just feel puny to me. I'm used to that, though, and I figure if the caliber is right for the job, I'll figure out how to use it.

Having said that, I have to agree with you 100% on that monstrosity. That's a stupidly large gun, designed for people with the very tiniest of penises, apparently. I'm completely happy with a .44 magnum revolver, because as you've often said, if you fire 6 shots of that beast at something and need more, you don't need a gun, you need a freaking EXORCIST!

Mike

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:56 AM

Again, innocent till proven guilty, although I tend to be pretty damn sure THAT bastard is guilty, and I never said there weren't folk who were, not even once.

You have yet to offer proof of that 10% figure, as FLDS most certainly has more than 10 adult males in it, and I take it with the same grain of salt as when you told me "half" the "underage" girls were pregnant, neither claim of which turned out to be true, mind you.

And, you have yet to offer any proof that it was a "matter of policy" as in statements under oath by church officials or official documents, which given your long record of outright falsehoods stated as fact, often in the fact of clearly refuting hard evidence, I am not in the slightest inclined to believe you.

That said, *some* of those church leaders and elders belong in jail, hell yes - where the bloody HELL do you think they're getting the goddamned evidence to put them there ?
Sure as shit isn't the case so thoroughly polluted by the fiasco, no - it's the stuff the members gave us and others in their defense, and more that they handed off AFTER realising just how badly their own leaders had shafted them.

Like I said, a housecleaning, and a badly needed one, but targeted on the PERPS rather than the VICTIMS - something you have trouble understanding from day one.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

KWICKO

Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:59 AM

Quote:

Did or did not Gov Perry push for mandatory vaccination with Gardasil ?

Yes, he did. And the shits of it is, he didn't do it out of any great concern for children, or any great hopes of saving a young generation; he did it for the basest of reasons: money. He was given large campaign donations by one of the bigwigs behind Gardasil, and in return, he promised his friend that he'd push to make the vaccination mandatory for all girls entering the sixth grade. Why he isn't up on charges is beyond me. Probably because he's got great hair.

Quote:

Did or did not serious safety and side effect concerns come up, including deaths and injuries reported to the VAERS database proportionally far in excess of any other vacc ?

To the best of my knowledge, yes. That's what eventually led the Texas legislature (or "the lege" as we call it here in the Capitol City) to push back on the issue, and to reverse course. But not before there were some horrific side effects inflicted.

Mike

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:09 AM

The bigwigs are Merck, which is Rummy and Co. Still, their science is sound. I don't care why they're pushing it, I think it's a good idea. It's a genetically engineer vaccine, so there's no risk of infection, and it could save a lot of lives.

I think only giving it to girls is pretty moronic, men die of it too, fairly readily. Right at the moment, Patrick Swayze is dying of it, like Farrah Fawcett before him. This is a common disease. If you give the vaccine to half the population, you only encourage the disease to evolve.

If Obama decided to provide support for an independent national rail system because of some special interest benefit, I'd still think it was a good idea.

National health plans have problems, not the least of which is that they are not improving heathcare quality or lowering the cost, and they are supported by people I thoroughly mistrust and an ideology which is just poorly conceived, but it's still better to provide the service than not. At least then govt. would be doing something.

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, August 13, 2009 3:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Frem, you seem to be of two minds. On the one hand, you think that children shouldn't be thought of as the property of their parents, but as full human beings with fully human rights. OTOH you seem ot think that parents "should' be able to bring up their children however they want. But when parents are negligent or abusive those two thoughts collide.

So how do you propose to ensure children's rights when parents won't, without public intervention??? And no, I don't mean in the distant future when we're all better community members, I mean now. What do you propose? 'Cause I'm not hearing it.*

It's very much like the healthcare debate. Most everyone agrees that the current for-profit health INSURANCE system sucks. But they don't want government either? So... what's the plan?

*ETA what I AM hearing is: Parents should be allowed to raise their children however they see fit as long as they have MY (Frem's) approval.

I was gonna say something snarky and throw hints, but longer I thought about it the worse idea it seemed.

This reminds me of recently watching a conversation between two alleged child advocates in which they talked to each other right over the head of an eight year old like he was a piece of furniture, and then reacted like he'd grown an extra head when I asked him HIS opinion and he started giving it.

I think you are conceptually making the same mistake - first we need to INVOLVE the children, and by that I mean in the process, without the patronizing brush off they get now, cause even today most will *not* take a report from a child seriously, and would be unable to take any action on it cause of that whole property-status thing.

Gotta cut this short cause I got rounds to do, but ponder this, what frustration exactly, do you think it was that lead me as a kindergarten age child, to come at my father with a steak knife ?

-F

BYTEMITE

Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:31 PM

It is so ridiculous the way people treat children like they're not even in the room, I see it too.

When I talk to children, I am careful to try to explain and describe a situation or a political issue in a neutral manner, and let THEM make up their own minds on the issue.

People often ask me why I bother, because they say there's no way children could possibly understand the complexity of what I'm trying to explain.

But if people would actually TRY it, they'd be surprised by how much children understand, and by how much fairness, as opposed to personal gain, dictates children's thinking on what's best to be done.

All it takes is patience.

The children often come to a point of view that's different from my own on the issue, usually as a result of upbringing and how they've observed their parents react to an issue. I'm fine with that, so long as it's THEM deciding and not their parents. If they want to tell me their opinion (sometimes they'd rather keep it to themselves or think about things for a while), I don't try to change their mind. I just nod and accept their opinion as a valid viewpoint.

WULFENSTAR

Thursday, August 13, 2009 7:55 PM

Yeha, those silly children.....

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, August 14, 2009 1:42 AM

Posting for Clarification.

Some of the leadership of the FLDS is guilty as hell, much of it - by our count eight of em, plus the original two we wanted even before the fiasco, not to mention Jeffs of course, who is in a class by himself, yick.

So that's a total of eleven, which ain't no ten percent, but given that they were at the top of the heap enough to have been a serious problem, something me and my folk *did* know about and were trying to get something done about prior to the mess at YFZ.

Now, while alluded to elsewhere, lemme make clear what happened at the end there, so folks will understand where this is going.

We found that "larger crowbar" in having serious hard evidence of criminal conspiracy on behalf of Judge Walthers, Sheriff Dolan and Angie Voss to more or less outright destroy the FLDS as an organisation, and we're talking unassailable, indisputible, iron-clad proof, ok ?

When it came to the dirty back room dealings and politics an incident like this always boils down to, that gave us an equal hand at the poker table, and they KNEW my "price" going in - something which there was less resistance to meeting when it became clear that we'd been freely given some substantial evidence against a collective of really bad people who used the mental instability of Jeffs and their own positions of power to manipulate the exercise of the churchs beliefs to benefit them while hanging the members out to dry - and we'll not discuss whether that's the purpose of religion itself (in my opinion it is.) cause that's not the point here.

It wasn't policy, as asserted, but more of a personal agreement between these lowlifes that was in contravention to church policy, but they used leadership positions, personal charisma, and other forms of influence to get their way despite ongoing opposition to it from within the faith itself, a schism they were NOT going to reveal publicly and explicitly asked me not to, while they were more or less under siege with their children as hostages, hell no.

Then they got advance notice of the DNA results, which caused much consternation among them cause it more or less blew the remaining tattered threads of their so called case to powder.

And so I pulled out the trump card - despite the entire case being poisoned due to the illegal actions taken in processing it, and the fact that we had the ability and intent to prosecute THEM and make it stick, were they to stand and deliver my bloodprice, not only would they not be prosecuted for their own wrongdoing, but those individuals who WERE actually guilty of the crimes in question could be prosecuted with untainted evidence, IF, and only IF, they tossed the original case without trying to prosecute it so that double jeopardy could not be invoked.

All they had to do was convince the appellate court to go along, which given that many of the folks in question were going to be held accountable in a major way if it didn't, was about as slam dunk a bet as it ever gets.

And once the children were properly reunited with their families, despite ongoing hassles with CPS, which has ever been uncooperative due to the religious conflict of the respective beliefs of most of the CPS personnel (Baptist) and the FLDS, my "price" was met and we handed over the files, and backed them up when needs be by taking statements and the like from members to support the evidence in those files, and so long as these were targeted, specific, by-the-book prosecutions - would assist and secure cooperation from present and former members of the FLDS for the housecleaning so badly needed.
(And yes, not all of em necessarily completely agreed with it, but having personally experienced the alternative....)

So despite repeated false accusations to the contrary, me and mine never, EVER had any intent whatsoever of letting the bad actors get away with that crap, but damned if we were gonna let the victims be punished for it instead of the perps.

I was measuring those bastards for the rope before most people ever heard of FLDS, much less about the fia

FIRST PAGE PREV PAGE 1 2