Reason Writers Around Town

|

In the San Francisco Chronicle, Shikha Dalmia and Lisa Snell lob spitballs at California schoolmarm Rob Reiner and his harebrained universal preschool proposal.

NEXT: Nanny State

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So, when does Meathead do his own version of the Numa Numa “dance?” Every other round fellow has done one.

  2. “Universal preschool sounds progressive, but actually has pernicious unintended consequences for the parents and children it seeks to help.”

    This sentence would make a lot more sense if you replace the word ‘but’ with ‘and’.

  3. what warren said

  4. Rob Reiner is a dickwad? doofus? asshat? In any case he’s a f.cking busybody who loves spending generously — other people’s money, that is.

  5. Gee, Reason is against a public initiative?who would have seen this coming?

  6. Dan:

    Uh..yeah.. And Democrats are pussies, and Republicans are assholes. Did you notice that, too?

    “Reiner’s initiative is a statewide version of Proposition H”

    “Proposition H”?! Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!! And I know a good place they can stick it.

  7. Regarding the void between Reiner’s ears:

    It’s like how much blacker could this be?
    And the answer is none.
    None more black.

  8. When we discussed this topic earlier, did anybody mention the Quebec experience?
    If not, why not?

  9. Dan-And Rob Reiner, along with a bunch of other liberals, is for it. Now that we’ve recognized the stereotypes, perhaps we could discuss the issue.

    But that’s not as much fun as posting smarmy one-liners, is it?

  10. In addition, California and San Francisco already offer child care assistance to needy parents through welfare-to-work and myriad other programs. Instead of instituting a huge, new pre-school entitlement, the best way to deal with any remaining need might be to strengthen such programs.

    Yeah, Dan, there go those scorched-earth Reason types again.

  11. But Adam, the “needy” aren’t informed of these programs. They don’t have the same “priviliges” and “opportunities” that the well-off have to learn about these programs.

    They must be taught. Through mandatory enrollment. And the accompanying fines/jail time/state take-over of your kids if necessary.

  12. That is an interesting remark – if you’re for it, it’s a “program”, if you’re against it, it’s an “entitlement”.

  13. Fair point about the language Dan, but still far from substantive.

  14. Answering my own questions above, Lisa Snell did comment about Quebec in the earlier string.
    Lisa honors us with her presence.

  15. In addition, California and San Francisco already offer child care assistance to needy parents through welfare-to-work and myriad other programs. Instead of instituting a huge, new pre-school entitlement, the best way to deal with any remaining need might be to strengthen such programs.

    Come to think of it, this remark reminds me of the common NRA sentiment of “why don’t we just enforce the gun laws we have now?”

    In other words, I found it disengenuous.

  16. “I found it disengenuous”

    ???

  17. Dan, your non-sequitor re: the NRA notwithstanding, why is it “disingenuous”? It’s certainly not so on its face, so why don’t you elaborate?

    I find nothing necessarily disingenuous about suggesting that we enforce the current laws (or strengthen the current programs, as it would be) rather than enact new laws (or create new programs, as it would be). I might be able to see your point, if the authors had not thoroughly explained why this new program is a bad idea…but they did.

    Using the “we should just enforce the current laws before enacting new ones” meme as a crutch [in other words, using it to avoid addressing the real issue at hand] is certainly disingenuous.

    But adding it as a suggestion after you’ve just addressed the issue at hand quite thoroughly, well, there’s nothing disingenuous about that.

  18. [E]very dollar spent on preschool will yield $2.50 in savings for the state by…diminishing juvenile crime.

    Set aside the specious preposition that parents who don’t care what happens to their children in K-12 are all at once going to become focused on their education if the state mandates preschool, but the last time I checked the savings argument was called extortion. If you don’t want to be a victim of juvenile crime fork over more of your income now.

  19. What I meant by my NRA example is that if you’re against gun laws it doesn’t make much sense that you’d want to see existing onces enforced, but it’s the kind of thing you might say to avoid appearing to fanatical about the subject.

    Basically, when an NRA member says he wants existing gun laws enforced, he’s probably lying.

  20. Dan, that’s true if you’re not an actual NRA member but merely an NRA member that someone has constructed from straw and designed to refute other people’s arguments. A real NRA member – one made out of flesh and blood, with clothes to buy and taxes to pay and friends to go hang out with, that one might place a priority on the rule of law.

  21. That guy Meathead annoys the shit outta me. Somebody needs to tell him to lay off the fried foods too.

    I find it fascinating that Reiner has hijacked millions of dollars from the fifty-cents-per-pack Tobacco Tax fund to fund the barrage of infomercials in Californicate about what a boon to society pre-school really is.

    The idea is to soften up the electorate and lull them into a YES vote on HIS universal pre-school initiative come June. And he’s getting away with it and nobody in the media has said one stinking word about it.

    That’s illegal you say? Not quite. Reiner is walking just this side of illegal because he never once mentions his initiative in the ad copy; only that preschool is good for kids and good for society.

    It falls under TWC rule number 2:

    * What’s legal isn’t always moral
    * What’s illegal isn’t always immoral

    I really, really detest that SOB.

  22. Funny intro Tim.

    Here is how that fargin’ SOB Reiner feels about OTHER PEOPLE’S tobacco taxes. He’s willing to go to the mat to protect his personal bucket of taxpayer’s blood.

    Hypocrisy thy name is Meathead.

    I really hate that guy.

  23. Unfortunately, most work is edited and the piece was somewhat edited for the San Francisco market. The original language in our piece sounded much less like an endorsement of the targeted preschool subsidy.

    If we had more space, I would have argued not to strengthen these subsidies in the sense of expanding them. Instead we need to examine how California already allocates $3 billion dollars to low-income folks through several separate and distinct bureaucracies.

    If we were to continue this subsidy, how would we streamline these existing programs to direct more of the money to the families and less to the administrative institutions that run the programs. etc. etc.

  24. I just read TWC’s link. Wow.

  25. Canada’s Minister of Social Development (ex hockey player Ken Dryden) has been made responsible for implementing a National Child Care program, based heavily on the Quebec model, across all of Canada. Most Canadians think the rest of the world is jealous of Quebec’s child care program. (Of course waiting for child care is no big deal for a citizenry that’s used to waiting months and years for health care.)

  26. Interesting — the article that TWC links to makes clear the fiscal dependence of these programs on tobacco taxes. It’s nice to have that out in the open.

  27. Evan, well said, well said. A little too generous on your part though. Reiner is much worse than that.

  28. My boss once openly expressed the wish that Rob Reiner would run for governor. I almost choked.

  29. Thanks Ruthless. I appreciate that.

  30. The idea is to soften up the electorate and lull them into a YES vote on HIS universal pre-school initiative come June. And he’s getting away with it and nobody in the media has said one stinking word about it.

    I stand partially corrected, there has been some stirring in second tier media. LA Daily News did expose the scam at one point. Not much elsewhere, particularly among the big boys in TV and print media.

  31. And it was on hit’n’run – did everyone but Ruthless miss it?

  32. And it was on hit’n’run – did everyone but Ruthless miss it? šŸ™‚

  33. Smoke up, Johnny! It’s for da chiiiiildren, dontcha know.

  34. More from a atheisstic pinko meathead he is still a jerk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.