Parents Rights

Is This the Creepiest Show Promo MSNBC Has Ever Run?

|

Transcript: 

"We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we have this private notion of children. 'Your kid is yours, and totally your responsibility.' We haven't had a very collective notion of 'these are our children.' So part of it is to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.

"Once it's everybody's responsibility, and not just the household's, then we start making better investments." 

H/T AllahPundit

NEXT: John McCain Doesn't Understand Threats to Filibuster Gun Control Legislation

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. If children belong to everyone, I guess we can get rid of the Amber Alert system.

    1. You win H&R for the day.

      1. Ashlyn. I see what you mean… Earn 10 to 60$/hr working from home with Google! I work two shifts 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening. And whats awesome is Im working from home so I get more time with my kids I follow this great link, goo.me/Jobs

    2. Yes, really, why should that molester be any less entitleed to benefit from the child than it’s parents?

    3. Best sarcasm in days. Please, as your reward, take you pick of any of the community women.

      1. Melissa Harris-Perry. Her name is hyphenated. She is free to do so, no laws needed, just saying.

    4. According to John Derbyshire, this witch makes a million bucks a year from MSNBC and her fake college job.

  2. What the sweet fuck?

    Reason #458673459683475 why I don’t have kids.

    1. I had lunch this weekend with a couple of my wife’s cousins. These people are annoying suburban Obama voting liberals. They have a daughter in the sixth grade. Last year they pulled her out of public school because they felt the environment was too oppressively liberal. I am not kidding. I couldn’t have a political conversation with these people for ten minutes without it getting angry. They are that liberal. But even they can’t stomach the public schools in NOVA.

      1. The common man is always somebody else.

        1. I had to grit my teeth. They will pull their little snowflake out but then happily vote for the very people who inflict this shit on everyone else.

          1. My good Jewish-liberal neighbors bought a new minivan last week. By the very next day, the Obama 2012 tribal markings were already on it. So was their Orioles sticker, so I can forgive them somewhat.

            1. Hmm, I want a bumper sticker now that says “Go O’s! And Fuck Obama!”

            2. But…but…the 2012 election is over. They put stickers from a done and gone election on their car? Are…are your neighbors retarded? Do they have a hat and a job and bring home the bacon?

              1. TRIBAL MARKINGS. Are you deef?

                Their daughter is frighteningly driven and was accepted to Harvard outright. She ended up going elsewhere (to her credit), but they seem to have it down and do all the right things in those circles. It’s like living next to kosher Ned Flanders.

                1. But…but…the election is done and gone. That makes no sense. Not even for mongoloids. How do you…I…

              2. It’s like those little fish decals. It is all about signalling to your people.

                1. Yeah or the ones that have feet. People love being in a tribe.

                2. I’ve got a Phish decal on my car. But it’s only signalling the cops anymore.

            3. Show them this:

              http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/…..4897_n.jpg

          2. and they are still your friends why?

            1. My wife’s relatives.

            2. Not sure who you were replying to, but one said cousins and the other neighbors. No one said friends.

          3. But their shit is good shit, other people’s shit is wrong shit. Now that I understand, can someone plug me into the collective so that I can stop worrying?

    2. This isn’t really about having kids.

      1. This is about having control of kids.

    3. Didn’t you hear what Comrade Harris-Perry said? Even if you don’t have kids, you do.

      1. As long as the good Comrade doesn’t mind my teaching other people’s kids about libertarianism!

    4. Kids are awesome.

      You don’t want kids because of communist idiots like this? In that case why not just off yourself and get it over with?

      1. Yeah, that’s totally what I said.

        1. You said this is a reason why you don’t have kids. The article is about a communist idiot saying stupid communist things.

          1. You said it yourself, that’s a reason I don’t have kids.

            1. But it surely is a dust mote of a reason compared to that night you spend with Warty.

              1. You cannot tell if it is day or night inside Warty’s basement.

              2. Don’t make me go to my bunk again!

                1. …Why not?

      2. How do you get from not wanting to have kids to no alternative but suicide?

    5. Reason #458673459683475 why I don’t have kids.

      Except you do, because apparently you’re responsible for everyone else’s even though you kept your own shit together.

      1. It Takes a Village.

    6. Reason #458673459683475 why I don’t have kids.

      The reason you don’t have children is because you’re an autistic manchild and no woman would engage in sexual intercourse with you with the intent of bearing children.

      1. Um, you realize you are replying to a woman, right?

      2. Uh huh. That’s some fine biology education you got there, Lou.

  3. Someone needs to punch that bitch in the uterus.

  4. So, at this point, the only thing anyone privately owns is a fetus.

    1. In the future, not taking your prenatal vitamin supplkements will be considered child abuse.

      1. But you can still terminate the fetus with it’s toes out of the womb so long as you’ve taken your prenatal vitamins. So no worries, choice is still intact.

    2. I could see da librulz outlawing abortion for the good of the collective, if Social Security remains insolvent after they remove the elitist earnings cap.

  5. your child — “You didn’t make that!”

  6. It’s nowhere near as creepy as knowing she’s dead serious and has tens of thousands convinced she’s right.

    1. Tens of thousands of single mothers who want Big Daddy to take care of them.

  7. This is why you don’t compromise with statists. No matter what you give them, they’ll come back and demand more. Now I’m responsible for my neighbors’ kids? FUCK THAT.

  8. I have this sudden urge to clean my guns.

  9. How wrong can one person be.

    First, we have invested WAY TOO MUCH in public education. Second- if someone tries to tell me my kids belongs to the community… I’m not sure what type of bad stuff will happen- but it won’t end well for them.

    1. I’m sure that Officer Friendly will be happy to execute you in front of your children to send a message to the community.

      1. He’ll get Randy Weaver’d out of principle. “You can’t hide from us.”

      2. But their dog dies first.

  10. If the Borg ever come here, we just need to air this ad, and they’ll assume we’re already assimilated.

    1. No, they would just assume were too damned stupid and inferior of a species to be worth assimilating. What biological and technological distinctiveness could we offer that would make them better?

      1. Fried Chicken.

      2. Burritos and Tamales. I don’t of any other species that has those.

        1. But every species has Swedish meatballs.

    2. Are you implying the Borg are not here and that we are not assimilated?

    3. Damn it you beat me to the Borg comment.

  11. Why and how did the collectivists just suddenly come roaring out of the woodwork? Were they waiting there the whole time?

    1. Yes. These ideas aren’t new, I’ve heard them for years. They are just emboldened to say them in public now.

      1. I think they need some negative reinforcement.

      2. And this is what will destroy them.

    2. They have always believed this shit. But two things happened in the last 20 years. First, the rise of the internet prevented them from hiding what they really were. They always used to say this kind of shit to each other privately and at liberal gatherings. We just never heard about it.

      Second, the black messiah came and convinced them that they don’t have to hide in the shadows anymore. The feel free to proudly proclaim the totalitarian gospel now.

      1. And the Soviet Union knew how to deal with anyone who did not support the brave new world of communism. Too the camps and up against the wall, MSNBC would cheerlead for that

        1. Oops, was a reply to your next comment down.

    3. Waiting, plotting, spawning their new army.

    4. This is not a new idea. I studied about the Kibbutzim in Israel. These are private communities, but very collectivist. But children are not seen as a parental responsibility, but a communal one. Kids don’t even live with their parents, at least they did not in the early days. The Kibbutzim have relaxed on many of their rules. But originally, the kids slept in a childrens house and had little interaction with their own parents.

      1. See e.g. Plato’s Republic.

        1. And Shakers.

          1. And on the fictional side Ayn Rands Anthem.

      2. I bet those kids grew to be fucked up in the head.

      3. The problem is that the Kibbutzum are low-scale and extremely culturally and ethnically homogenous. Try to scale this idea up to a culturally diverse, high-population area and it would rapidly devolve into tribalistic warfare over limited resources (see: just about every urban area in this country).

        1. well, even in the kibbutzim, it did not work for more than one generation. The second generation wanted to be more active in their own children’s lives. One could probably see why.

    5. Remember Episiarch, these people supported the Soviet Union. Don’t ever let them tell you they didn’t. They liked the old USSR and supported it. And they were not useful idiots. They knew from the late 1930s how horrible it was and liked it anyway. It had free healthcare, education and full employment. And that was enough.

      1. They don’t deny it. It is a badge of pride to have been a red diaper baby.

      2. More importantly, it didn’t have any evil capitalists extracting surplus labor value from the proletariat. They liked the USSR BECAUSE it oppressed people. People they hate. The “dictatorship of the proletariat” was about getting revenge and oppressing the boergeois more than it was ever about human welfare.

    6. It’s the weird part of all of this. Were there really that many total state people hanging out in the wings, or is this some sort of odd fad, like Pet Rocks?

      1. That’s what I’m asking, ProL. I mean, are we normally surrounded by TOTAL STATE pod people all day and don’t know it? Or is this just some fad? I’m scared now, ProL! Hold me!

        1. Being stuck in the DC Reality Distortion Field, I can tell you that they’ve been there. They congregate together exclusively and share ghost stories of people who think differently than they do and what should be done about them.

          Pre-election, I got stuck with other parents at a People’s Republic of Takoma Park house for The Boy’s end-of-season party for his soccer team. It was all I could do not set the house on fire and run. The hubby had some old MAD magazines form the 60’s, so I kept my sanity with those.

          1. Ah, the Nuclear-Free Republic of Takoma Park.

            1. And don’t think the Sun is getting away scot-free with it’s fusing!

              1. I’m surprised they haven’t endomed the town already.

                1. I only wish they would hurry up and get on with the dome building. Do we have to cut a door in?

        2. Maybe that’s all fascism and other varieties of statism ever really were–fads. Not political or economic beliefs. Just the Wave writ large and with much more blood.

          1. Props for ‘The Wave’ reference.

          2. Funny, I tied to search for the Wave a few weeks ago on the intertubes and came up empty.

            1. It be on teh Youtubez

            2. Lend a hand to a fledgling, what is the wave?

        3. I mean, are we normally surrounded by TOTAL STATE pod people all day and don’t know it?

          Yes. Of all things, how did you not know this?

    7. I have no idea. I’m astounded at how many idiots there are openly supporting communism/socialism. Unheard of a few short years ago. Now commonplace.

      I don’t know if they’ve always been here but to afraid to voice their ideology or if this is newfound ideology.

      Either way. Stupid and scary.

      1. Like the collapse of communism under its own weight and all of the horrors never even happened.

        1. They’ll get it right the 112th time they try it!

        2. But the crimes weren’t really exposed. Only a few communists were ever charged for what they did. There are few TV or news stories about the crimes. Its all been pushed under the rug.

          And that has too do with Soviet and Eastern Europe communism. The Chinese and Vietnamese communists are still in power, but they have bought off any criticism with cheap labor and goods.

          1. The crimes were exposed but they were not taught. Think about it, if you depend on your schooling for your understanding of history, how would you ever know about those crimes? –

            1. I grew up in the Cold War in the US and I remember my teacher showing Soviet propaganda movies about how wonderful the Soviet Union was. Happy dancing farmers and strong workers building a new society.

              1. I remember getting something similar from my “Social Studies” class in Canada. This whole moral equivalency thing where both sides supposedly had pros and cons. Only, the Soviet side was presented as being ideologically purer and nobler, just possibly flawed in implentation, in some ways, maybe.

              2. If the Nazis had fought to a stalemate, probably would have heard the same stories about them.

            2. that’s where family history has to come in

              for me it was “who is that in the picture. that’s your grandfather’s brother. he disappeared in the Ukrainian purge”

              1. Sadly, there isn’t much of that. Think how hard it is to keep people aware of the Holocaust. With the crimes of communism it is ten times harder.

                1. It’s what makes me go all old curmudgeon on every stupid kid I see wearing those fucking Che shirts. They truly don’t have any idea.

              2. for me it was “who is that in the picture. that’s your grandfather’s brother. he disappeared in the Ukrainian purge

                “So mom, why did the family leave Russia?”

                “Once the Bolsheviks became active, somebody cut off my great-grandfather’s head and left it on his porch. It’s never safe to be bourgeois and Jewish in chaotic times.”

        3. Like the collapse of communism under its own weight and all of the horrors never even happened.

          But OUR Top. Men. are better than their Top. Men.

          1. What’s particularly irksome about that mindset is that there are no Top Men. It’s not even possible, not in the long term. That’s been tested by thousands of years of human history.

            We’re all untrustworthy with power over others. Even if some individuals could handle that sort of power, we can’t and shouldn’t trust them with it.

            1. In my fantasies of holding the Oval Office, I do nothing but pardon people all morning.

              Then in the afternoon I shoot guns in the pistol range that I have converted the press room to. Followed by a nap. Then I bang girls who love me being the President. Then I sleep.

              Thats Monday-Thursday. Friday through Sunday is at Camp David.

              1. Add “veto everything”, and change “bang girls” to “bang thick, hairy men” and yours lines up pretty well with mine.

                1. Probably make room for “fire federal employees and disband entire Cabinet Departments” too, but I like both of your rough draft schedules.

                  1. I’ll be in my bunk.

                2. Add “veto everything”, and change “bang girls” to “bang thick, hairy men” and yours lines up pretty well with mine.

                  Okay…we’ll put you down for VP. You’re just a girl so no harm done!

    8. The gun control debate and the slight acceptance they thought people had for a while about restricting “assault weapons” has really gotten that hobby horse moving.

    9. I know all things are not Obama’s fault, for instance, loaning tax payer money to his crony friends that will not be paid back, does not make him at fault for those companies failure. However, I do think seeing a communist in the WH has empowered the lot of them. Political doors have been opened and they are espousing old tired lines of “Fill in the Blank” __________ Justice.

    10. They had a 10-point agenda, or maybe it was 20, I forget. Either way we’re 95 percent through it already.

  12. They just keep pulling that mask back more and more. I suppose that’s a good thing.

    Even more batshit-fucking sad is how many people will sit there and no there heads in agreement.

    1. Ah feck…”no there” = “nod their”

    2. Don’t you care about children JW?

      1. I care about *my* kids.

        The she-spawn is Skyping with this teenage girl in the UK that she met in her tumblr anime universe (and yes, she is a teenage girl or the creepo is the best mimic I’ve ever spoken to). The wife-unit is freaking about why this other girl is up at 3:00 AM her time, talking to the she-spawn and why do her parents let her do this??!1!1!!!

        I keep noting, futilely, how this other girl’s schedule is not *our* problem.

        1. yeah. Maybe she has insomnia. Some kids operate differently than others. Or maybe she is sneaky and her parents have no idea.

        2. Why does your wife care about the hours that some council house trash keeps? Is the concept of Not My Business beyond her?

          1. Is the concept of Not My Business beyond her?

            Pretty much.

        3. It’s not 3:00 a.m. and it’s not the UK. She’s Skyping with a Thai prostitute at 3:00 p.m., Prostitute Local Time.

          1. I’m OK with this either way. That’s win-win for me.

        4. Maybe she is skyping with Jake at Allstate? Is he wearing khakis?

          1. Does she sound hideous?

        5. Are you sure your daughter isn’t Chris Hansen?

  13. “The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy ? everything.”

  14. Because nothing is better cared for than the commons.

    1. “Let’s treat our kids like a public bathroom!”

      1. That image is wrong in so many ways.

    2. I’m from the government and I’m here to help.

    3. They hate when you point that out.

      They either get pissed or claim that the right’s selfishness influences or “causes” people to trash various ‘commons’

  15. If you want to piss of a left-winger just share them this gem of a quote from Mussolini:

    “Everything for the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”

    How can anyone possibly dispute that this is the core of contemporary left-wing ideology when we have ads like those?

    1. Well, you can’t. The TEAMs are objectively fascist.

  16. I particularly like she claimed we don’t spend enough on public schools, as if that is self-evident and uncontroversial. But, I guess, if you’re a navel-gazing totalitarian shitheel who fantasizes about gassing your opponents like this nasty twat, it is.

    1. But it is self-evident that we need more and better educated and better compensated teachers and administrators and counselors, with more generous and more secure health and disability and retirement benefits, for the sake of the children, or the results wouldn’t be as bad as they are now!

  17. But nobody watches MSNBC. In this case, is that good or bad? Maybe if more low-info voters were exposed to this silliness, they’d stop voting for statists just because they don’t want to be seen as uncool.

    1. Entertainment for angry unemployed people. They don’t even try to be professional anymore.

      1. I know a guy who’s a big fan of MSNBC. He’s told me how to make crack a couple times.

        1. He’s told me how to make crack a couple times.

          At least he has a marketable skill! Melissa Harris-Perry, much like reasons favorite S o c k p u p p e t have to hide out in lefty academia so they don’t starve.

  18. So I can advocate the overthrow of the government but not punching a woman in her reproductive organs? I’ll remember that next time H & R.

    1. You have a problem with not being able to advocate assaulting women?

  19. Anything that goes right in the public education system is a result of the tireless efforts of selfless educators.

    Anything that goes wrong is a result of bad parenting.

    Heads they win, tails you lose.

    1. I’ve avenged myself on the public education system by not having any kids. Try to corrupt their non-existent minds! Just try it!

      1. Proglodytes find a way.

      2. They’ve avenged themselves on you (and me) by making us pay for it, and training everyone’s kids to vote against us.

      3. Yes, it’s always a good vengance plan to allow your enemies to out-populate you.

    2. Anything that goes wrong is a result of bad parenting.

      I thought it was not enough money being flushed down the toilet.

  20. This is not new.

    Hillary Clinton: It Takes a Village . . . .

  21. I’m not watching that video. Just the quote from it is more than enough. The stupidity of the left has reached a new all time low, and they are not finished yet, there’s a lot more stupid on the way.

    So what do they plan on doing? Forcing people who chose to not have kids, to become involved in parenting other peoples kids? That’s going to go over really well.

    I

    1. It starts off soft. They think they can do all of these sort of feel good things and everyone will go along. Think about the crap Cass Sunstein peddles and you know what I am talking about. Those things never work of course. So they quickly resort to more and more coercive measures until finally they are locking people up and shooting people. This movie always ends the same way.

      1. “But always ? do not forget this, Winston ? always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless.”

      2. And also, “Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”

        1. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing

          Or as we like to call it around the house, “parenting”.

        2. Aka “Warty’s Basement”?

      3. Chief Wiggum: Okay, I assume you all know why you’re here. That’s right, you’re all angry, sick people. But, over these next eight hours, you will be broken down to the level of infants, then rebuilt as functional members of society, then broken down again, then lunch, then, if there’s time, rebuilt once more.

    2. To them it is not stupidity.

      It is a logical conclusion given their philosphical and political beliefs.

      1. The other logical conclusion of their philosophical and political beliefs is everyone ends up in ovens.

        1. but at least it will be fair!

  22. As we all know, the best investments are made in common property, not private property. This has been well known since at least 1705. The moment something is transferred to the commons, it gets all the investment and protection it needs.

    1. Re: MJGreen,

      As we all know, the best investments are made in common property, not private property.

      You mean like this common property?

      1. Ewww! That must be the worst toilet in Scotland from Trainspotting. The one Ewen MacGregor went swimming in.

    2. I would suggest not doing a Google search of “Tragedy of the Privates.”

  23. Is This the Creepiest Show Promo MSNBC Has Ever Run?

    I’d call it the most telling.

    1. It was just another mask coming off.

  24. We’re seriously considering yanking one of our kids in public high school and doing a mix of home school/Florida Virtual School/dual enrollment. Public school is getting worse every year, with less and less ability to truly educate.

  25. The American experiment in liberty is drawing to a close as humanity reverts back to its default state of slavery.

    1. That experiment ended long long ago Sarcasmic. Think pre Civil War

  26. We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we have this private notion of children.

    Goatfucking, laudanum-guzzling Jesus, what a vapid, moronic twat.

    1. So much is warped and distorted. I’m fine with the idea that people should cooperate as a community, but that not bad idea is not even remotely the same as the community’s rights trumping yours.

      No one–no one–cares or makes the sacrifices we do for our kids. Fuck the power-hungry meddlers.

      1. But, but, but Tony said that the only reason why parents bother to feed and clothe their children is because the government tells them to!

      2. But ProL, they only want what’s best for you and your kids. Don’t think of it as meddling, think of it as the community reshaping your children into little drones who will follow orders much better than you do. They’re only here to help!

        1. Bitch can’t even manage her own first marriage and she’s somehow qualified to have input on how I raise my children? No thanks.

          1. It’s not her fault that her husband turned out to be an intolerable asshole. It’s the community’s fault. They didn’t raise him right. So she gave him back to the community for a little more raising.

        2. Oh, you mean like the Hitler Youth? I guess some Hitler Youth kids did pretty well, later in life, like the Pope Emeritus (I’ve heard he wasn’t actually in the Hitler Youth, but let’s leave him in for example purposes).

      3. I think they are just lazy. I think progs simply want to dilute responsibility because they are incompetent, fear failure and have a fairly high probability of being failures. They go on and on about saving the children through community involvement, when in actuality, it absolves them of the need to take any responsibility for how their snowflake turns out.

        Universal healthcare to save the sick, when the real reason they want it is so they personally do not need to be responsible for obtaining it on their own.

        Welfare to save the poor, when in actuality they see a high probability of them needing it in the future so they want to make sure it is as robust as possible.

        They wrap it up as altruistic when the real reason is actually fear and greed.

    2. Can’t this work in the opposite way?

      How about making it easier to invest in private education? Why take public education as a given? (Idiot)

  27. What 10 years ago would have been an Onion parody is now a serious ad.

  28. http://www.slate.com/blogs/mon…..n_won.html

    Reagan and Thatcher may have had useful ideas back then, but they’re not relevant anymore, because that was like before I was born you know.

    1. Don’t miss the comments.

      Jack Manning
      Those who would live with the starvation of a child, those who would tolerate the end of the middle class as a greater and greater percentage of the wealth go to the lucky golden ticket winners, have already suffered the death of the soul.

      That defines the conservative movement.

      Those who still believe that we can make this a better place to live and raise our children, those who dismiss the tyranny of cynicism, those who believe as did Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Lincoln that we may establish a government for the promotion of the common good, they are the inheritors of the enlightenment and the progressive spirit.
      7 Minutes Ago from slate.com ? Reply

      Joe Kidd
      Where are American children starving?
      4 Minutes Ago from slate.com ? Reply

      Jack Manning
      They are not. Because of progressivism.
      The progressivism that said that every child should have a free education.

      The progressivism that says that there should be assistance for those families that cannot feed their children.

      The progressivism that says that every child, and importantly, their parents too, should have health insurance.

      The progressivism that said there should be a “social” security for the aged.

      The progressivism that you hate so much.
      19 Seconds Ago from slate.com ? Reply

      1. Read the comments on Jennifer Rubin’s Right Turn blog on WAPO sometime. Rubin is your typical right of center blogger. She is not horrible but nothing special. But the comments are a special sea of stupid. You can’t find that kind of stupidity and ignorance just anywhere.

      2. Demonization is just lies with hate added in. Not much good is served by lying. Especially when there’s plenty of smearing that can be done with the truth.

      3. “tyranny of cynicism?”

    2. Thatcher, like Ronald Reagan in the United States, became what Johnson never was?more than an influential politician but a generation-defining icon.

      The clause after the dash is a mess. It’s like a random collection of words. This guy is a professional writer? Is Slate run like Harrison Bergeron?

    3. Hitch is dead and buried. Why continue to punish yourself by reading Slate?

  29. I actually find I refreshing that they’re being so open. The problem is that nobody but us whacko-birds seems to be alarmed. My fear is that most people would agree with that ad and ignore the implications.

    1. Intentions trump results.

    2. Most people I know Would agree. I mean she sounds reasonable, she’s black (sort of), with corn rows…..and it’s not like anything bad will happen here in America. Implications ? what implications ?

      1. By her definition, she’s black. Although her mother is white, she’s been quoted as saying that she doesn’t see herself as bi-racial, but rather, as black.
        That’s actually sort of sad in a way – she denies 50% of her gene pool.

  30. Someone should follow her little brats around, correcting and yelling at them throughout the day.

    1. Take them to the range and teach them all about guns.

  31. This woman thinks Logan’s Run was about destroying a utopia.

    1. ObamaCarousel.

      Damn, why didn’t I think of this before?

    2. You don’t need death squads to decide who dies if everyone dies.

  32. Between this and Obama’s talk about retirement account limits, we’re discovering that there was a mask underneath the mask.

  33. when you begin with the false premise of “We have never invested as much in public education as we should have”, and no one questions it as such, the rest is not that difficult.

  34. When the Borg finally arrive, assimilating MSNBC will reduce them to the level of sentience of toasters.

    So we’ve got that going for us.

    1. So we’ve got that going for us

      Which is nice!

      /spackler

  35. those who would tolerate the end of the middle class as a greater and greater percentage of the wealth go to the lucky golden ticket winners, have already suffered the death of the soul.

    That’s not a very nice way to talk about Tim Geithner.

  36. “We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we have this private notion of children.”

    So she’s a Communist. Are you guys really surprised?

    1. No. Not surprised, just a little taken aback that what I thought was responsibility for raising my kids appears to be some sort of bizarre “private notion”.

      So, in that case, which one of you wants to get my kid to lacrosse tonight? And, he’ll need new cleats shortly. The new Warriors look pretty nice.

      1. Lacrosse is bourgeois. Your kid will play soccer and like it.

        1. This is the State of Hockey, dude. Lacrosse here is nothing like the effete East. But you’re right, I suspect an attempted lax ban before long.

      2. Wait a minute, don’t we need to vote first on whether or not he’s allowed to play lacrosse? How did you slip that decision past the community?

  37. If these are our children, can we all claim 100 million dependents on our taxes?

    1. No. Since they’re *everyone’s* children, the tax write-off does not apply. It would be like claiming that, oh, Puerto Rico is your dependent.

    2. If these are our children, can we all claim 100 million dependents on our taxes?

      You sir have a bright future ahead of you with that kind of “out of the box” thinking.

  38. Aside from all the other problems with this point of view, it fails to take into account the undeniable fact that parents are biologically programmed to feel more attached to their children than others in the “community”, and are inclined to favor thir OWN children over other people’s kids. You want to engineer a society that will actually work, you have to deal with human nature as it IS.

    And that fact IS that parents are simply NOT going to either treat other people’s children equal to their own, OR be willing to give their children away to society, even if society says it is in the kids best interest.

    Hence the propensity of parents to, you know, fight over things like custody and visitation rights.

    This isn’t just some Western cultural bias that you can legislate away.

    1. But, but, but the whole point of progressivism is to use force of government to change human nature! Social engineering is science! We’re all just clay to be molded by the government!

      1. And the cultural anthropoligists are the last people aside from Christian fundies to deny evolutionary theory when it comes to humans.

        We have to say that humans are a blank slate because anything less would be giving aid and comfort to racists and sexists.

    2. Two examples:
      Adoption – adopted kids are not necessarily treated any differently than biological children.

      Culture – there are cultures where a man raises his sister’s children as opposed to his own biological children. His sister’s children will be given the inheritance instead of his own biological ones. These are outliers, and definitely not the norm over most of humanity.

      1. 1. True, but an adopted child who lives with you from birth is different from a “community” child. Also, it’s difficult to measure for mother-child relationships given that most women who adopt children are infertile so they have no natural children to compare to.
        I think you’d be hard pressed to find a culture where ALL children are treated equally by the adults, regardless of parentage. Or where parents are punished for helping their own biological children. Also, foster children ARE treated differently from the biological children of foster parents.

        2. I think the cultures you refer to are matrilineal, to the man’s biological children are part of his wife’s family and carry his wife’s family name, rather than his own. So then you mix this up with a patrilieal inheritance system, and the only heirs of his family name are his sister’s kids.

  39. which one of you wants to get my kid to lacrosse tonight?

    If he’s one of those kids who looks like he’s pulling on a rope when he passes the ball, I’d be happy to poke check him in the neck a few times.

  40. Hey there’s an idea Melissa, let’s make our kids public bathrooms!

  41. Children are either the slaves of parents or they are partly the responsibility of community. If children are to be 100% at the mercy of their parentage, then I don’t see how libertarians justify making them totally responsible for their lives when they grow up. Having bad parents is disadvantage enough in a society that has public education. You guys, what, what to make things just a little more Darwinian?

    What I find creepy is the fact that libertarians never talk about children because they can’t fit nonautonomous dependent humans into their worldview.

    1. *remember Counterfly*
      *remember Counterfly*
      *remember Counterfly*

    2. False dicotomy alert.

      If you’ve read much about libertarians theory there is this thing called “children’s rights”.

      Children aren’t 100% at the mercy of their parentage, but neither are they at the mercy of “the community”. They are individuals with rights that should progressively increase as they grow up, granting them progressively greater levels of individual autonomy until they reach full autonomy at adulthood.

      1. You probably appreciate that I see your rights scheme and “community responsibility” as synonymous. Someone’s going to have to intervene if a parent violates a child’s rights.

        1. The same way someone intervenes when an adult violates another adult’s rights.

          They’re called police and courts.

        2. We appreciate how that connection is completely ass-backwards. Melissa isn’t talking about police and courts, she’s talking about the community making parental decisions for children, you dense fuck. Either parents make decisions for their children, or the community does.

          1. Calling them parental decisions begs the question. How much authority over the lives of children should parents have in a society that affords children rights? It’s a good question, and not one you’ve answered.

            I would submit that human offspring have always been raised by communities rather than (strictly) parents alone. In tribal times extended family participated. It’s not a great leap to say modern communities can be useful in dispersing the burden and responsibility somewhat. All the more so for a society that relies on individual achievement to prosper–we suffer if we let children with no support network and bad parents be forever disadvantaged.

            1. dispersing the burden and responsibility

              That’s what it’s all about with progs. As I posted above:

              I think they are just lazy. I think progs simply want to dilute responsibility because they are incompetent, fear failure and have a fairly high probability of being failures. They go on and on about saving the children through community involvement, when in actuality, it absolves them of the need to take any responsibility for how their snowflake turns out.

              Universal healthcare to save the sick, when the real reason they want it is so they personally do not need to be responsible for obtaining it on their own.

              Welfare to save the poor, when in actuality they see a high probability of them needing it in the future so they want to make sure it is as robust as possible.

              They wrap it up as altruistic when the real reason is actually fear and greed.

              Thank you for admitting it.

              1. I’m sorry, I can’t take you seriously with that handle. At least you’re telegraphing exactly the idiotic egocentric worldview you apply to these questions. The fact is most of what’s good about the society you live in was created by progressive people.

                1. As you’ve admittedly never read the book, how would you know the first thing about my handle or the character it comes from?

                  More nonsensical, uncited, meaningless Tonybabble.

                  1. I’ve admitted to reading the book cover to cover. All of them actually.

            2. I would submit that human offspring have always been raised by communities rather than (strictly) parents alone

              Please drop the “it takes a village” nonsense. Children typically aren’t going to be able to overcome bad parenting even with a massive centralized bureaucracy of Top. Men. in place to try and counteract it. For managerialists like Harris-Perry, there’s no problem that exists that a government program can’t solve and don’t believe the limits of human scale are real. They act like the 1970s never happened.

              And that’s even if you completely disregard the dubious nature of CPS and the tendency of our increasingly hysterical society from raising red alerts at every possible thing that could “possibly” harm a child.

              If you want to encourage a strong society, then strong, stable families will provide more security than a random government program of nebulous value.

            3. Once again a liberal is completely oblivious to the possibility that liberal policies themselves create incentives for people to be “bad parents”.

              If there were no public facilities for parents to slough off responsibility they would be FORCED to take responsibility. Nobody talks about darwinism except liberals. People with some understanding of human nature realize that change can happen if you don’t create an artificial environment which rewards those who suck at life.

    3. Children are either the slaves of parents or they are partly the responsibility of community.

      Can you say “false dilemma?”

      If children are to be 100% at the mercy of their parentage, then I don’t see how libertarians justify making them totally responsible for their lives when they grow up.

      IF indeed…

      Having bad parents is disadvantage enough in a society that has public education. You guys, what, what to make things just a little more Darwinian?

      And having bad public education is disadvantage enough in a society with good parents.

      What I find creepy is the fact that libertarians never talk about children because they can’t fit nonautonomous dependent humans into their worldview.

      What I find creepy is that you can fit so many lies into one post without feeling guilty.

      1. I think my use of the word “partly” clears up the false dilemma. Either children are the total slaves of their parents, or they are afforded some rights despite parents’ wishes, which is to say they are partly the responsibility of the community. Glad we’re on the same page with Melissa Harris-Perry.

        1. No it doesn’t. You are still assuming the only options are “slavery” or community responsibility, in some combination. Of course, this is a convenient phrasing, as parental responsibility is no more or less slavery than the community being responsible for children. And you ignore the fact libertarians don’t think children are someone’s property. Actually, you don’t ignore it (you’ve been here too long to not know our position on this), you just lie about it.

        2. Only in your fucked up retarded mind is giving children rights somehow making the community responsible for them. Is the community responsible for adults because they have rights? God dammit you’re aggressively dumb.

        3. Saying they have “rights” is not the same as saying they are the responsibility of the community.

          If a parent beats his child, they should be charged with assault. How is the community involved any more in that than if an adult beats an adult and is charged with assault?

          1. It’s not in the case of physical assault, but what if a parent refuses medical care or schooling for a child?

            1. Refusing state-sponsored schooling is an act of mercy in this day and age.

              1. Lame stereotype avoids the issue.

                1. Lame stereotype avoids the issue.

                  Actually, the sociopathy of mass society and the role of the public school system in such dysfunction is quite pertinent to the issue.

                  Teachers shouldn’t complain about parents expecting them to be full-time babysitters when the public school system has spent decades indoctrinating students in the idea that the government should take care of you from cradle to grave.

            2. Re: Tony,

              It’s not in the case of physical assault, but what if a parent refuses medical care or schooling for a child?

              First, what do you mean by “refusing”? Please provide a clear definition, because what *I* believe is education is probably not what *YOU* believe is education. Same way, what *you* may think is medical care may not be the same as other parents believe is proper medical care.

              1. That’s why we shouldn’t leave it all up to parents.

                1. Again, we have these things called “crimes” that people aren’t allowed to commit.

                2. Whose this “we” you speak of? Oh yeah, your managerialst wet dream.

  42. Somebody haz a sad.

  43. I would suggest not doing a Google search of “Tragedy of the Privates.”

    You’ll just get a bunch of stories about trench warfare in WWI, right?

  44. Someone’s going to have to intervene if a parent violates a child’s rights.

    Substanceless drivel.

    Try harder. Or, better yet- STFU.

  45. So, if this statist fuck thinks that everyone, even people like me who don’t want kids, are supposed to be raising kids and guiding them… When do I get to teach her kids how to shoot guns?

  46. I like the assumption at the beginning. So many idiotic notions from the left contain similar unchallenged assumptions. Say what you will about Newt Gingrich, in debates he was very adept at identifying them.

    Anyways… “””We have never invested as much in public education as we should have “””

    Except by the metric of every other developed country. We get less bang for our buck than pretty much everywhere else. More money is not the answer MSNBC. More accountability is.

    1. Accountability starts with parents paying for the education of their own children. You’re not letting Junior goof off on his homework when it’s your own 10 grand you’re spending on tuition.

  47. Instead of arguing whether kids belong to their parents or kids belong to society, shouldn’t the libertarian position be that kids belong to themselves?

    1. Obviously children need someone to make choices for them. A child has to be told what to do by somebody, at least to a degree.

      1. Yes, but I suspect that degree is far below the level we currently set in this society. And in either case, we can still implement the responsibility for parents to act as guardians while recognizing that they are acting as gents of a self-owning being rather than as the owners of property.

        There’s a big difference between preventing your kids from running into traffic and, say, sending them off to a forced labor camp in Jamacia because you want to force them to believe in Jesus.

    2. It is, which makes MHP’s insistence on a false dichotomy between private and public ownership of children extra-special creepy.

      Parents raise children, but any kid who wants to ditch mom and dad in favor of greener pastures is absolutely, 100% free to do so.

  48. So, we’ve never had this concept of kids belonging to the collective, we’ve just required collective schooling on a collectively agreed to curriculum, funded collectively. Got it.

  49. Handing over control of one’s children to agents of the state is just hunky dory, but when Facebook tweaks their privacy policy every so often OMG WTF FREAK THE FUCK OUT.

  50. Re: Tony,

    Children are either the slaves of parents or they are partly the responsibility of community.

    They’re neither. How about that?

    If children are to be 100% at the mercy of their parentage, then I don’t see how libertarians justify making them totally responsible for their lives when they grow up.

    Which means your contention is wrong.

    Having bad parents is disadvantage enough in a society that has public education.

    You may still want to sterilize “undesirables” just like it was prescribed your philosophical betters of old…

    What I find creepy is the fact that libertarians never talk about children because they can’t fit nonautonomous dependent humans into their worldview.

    There has been plenty of talk about children and their rights, within libertarian circles. You just want to pretend it never happened.

    Children are dependant on their parents but that does not mean children have no rights as individuals. It just means that parents take on the responsibility as caretakers of children; the reason is because parents have a stake on their children’s survival. Once they are mature enough to make their own choices, which may happen much earlier than the totally arbitrary so-called “legal age,” children can emancipate from their parents.

  51. Re: Tony,

    How much authority over the lives of children should parents have in a society that affords children rights?

    Who’s begging the question now? Societies do not afford rights.

    Children are born with the same rights as everybody: life (which they have), liberty (which they have) and property (the first property they own being their bodies). What they lack is physical maturity and experience, which is what parents provide through feeding and nurturing.

    I would submit that human offspring have always been raised by communities rather than (strictly) parents alone.

    Your submission is wrong. Tribal societies are limited in size yet children are always the responsibility of the family, not of the whole tribe. If you think that you can call a group of cousins and aunts and uncles a “tribe,” then so be it, but you do not get to make the leap from “tribe” to “community” because the terms are certainly NOT interchangeable (a community is a more encompassing term than tribe.)

    It’s not a great leap to say modern communities can be useful in dispersing the burden and responsibility somewhat.

    You would be committing a reductio ad absurdum fallacy by making such leap.

  52. BTW, is this part of the social contract?

  53. She has a PhD and won’t ever be unemployed. How pitiful.

  54. It amazes me (even though I know it shouldn’t) that a news channel can brazenly cross over into naked agitprop and get absolutely no reaction from the public. I’m not sure which is more frightening, the promo or the lack of reaction.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.