Patterico's Pontifications


Obama: Moms Staying At Home Is “Not a Choice We Want Americans to Make”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:16 pm

They want to control your life:

Sometimes, someone, usually mom, leaves the workplace to stay home with the kids, which then leaves her earning a lower wage for the rest of her life as a result. And that’s not a choice we want Americans to make.

OK with you if some Americans make that choice anyway, bub?

Disciplining Children And Social Media

Filed under: General — Dana @ 7:11 pm

[guest post by Dana]

With the rise of technology, it’s a new day for just about everything, including disciplining children. Raising a stir after his Facebook post disciplining his daughter, Kevin Jones’ garnered over 271,000 likes and more than 83,000 shares. This is “social media discipline.”

Here is Jones’ post:

Since my beautiful daughter Janiya wants to be grown & lie about her age. Saying she is 14,15,16,&18 years old. She claims to be in love and going out with a boyfriend which is completely against my rules!!!! I uncovered that she has been doing this for quite some time. She also has snuck and obtained social media accounts, also against my rules!!!! Heres the consequences behind her actions. An age defining shirt. Yes people she is 5’9 & 10years old.



Some commenters were fully supportive:

Lately, every form of punishment for children seems to be considered by most either embarrassing or very harsh. When children embarrass their parents in public, society condemns the parents and says that they need to discipline their children. Why can’t parents discipline children publicly? If your child stole an item from a crowded store in your presence, would Psychologists prefer parents not to chastise the child in front of others who saw the child stealing, just because the child may feel embarrassed? If we are in an internet era, and the child has already posted her pictures, why is society condemning this father for trying to deter predatory elements such as paedophiles, risky and horny teenagers etc, that she has and would have attracted or who could have negatively changed her future paths of life? This is the most innovative form of punishment that I have seen in a long time. She publicly displayed herself to those boys and men when she knew it was against her father’s – and the same hypocritical society’s – rules, and she is getting suitable punishment, not torture, not abuse, publicly.

And some commenters, while agreeing with Jones’ intentions, questioned the execution:

I applaud you brother for your intentions, but its a sad day in our society and culture when a parent disciplines their child through the same outlet that drove the behavior. Social media has caused our kids to forget what it means to be kids and has caused parents to forget how to be parents. The focus should not be on how viral this post has gone or how many comments it has received, but why would a 10-year old feel the need to seek the attention of an older male at such an early age. Fathers, we need to love on our daughters to the point that when they are approached by older guys, they know and can recognize what real love is and not feel the need to seek the attention and attempt to fill an empty void in their lives. We as fathers are the first person our daughters date. They compare every male that enters their lives to us. It is by our actions that define what a man is and exhibit that behavior based on how we treat the women in our lives. Again, I applaud you brother for your intentions, but when was the last time you dated your daughter??

It’s been a long time since I’ve disciplined kids, so I would be curious to hear from parents who are still in the throes of it, as well as from those who disciplined their kids before the existence of social media, via the old tried and true methods, including restriction, confiscation of items important to the child, loss of privileges, etc. Do you think public shaming (if we can call it that) is effective, damaging, or just another desperate attempt by parents struggling to do their best and keep control over those they love the most?


From the “Awkward Headlines” Department

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:18 pm

Offered without further comment.

Screen Shot 2014-11-01 at 4.16.11 PM

Thanks to Dana.

UPDATE: Yes, she’s wearing a blue dress.

Feds Convene Grand Jury in George Zimmerman Case

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:09 pm

Cowards. Andrew Branca on Thursday:

The Orlando Sentinel newspaper today reported that the Department of Justice has assembled a Federal Grand jury to meet next week to hear testimony about whether George Zimmerman violated Trayvon Martin’s civil rights on the night that Zimmerman ultimately killed Martin in self-defense.

When you have a case you can’t ethically prosecute, you don’t submit it to a grand jury and hide behind their decision. You reject it. Period.

Like I said: cowards.

Proposition 47 Is a Disaster

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:06 pm

Speaking as a private citizen, I will guess that most prosecutors don’t much care whether their docket is clogged with a bunch of drug possession cases. Then again, it’s mostly not their neighborhoods that are populated by drug addicts and drug sellers. But making any theft $950 or less an automatic misdemeanor means people can steal as often as they like, and when caught, will serve a “year” (that’s about 30 days in actual time, folks) at most. Cost of doing business.

WalMart can maybe absorb the losses that will result. Mom and pop groceries are going to take it on the chin. And I suspect we will see even more reluctance than usual to locate businesses in high crime areas.

And some violent people, currently locked up for petty theft, will be released. For example, the second fellow mentioned in this post could be released under the proposition.

Unintended consequences.

I used to get wound up about this kind of thing. I wrote post after post about a long-ago attempt to water down Three Strikes. These days I more resigned. People are going to do what they’re going to do. When it turns out badly, I’ll be there to say I told them so. But I can’t waste my precious life force getting agitated about it. This is probably the only post I’ll write about this dog of a proposition.

Bad idea. Don’t say I didn’t tell you, because I just did.

UPDATE: A George Soros Production.

Kaci Hickox: Doing What She Wants, No Matter How It Impacts Others

Filed under: General — Dana @ 2:52 pm

[guest post by Dana]

After winning a court reprieve, nurse Kaci Hickox continues to self-monitor in Fort Kent, Maine. The judge who rejected the Ebola quarantine urged Hickox to wisely “demonstrate her full understanding of human nature and the real fear that exists.” And the fear does exist in her town, and it is negatively impacting local businesses and the local medical center:

The situation “is bound to affect the whole town,” Steve Daigle, owner of Stevie D’s Panini Plus said Friday. “The economy around here is already so fragile, every dollar we lose hurts us.”

Daigle said he has spoken to several customers who have told him they plan to shop out of town until the 21-day incubation period for the virus ends for Hickox on Nov. 10.

“People are afraid,” Daigle said.

On Friday, another business owner in Fort Kent, who did not want to give his name, said he, too, has heard from customers planning to shop out of town in the wake of the Ebola concerns.

A local dentist also voiced his displeasure that Hickox has not committed to home quarantine.

“I think that is very irresponsible of her,” Dr. Lucien Daigle said. “She cannot guarantee 100 percent she will not become symptomatic [and] in that worst-case scenario the ramifications will be beyond what you can imagine.”

There already has been an adverse impact, Daigle said, pointing out the numerous cancellations of routine and elective procedures at Northern Maine Medical Center.

Earlier this week Peter Sirois, chief executive officer at NMMC, said the hospital had dealt with 10 such cancellations on Tuesday alone.

“It’s not acceptable she is doing this,” Daigle said. “Especially from a health care provider; why would she want to do this?”

Daigle also suggests that the negative attention is actually distracting from the noble work Hickox did fighting Ebola in Sierra Leone. Further:

He said it is understandable people in Fort Kent are concerned and they should not be faulted for that.

“People are very caring around here,” he said. “But don’t put them at risk.”

Fort Kent Police Chief Tom Pelletier is assured of Hickox’s compliance as she has stated she has no plans to go into town to shop or dine:

“[Hickox] is working in good faith with the professional health care workers,” Pelletier told the media as he and the CDC staffer returned to the SUV a few minutes later.

“They understand the sentiment in the community, and they do not want to be disruptive,” Pelletier said.

For his part, Gov. Paul LePage disagrees:

“She’s violated every promise she’s made so far, so I can’t trust her,” he said Friday, answering reporters’ questions after a news conference celebrating a business opening in Yarmouth. “I don’t trust her.”

(pic via Weasel Zippers)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0703 secs.