Pelosi proclaims her goal to “do for childcare what we did for healthcare”

posted at 12:20 pm on November 18, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Yippee — just what we want, more federal government intrusion into our lives. Nancy Pelosi is no longer Speaker of the House, but she’s confident she will be again soon. Since she’s been “out of power,” she’s hit the fundraisers like the average 21-year-old hits the bars, attending 311 nationwide, drawing in $26 million for Democrats. Her short-term goal: To take back the 25 House seats necessary to regain her place as a part of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi axis of power.

Just to think we might again have to call Princess Pelosi “Madame Speaker” is unpleasant enough. But contemplate her long-term goal and the short-term goal looks even more sour. Pelosi told The Washington Post that at the top of her to-do list as the reinstated Speaker would be “doing for childcare what we did for healthcare reform.” She explained further:

“I could never get a babysitter — have five kids in six years and no one wants to come to your house. … And everywhere I go, women say the same thing” about how hard it is to find the kind of reliable care that would make their family lives calmer and work lives more productive. When it comes to “unleashing women” in a way that would boost the economy, she says, “this is a missing link.”

First, let’s talk about this as a follow-up to Obamacare. Has Pelosi paid no attention to the polls that show people are anything but pleased with a fourth entitlement program that offers them less control over their own health care? Just this week, Gallup released a poll that showed a plurality of Americans want the law completely repealed. Of late, even Democrats have soured on the law. Just 34 percent of Americans actually approve of the law, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Why, at a time when Americans react to government overreach with bitter disapproval, would Pelosi baldly bid for still more control? If I were a prog, I’d be hoping Pelosi would hush up. She’s giving it away too clearly: Progressives really do want a nanny state — literally.

Secondly, let’s talk about childcare for a minute. While I pity Pelosi’s plight to be burdened with so many children (not), I pity the plight of her children more. No, not because they were born to her (how mean would that be to say?!), but because they had to have a babysitter in the first place. Obviously, in many circumstances, that’s unavoidable, and I’m not criticizing parents who find themselves in a bind and do what it takes to make it work. But, in general, I’d argue couples should consider carefully whether one or the other of them would be able — and willing — to provide at-home child care before they have a kid in the first place. Why? Simple: Studies show that children who spend longer hours (30 hours/week) in daycare are more likely to exhibit problematic social behaviors including aggression, conflict, poorer work habits and risk-taking behaviors.

Anecdotally, the most common argument I’ve heard against stay-at-home parenthood is, quite simply, a lack of money. But I’d humbly submit that, beyond the three basics (food, shelter and clothing), children will benefit far more from the presence of a parent at home than from a few more material goodies. Also, consider the costs of daycare itself: The loss of a second income is at least partially offset by what a couple will save by not having to pay for childcare. The average cost of center-based daycare in the United States is $11,666 per year or $972 a month. That’s nothing to sneeze at. At the risk of trivializing the financial trials parents face (especially as I’m not a parent myself), I kinda can’t help but think, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.”

Most likely, parents just simply don’t want to give up the careers they’ve cultivated for the sake of their children. But staying home with kids doesn’t mean giving up all meaningful contributions to the outside world. My friend Chad Kent, for example, stays at home with his twin sons while his wife, a doctor, works outside the home — but he’s also a public speaker and blogger who breaks open the Constitution for his listeners and readers in a fun and memorable way. Again, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.” Just takes a little creativity!

Creativity and flexibility that — you can bet — wouldn’t be baked into any federal childcare program. Beyond the manifold federalist arguments against a federal takeover of daycare, a federal program to provide childcare sends exactly the wrong message: That the childcare-center model makes sense and should be incentivized, when, in fact, the opposite is true. Kinda like welfare programs incentivize single parenthood, when, in fact, the single simplest step a single mother can take to raise her children out of poverty is to marry their father.

I wish I could breathe easy thinking this is just a pipe dream — but I’d have never guessed Obama-Reid-Pelosi would manage to ramrod Obamcare through Congress, either. Never too early to be on guard.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I kinda can’t help but think, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.”

Having spent the past 33 years in a 2 career household I can tell you that you’re exactly right. We had our first child in 1980 with 3 to follow. Our solution was for dad, (me) to work nights while mom worked days. I had full responsibility for child care until I left for work when mom took over the reigns. I worked nights until our youngest was in high school. (18 years) I used vacation days so I could watch our “little athletes” play little league baseball or our “little musician” play in concerts etc. It took a lot of sacrifice on our part to make things work out but I’m happy to say all of our kids our well adjusted and living productive lives. (Even though a man, (God forbid) played a major role in their everyday upbringing.)

chickasaw42 on November 18, 2011 at 5:15 PM

The sooner this lady moves on to the great beyond, the better off the rest of us will be….

Danny on November 18, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Old socialists never die, they just keep looking for new ways to wreck your life.

labrat on November 18, 2011 at 5:28 PM

Progressives think we’re too ignorant to raise our own children.

kingsjester on November 18, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Anecdotally, the most common argument I’ve heard against stay-at-home parenthood is, quite simply, a lack of money. But I’d humbly submit that, beyond the three basics (food, shelter and clothing), children will benefit far more from the presence of a parent at home than from a few more material goodies.

Tina takes a swing .. and….. STRIKE! We all know it’s all about the children’s emotional well-being. If they can’t parade around in the latest garbage designed by some fat hoe in the garment district with a Jessica Simpson label slapped on it, or be trolling facebook on the HalPad 10.4 bullying the trannies, then the children will suffer.

All children must receive a trophy for suckage these days.

preallocated on November 18, 2011 at 5:38 PM

And this is why we must all make sure we have STRONG Republican candidates running in every single Congressional District in 2012.

Her short-term goal: To take back the 25 House seats necessary to regain her place as a part of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi axis of power.

25 seats is much too small a buffer to risk having Nancy Pelosi become Speaker of the House again!

We must increase the Republican majority in the House of Representatives in 2012!

Call your local Republican Party to find out who is running for Congress in your district.

wren on November 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM

And this is when a HA blogger and many of it’s commenters get sanctimonious.

Shorter self-righteous comment: “I have the best plan. Everyone should be like me and make the choices I make. If they aren’t and don’t, well, their kids aren’t going to be self-actualized and I am therefore superior. Oh, and studies say I’m right.”

kthxgoodbye

Kudos to everyone who kept the focus on the the abominable atrocity from San Fran where it should be. Don’t forget that Cali tried to mandate rules for in-home childcare givers involving a break every 3 hours and others with equally unproductive results.

TWG78 on November 18, 2011 at 6:06 PM

Of all the things that I almost grateful for, the first is being able to stay home so many years ago and raise my daughters. When they were small my husband worked like a maniac to support our family. We had less than our friends who had two incomes, but we both had agreed that we wanted to inculcate our own good values to them, ourselves. Selfish? You betcha!

We are happy their child care peers seem to be well adjusted and successful adults, but we are always glad we can see our imprint on our now grown girls’ values and choices.

I shudder that the Dems like Pelosi could intervene, even before public school age, to imprint and brainwash yet another generation of children.

marybel on November 18, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Sooooo….Nancy Pelosi wants to:

Make child care much more expensive.

Force everyone to buy child care from the government: even those who do not have children.

Establish a panel of unelected political appointee bureaucrats to decide who can get child care and what kind of care they can get.

Raise all kinds of taxes.

Establish lots of union payoffs in law.

Mandate the production of millions of new tax forms by parents and business.

Remove all decision-making from both parents and children.

Establish new child-care fees for all child care provicers.

Establish new taxes on manufacturers of toys, diapers, food, and all other items which might be used for child care.

Establish a new bureaucracy which tells child care providers where they can live and what they can charge for their services. Give the bureaucracy the power to pay less than what providers were told they were allowed to charge when and if they feel like it.

….etc….for at least 2000 pages.

ISN’T THIS SPECIAL!!!

landlines on November 18, 2011 at 6:39 PM

Pelosi is like tree fungus . . . it doesn’t matter how many times you scrape it off, it just keeps coming back.

rplat on November 18, 2011 at 6:41 PM

We can be certain that a move will soon be made by the left to eradicate home schooling. Evidence? Yu[, every breath they take reeks of loathing parent control of what they consider the rightful property of the state for its own manipuloation and indoctrination.

Heck, those with a few years memory remember that Joyclyn Elders let that cat out of the bag and they had to remove her almost immediately (Leftists don’t readily take to openly removing one of their own that is of the politically correct persuasion-so you know that she let a big fat cat out of the bag)

Then there’s that marvelous leader(who even took sniperfire on our behalf) Hillary, who truly believes that your flesh and blood children belong to the government village -not you!

Don L on November 18, 2011 at 6:49 PM

Oh, and let’s not forget that when it comes to childcare and the millions of pages of regulations, taxes, and bureaucratic oversight that goes with that socialist gem, there will be one major group that will receive the first Obama waivers -teacher unions!

Don L on November 18, 2011 at 6:52 PM

So this video I circulated before the 2008 election wasn’t so crazy then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyocMbv7bOk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I dare her to try.

Naturally Curly on November 18, 2011 at 6:58 PM

But never, ever would they consider making things work so a parent could afford to stay at home.

Nope. Gotta hire minimum-wage strangers to watch your kids while you go off to the salt mines to pay your taxes like a good slave I mean, citizen.

englishqueen01 on November 18, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Every good idea does not mean the federal government must pay for and control it. Yes, there should be top quality child care. So what. Does that mean we need a Department of Good Child care? Or a Department of Good Music? or a Department of Good Citizenship? Or how about a Department of Smart Politicans. Now that I could go for.

Fred 2 on November 18, 2011 at 7:15 PM

I think Conservatives should start these govt subsidized child care businesses…

We can use them to indoctrinate the little children and counterbalance the public schools…

Stelth mode on political leanings, with guaranteed government COLAs…

Khun Joe on November 18, 2011 at 7:16 PM

Stealth mode… STEALTH mode…

Khun Joe on November 18, 2011 at 7:17 PM

Sorry kids, no cartoons today!!

We are going to learn how to balance a checkbook and amortize a home loan!!

Khun Joe on November 18, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Haven’t read the comments yet, but don’t people who do to children what Pelosi did to healthcare have to be put on some sort of database?

Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on November 18, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Rick Perry responds to Nancy Pelosi being too busy to debate her. Maybe she’s working too hard, and getting paid too much?

Dr Evil on November 18, 2011 at 7:33 PM

You mean Sandusky them?

TiminPhx on November 18, 2011 at 7:38 PM

I sat through a town meeting debating whether our school district should pay for “free” all day kindergarten. Currently in Missouri only 1/2 day kindergarten is mandated. It came down to two issues:

1. It allegedly makes the first grade teachers’ jobs easier
2. It’s “free” child care.

The superintendent admitted after 3rd grade, gains for kindergartners vs non kindergartners were negated. So our district doesn’t want to do it for any long term educational gains (because they don’t exist). It’s so the teachers won’t have to work so hard and the parents can have “free” childcare.

The room was packed with 30 something moms who can’t wait to get back to work and ditch their kids. Oh, and pay attention to the phrase “education equity”. My superintendent dropped the phrase several times during the evening. That means that even if you can pay for something, you shouldn’t have to because “free” means “free” for everyone regardless of income.

But who is funding these “free” programs that we don’t really “need” but “want”? Gee, he didn’t elaborate on that question.

manateespirit on November 18, 2011 at 3:14 PM

And we’re wondering why the Chinese are getting ahead of us… There is a difference between dropping off one year olds at a day care all day and stating that a five-and-a-half or six year old should be in school for the full day. Ideally, a student entering first grade should be able to read a picture book, write simple words, and know basic addition and subtraction. I don’t know how students would learn all that if they got out at school at 12 each day. Missouri is trying to be competitive and the parents are supporting the proposal for that reason. Frankly, even if you decide to stay at home, a three or four year old child should spend a few hours each day in preschool.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Frankly, even if you decide to stay at home, a three or four year old child should spend a few hours each day in preschool.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Why? I knew how to do all the things you mentioned before I went to kindergarten. Then, every afternoon, when we full-time students went to meet the bus, my teacher would ask me not to read the whole book or do the entire workbook at home because she knew I would. This was back in the late fifties. My mom was a stay-at-home mom. Is there really any k-6 subject parents cannot teach their kids?

My next door neighbor is a homeschooler. She belongs to a very active association. Her kids are exceedingly bright, imaginative, courteous, and involved. They are well-rounded and interact well with all age groups.

Connie on November 18, 2011 at 8:09 PM

It’s always great to watch a pro in any profession, school the amateurs.

Pelosi is a pro. The GOP?

Not so much.

rickyricardo on November 18, 2011 at 8:20 PM

FIRST OFF…..she’s smokin to much crackpipe.

She will never be Speaker again.

The Dems would ditch her if they regained power. 2012 is going to be a butt-kicking Conservative frigginavalanche sweeping these wretches out of power. 2010 will seem like a Dem landslide after the polls close next November.

secondly, I’ve said all along that the goal of these Progressives is to have parents drop kids off when they are 6 wks old and they will be raised by Child molesting, state supported Union thugs and parents MIGHT pick them up at 6pm.

But then how long before the FEDS started screaming about “AFTERCARE” for busy parents that work long hours, or the midnight shift or whatever?

This Progressive led government will take more and more liberty and consume more and more of the economy until they are PUSHED BACK.

PappyD61 on November 18, 2011 at 8:42 PM

POLITICIAN PUSH-BACK!!

November 6, 2012

(a/k/a Victory for America Day)

PappyD61 on November 18, 2011 at 8:49 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fO-usAlqak

finally, this is how Obama will get his CIVILIAN SECURITY FORCE he talked about in 2008.

He’ll raise the Progressives own Storm Troopers (to snitch on their parents after all day at the the FEDCAMP maybe?).

But who, who, who can be against providing childcare to “help” parents?

It’s for the children (the ones that the Progressives don’t kill through abortion).

Let’s see where this could go……

the Feds could control what they eat, and could levy fines if the parents don’t continue the same diet at home.

the Kids could be asked to watch Mommy and Daddy to see what they do at night when they are on the computer.

the kids “need” to have that birth control device implanted at the school nurses office at age 12.

if you don’t enroll your kid in the KIDGROW program would you be fined, or be guilty of child abuse?

would the kids be learning from such childrens classics as:
“PARENTAL UNITS, what they really are”
or maybe “Steve, Greg and the goat: My new family”
or “Sasha and Melia and other heros”
maybe even “I like my brown shirt do you?”

PappyD61 on November 18, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Oh, this is rich; the woman who invokes the patron saint of pregnant women to further the cause of abortion now wants to force through unconstitutional laws on childcare in the middle of a weekend night? No.

Keep your filthy hands off childcare, Nanzi.

Eren on November 18, 2011 at 9:26 PM

And we’re wondering why the Chinese are getting ahead of us… There is a difference between dropping off one year olds at a day care all day and stating that a five-and-a-half or six year old should be in school for the full day. Ideally, a student entering first grade should be able to read a picture book, write simple words, and know basic addition and subtraction. I don’t know how students would learn all that if they got out at school at 12 each day. Missouri is trying to be competitive and the parents are supporting the proposal for that reason. Frankly, even if you decide to stay at home, a three or four year old child should spend a few hours each day in preschool.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 7:49 PM

My district doesn’t need to be competitive with all day “free” preschool. It currently ranks 3rd in all around scores compared to the surrounding districts. The district ranked second has all day “free” preschool. There is a 1.6% difference between scores. The district ranking first? It’s a half day kindergarten program and there is a 2% difference. Also, all these years, the district has stated there is no differencebetween those students attending half or full day kindergarten. So the argument that kids are educationally disadvantaged who attend half day vs full day is bogus.

We are now demanding our human capital become competitive at age 5. Mmm. Have you seen the assessments rolled out for these little ones? The pressures put on 5 year olds is going to be brutal.

Did you know compulsory education does not start in Finland (the highest ranking country in scores) until age 7? It does have preschool available and fees are set by sliding scale based on the parents’ wage bracket.

I feel sorry for three or four year old children who “should spend a few hours” in preschool each day. Three or four year old children need to PLAY in unstructured times of the day. They don’t need to be under common core assessments. Why should the government be mandating programs for school districts that are currently struggling with budgets?

Just what wisdom, guidance and love will they get from a governmental employee at age 3 and 4 that the parents are unable to impart?

manateespirit on November 18, 2011 at 9:59 PM

What is it, 60-80% of all the 16-19 year olds are unemployed… but you can’t find a babysitter?

Color me suspicious. I did this work at the age of 14-16 to supplement my off-the-books job at the roller rink; and the odd jobs I did for my dad’s company for cash on occasion (once I hit 16 and could drive those picked up nicely).

Maybe the next generation of kids are unwilling to work; but one summer I had 4 separate part time jobs and would have loved another babysitting gig to help cover gas/maintenance costs for my car.

I have to wonder where she was and how little she was offering for this not to be possible… or perhaps what times of day and how long she needed a babysitter for her not to be able to find one.

gekkobear on November 18, 2011 at 10:00 PM

Three or four year old children need to PLAY in unstructured times of the day.

manateespirit on November 18, 2011 at 9:59 PM

You are so right. Adult interference and management of every waking minute is one of the biggest reasons we have middle and high school students in anger management classes. How to deal with conflict is something kids learn on their own during and because of conflict. In preschool, conflict is simply not allowed.

Connie on November 18, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Why? I knew how to do all the things you mentioned before I went to kindergarten. Then, every afternoon, when we full-time students went to meet the bus, my teacher would ask me not to read the whole book or do the entire workbook at home because she knew I would. This was back in the late fifties. My mom was a stay-at-home mom. Is there really any k-6 subject parents cannot teach their kids?

My next door neighbor is a homeschooler. She belongs to a very active association. Her kids are exceedingly bright, imaginative, courteous, and involved. They are well-rounded and interact well with all age groups.

Connie on November 18, 2011 at 8:09 PM

To perhaps understand how to interact with children their own age and realize the rules associated with school?? There is a whole set of rules associated with the classroom that children must learn – such as there are 25 other children there and that teacher isn’t mom and that they need to interact with children of their own age appropriately — learning to share, etc. Most parents I know decide to put their children into school before hand. For instance, some of my friends are teachers and put their children in scheduled activities at 2-and-half for about an hour or so a week. They have twins and the little girl is in a dance class and the little boy is in a pre-preschool program. Both will be going to preschool when they turn three. Their mother was a teacher, but is now staying at home with occasional sub jobs (granny babysits). It makes sense to provide children with that sort of education : not only does it help with development, but it also helps with maturity, independence, and confidence. Better to cut the strings at three with a few hours a day of preschool than have a clingy momma’s boy/girl at six who you cannot even drop off at the bus stop.

As for homeschooling, I’m against it because it isolates the kids. Part of going to a real school is interacting with peers your own age without mom hovering around and having to make your own decisions. Some of my cousins were homeschooled and the only jobs they’ve ever had were at McDonalds (while living at home). The sad thing is that both have college degrees as well.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:05 PM

As Henry II said, sort of: “Will no one rid me of this troublesome woman?” How is it possible this dim bulb hypocrite keeps getting elected?

NNtrancer on November 18, 2011 at 11:14 PM

My district doesn’t need to be competitive with all day “free” preschool. It currently ranks 3rd in all around scores compared to the surrounding districts. The district ranked second has all day “free” preschool. There is a 1.6% difference between scores. The district ranking first? It’s a half day kindergarten program and there is a 2% difference. Also, all these years, the district has stated there is no differencebetween those students attending half or full day kindergarten. So the argument that kids are educationally disadvantaged who attend half day vs full day is bogus.

We are now demanding our human capital become competitive at age 5. Mmm. Have you seen the assessments rolled out for these little ones? The pressures put on 5 year olds is going to be brutal.

Learning can be fun. I don’t see kindergarteners as having to spend time memorizing letters and numbers and getting beaten if they miss. There are fun math games and english games that you can do with a child. To get them to the goal – reading by the end of Kindergarten and knowing simple arithmetic.

However, there is a whole sliding scale of things that children need to learn at certain times to get to advanced math and science classes in high school. For instance, I transferred schools in seventh grade (bullying issues) and wasn’t able to take high school algebra in eighth grade because I wasn’t allowed in the honors program (although the ‘rents fought for it). The not being able to take AP Calculus hurt me when I was choosing colleges. So parents really have to fight for that and that starts with all day kindergarten.

you know compulsory education does not start in Finland (the highest ranking country in scores) until age 7? It does have preschool available and fees are set by sliding scale based on the parents’ wage bracket.

Finland is a white upper middle class country – It is basically homegenous. Also, Finland is a socialist democratic country like all the Scandanavian countries. What do you want to bet that most Finnish parents are taking advantage of the gov’t freebie with preschool.

This isn’t to say that the U.S. should provide free preschool; middle class parents can afford that. There are some pre-school programs for poorer people, but they are not that good (like Head Start). They don’t emphasize reading and are basically daycare.

I feel sorry for three or four year old children who “should spend a few hours” in preschool each day. Three or four year old children need to PLAY in unstructured times of the day. They don’t need to be under common core assessments. Why should the government be mandating programs for school districts that are currently struggling with budgets?

Actually, my understanding is that toddlers need a very constant schedule. They get crabby and upset when they are off schedule. Toddlers need play time, but there is lots of play time at preschools if I remember correctly. As well as some lessons thrown in.

Also, I’m not arguing that this should be a gov’t mandate. But I do think that middle class stay-at-home moms want to consider sending their kids to pre-school for a few hours unless they want socially inept children living in their basement in their twenties.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:05 PM

I gave you specifics as to why kids at home are not isolated. The “but omg how will they learn to socialize” is the biggest and phoniest argument people on your side give. The more stay-at-home moms; the more homeschooling associations, the less that is a problem.

Connie on November 18, 2011 at 11:47 PM

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM

You read too many “how to” books.

Connie on November 18, 2011 at 11:48 PM

Sure, send ‘em to indoctrination centers before they go to indoctrination centers…then subsidize their attendance of “Collegiate” indoctrination centers.

So when we object, WE can be send to “re-education” final-solution-indoctrination centers.

If it smells like a Fascist, acts like a Fascist…it might be a….FASCIST!

Who is John Galt on November 19, 2011 at 12:20 AM

But we all forget the reason for “two-income” families. It’s not mostly Consumerism; since the 70′s the lowest-income spouse is working simply to pay the increased tax burden, the inability to survive on a single income, and yes some very effective pro-consumerism promotions.

Who is John Galt on November 19, 2011 at 12:25 AM

My Spawn will cease to be a ‘child’-in the legal sense of the word anyway-as of April 1st.
Thank. Gawd.

annoyinglittletwerp on November 19, 2011 at 12:39 AM

Why do you think housing prices rose so much? Anyone? Bueller? Because they could. Dual income families were willing to buy up(scale) because they thought they could and banks and the mtg industry took advantage.

Connie on November 19, 2011 at 12:41 AM

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM

Read the common core standards and expectations for kindergartners. It is not a day of play and learning colors and napping. It is a day of assessments and if those kids don’t pass the assessments, the teachers’ evaluations go down and their jobs are at risk.

SERIOUSLY? Assessments at 5 years old?And you think 3 and 4 year old children need to go to preschool to learn social skills, otherwise they will end up living in their parents’ basements?

You have very little faith in parents’ abilities to parent and teach their children. You didn’t refer to my last question:

Just what wisdom, guidance and love will they get from a governmental employee at age 3 and 4 that the parents are unable to impart?

I sure would like to hear your answer to that one.

manateespirit on November 19, 2011 at 6:55 AM

If Nanzi couldn’t find a baby sitter, maybe it was because her kids were too much like their mother. Would you have wanted to watch her little ones for a couple of hours? They’ve been implementing this program in small pieces for years by adding pre-school and expanding school lunch programs. Moochelle wants to take over what is being fed to kids. We’ve lost this fight already.

Kissmygrits on November 19, 2011 at 8:26 AM

Former Speaker Pulosi (phonetically fullofshesi) is beginning to show signs of Botox OD. Delusions of grandeur, in that she can still have her way with the public.

Now she is starting to take the child out of childhood and turning them immediately in “mind numbed robots” thinking she know whats best for them.

The public must make it known that she should be disallowed any access to legislative process which is one step toward legitimizing politics.

MSGTAS on November 19, 2011 at 8:44 AM

As for homeschooling, I’m against it because it isolates the kids..

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:05 PM

Baloney. The homeschool kids that I have met are very socialized. I wish I had pulled my kids and homeschooled them. I live in a very good school district with “a tradition of excellence”. The teaching was mediocre at best and what they wasted precious class time on, things like sorting through lunches to recycle, learning there are two constitutions (they included the UN constitution) and “pledging” to themselves, the world and the universe right after the Pledge of Allegiance, was practically criminal.

But I do think that middle class stay-at-home moms want to consider sending their kids to pre-school for a few hours unless they want socially inept children living in their basement in their twenties.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM

Nuts to that, too. The current crop of basement dwellers went to pre-school.

Fallon on November 19, 2011 at 9:20 AM

Because there isn’t any problem that doesn’t deserve a federally-mandated, taxpayer-funded “solution,” right Nancy?

AZCoyote on November 19, 2011 at 9:50 AM

“From Diapercare to Dependscare” — Pelosi/Reid/Obama

In 2012 throw all of them out, including Boehner and his gang.

Schadenfreude on November 19, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Also, I’m not arguing that this should be a gov’t mandate. But I do think that middle class stay-at-home moms want to consider sending their kids to pre-school for a few hours unless they want socially inept children living in their basement in their twenties.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 11:27 PM

You really need to stop generalizing a group of kids just because your cousins were failures in life. I have had a couple friends who were in the “gifted” programs in public school system who have amounted to nothing. Smart kids, but lack of motivation, desire, or common sense to get ahead will get you nowhere in life.

I am that middle class mom who have children who did not enter public schools until kindergarten. My son and daughter were socialized because I had the time to go find play groups, go to the parks where other kids their age played and enroll them local toddler gyms. Children begin to learn to socialize from birth, and they continue to learn to socialize on their own when put in a group on a playground or at a playdate at someones home or in a mommy and me class. Their mom (or dad if the case) also helps them socialize and teaches them how to share, play together, create games and stories.

As to the academics, my son went directly into advanced classes and has stayed there since (now in high school) with a wide circle of friends. He works part time as a webdesigner for a high end jewelry firm and just had a seoond job offer for freelance work. My daughter is an honor roll student in middle school part of a great group of girls. And they are the norm, not the exception, to the dozens and dozens of their friends who did not go to school as soon as they were potty trained, who were home until they were in kindergarten.

I may take a guess that you don’t have any children. Stop reading the psychobabble about socializing is done in daycare. To learn to socialize, abc’s, reading, colors, counting, can be and are successfully done at home with a mom or dad.

LadyGator88 on November 21, 2011 at 11:48 AM

Comment pages: 1 2