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 Just this week, Gallup released a poll that showed a plurality of Americans want the law completely repealed.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

Nancy must have gotten an IPO on some new children’s drug or something.

NickDeringer on November 18, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Make it horribly expensive, hard-to-get and unmanageable?

mankai on November 18, 2011 at 12:23 PM

No Child Left Behind alone by the government…

PatriotRider on November 18, 2011 at 12:23 PM

So she’s pushing child abuse now.

Oldnuke on November 18, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Actually, this is good news. IF, and I say, IF, the Supreme Court is paying attention. because instead of hypothetical “what ifs” regarding the Commerce Clause, we have an actual example of how corrupt and over reaching the government can be in this. Anyone, and I really do mean anyone, who thinks creating a government run agency to take over the task of raising our children is a good idea, is a fool. What kind of “Liberal” utopia have we created, when the expectation is for government to be parents for the children? What kind of “Liberal” utopia has been created when the expectation is for government to provide all citizens with “equal” outcomes??

We are all just wards of the State in this view, completely contrary to the Constitution.

This vision “Liberals” have for society, is insane.

KMC1 on November 18, 2011 at 10:56 AM

I’ll just move this down here where it belongs.

KMC1 on November 18, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Isn’t it illegal to do to children what Congress did to health care?

Think about it.

martin.hale on November 18, 2011 at 12:25 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

Yeah, babysitters – let’s call them ‘Homecare Professionals’ like that idiot Governor Granholm did in Michigan and have them required to fork over part of their pay to SEIU each month. People taking care of their own retarded children, on their own dime, required to pay dues to SEIU!!! Absolutely disgusting, as is San Fran Nan by the way.

Bob in VA on November 18, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Stay at home mom? Are you crazy? How will she then pay for her iPhone, her iPad, her BMW lease, her daily $7 Starbucks mocha and monthly $300 jeans?

Tina, you’re just nuts!

angryed on November 18, 2011 at 12:26 PM

The Baby-Sitting Affordability Act…

PatriotRider on November 18, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Really?!? Death Panels for kids!!!

But, let’s pass the bill first in order to see what’s in it….

Neo-con Artist on November 18, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Yeah, let’s institutionalize child care. It’s worked so well for education.
/

parteagirl on November 18, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Good things kids can’t read enough to know what’s in it!

lorien1973 on November 18, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Why, at a time when Americans react to government overreach with bitter disapproval, would Pelosi baldly bid for still more control?

um…yeah….because Pelosi has been so pro-liberty and anti-government that this is a genuine surprise.

/

Tim_CA on November 18, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Wonderful.

Socialized childcare.

Pelosi now following the Elena Ceausescu model?

coldwarrior on November 18, 2011 at 12:27 PM

I seem to recall way way back when other nations took the kids and put them in a government controlled care, and as I recall those kids were little robots for the government!
L

letget on November 18, 2011 at 12:27 PM

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.

Future Democrats of America. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature.

DrSteve on November 18, 2011 at 12:28 PM

“I could never get a babysitter — have five kids in six years and no one wants to come to your house. …

If you pay them enough to watch your spawn you could get a babysitter.

batterup on November 18, 2011 at 12:29 PM

We’ll call it “The Obama Youth” program.

It has a nice, historical ring to it.

mankai on November 18, 2011 at 12:30 PM

Well stated, Tina. When my wife and I decided to have kids, we made the decision then and there that she would stay home to raise them. Money was tight, but it was in no way the financial disaster some people make it out to be.

I’m always mildly amused when I hear someone make that claim and I see them driving a BMW SUV. Well, of course, some very real lifestyle choices will need to be made. You won’t have new vehicles, 250 channels of digital cable TV, or trips to Disney World every other year. Believe it or not, your kids won’t care.

What they’ll remember is a hot breakfast with Mom every morning and finger painting at the kitchen table when it’s raining.

CurtZHP on November 18, 2011 at 12:32 PM

Nobody should speak out against this plan yet. We have to pass it first. That’s how we get to find out what all the details are.

Ferris on November 18, 2011 at 12:32 PM

“this is a missing link.”

Pelosi is the missing link, I think.

So for the children who avoid being aborted, she wants to outsource their care to total strangers.

NoDonkey on November 18, 2011 at 12:33 PM

The woman is nuts.

fogw on November 18, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Hide your children from Pelosi and Obama.

Schadenfreude on November 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Nancy Pelosi: El Diablo.

Lourdes on November 18, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Obama: “Moms are lazy”

faraway on November 18, 2011 at 12:36 PM

When will we be freed from this natural disaster curse on this country?

NoDonkey on November 18, 2011 at 12:37 PM

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

Fallon on November 18, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Nancy-poo doesn’t realize it, but SHE is the reason the Democrats will not take back the House.

GarandFan on November 18, 2011 at 12:37 PM

Kindergarten death panels! Yikes!

tomg51 on November 18, 2011 at 12:38 PM

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

(Statutory) rape?

listens2glenn on November 18, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Obama Youth

faraway on November 18, 2011 at 12:40 PM

“I could never get a babysitter — have five kids in six years and no one wants to come to your house…” (said Nancy Pelosi).

01. I strongly doubt that “no one wants to come to (her) house” because of her “five kids” — surely El Diablo is missing the point as to why she is entirely offensive to just about everyone about everything;

and,

02. Obviously El Diablo is lying because El Diablo has been out of her house mucking about in the public’s affairs for just about her entire lifetime; since those “kids” of her haven’t been in tow while she was doing her mucking about (or most of it), either she left them on their own wherever or someone else was tending to them.

Lourdes on November 18, 2011 at 12:40 PM

As menacing a threat as you’ll ever hear. But, it’ll sure make a nice GOP campaign ad next year…

rcpjr on November 18, 2011 at 12:41 PM

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

Who read the book or saw the film titled “The Exorcist”?

Remember how El Diablo enticed the child by presenting itself as some “Captain” playmate pal?

Lourdes on November 18, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Start out with the Tots in Training program and graduate to the Kids Kadet Korps then the Progressive Youth and then…

cartooner on November 18, 2011 at 12:43 PM

It’s sad how multi-millionaires can’t get good help these days.

NoDonkey on November 18, 2011 at 12:43 PM

When will we be freed from this natural disaster curse on this country?

NoDonkey on November 18, 2011 at 12:37 PM

The 2012 elections will be the deceiding factor in what America is now. If the socialist dems can steal the election through fraud, lying, cheating and flat out thuggery we will be done as a republic.

VegasRick on November 18, 2011 at 12:44 PM

It looks like Jerry Sandusky was just an early adopter.

John Deaux on November 18, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Here are some things Hillary wanted to do with childcare.

Basically.. no one could babysit or watch your kids anymore unless it was a government worker. Dropping off your kids for an hour with grandma would be a violation of federal law unless grandma was being paid and trained as a child care worker and her house had been up to codes as a child care facility.

There you go.

JellyToast on November 18, 2011 at 12:46 PM

ObamaSitter.gov

Please complete the application for Federal Government Sitter Service.

Indicate if you qualify for free sitter service, or you belong to a special voting group.

Be assured that our sitters are approved by the Sitters Union and are earning union-approved wages.

faraway on November 18, 2011 at 12:46 PM

The Democrats unionized graduate students, for pity’s sake, I can see where this idea is headed: “childcare” will be “home moderator engineers” unionized and billing the taxpayers $3.6 billion annually to “moderate” the children of other “home moderator engineers.”

Something like that…

Lourdes on November 18, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Here are some things Hillary wanted to do with childcare.

Basically.. no one could babysit or watch your kids anymore unless it was a government worker. Dropping off your kids for an hour with grandma would be a violation of federal law unless grandma was being paid and trained as a child care worker and her house had been up to codes as a child care facility.

There you go.

JellyToast on November 18, 2011 at 12:46 PM

To interpret that leftwing plan for the average reader: what the Democrats want is more state institutions, where all the ‘children’ will go. So parents who didn’t become free by having abortions can drop off the child they consider a very big burden and the taxpayers (someone else) will pay for all that.

Lourdes on November 18, 2011 at 12:50 PM

No wait, folks! Don’t you remember when Obama said he didn’t what his daughters ‘burdened’ with an unwanted pregnancy?

Pelosi will relieve you of that burden! Don’t you see? Once the baby is born, you turn it over to a government run collective day care and education facility, and your life goes on; parties, and more parties with no worries about feeding the children.

It will be great, don’t you see?

Skandia Recluse on November 18, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Well she screwed us. That must mean she is a pedophile.

csdeven on November 18, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Don’t forget the mandate that you must have your children in a childcare facility and if you can’t afford it the government will subsidize it.

chemman on November 18, 2011 at 12:50 PM

ObamaSitter Job Training Description:

- Learn how to spot signs of abuse – flags, bibles, guns, Fox News, HotAir.

- Learn interrogation techniques to spot signs of learning math, logic, budget balancing.

faraway on November 18, 2011 at 12:52 PM

I did a lot of babysitting when I was young. There was one family my friends and I would not sit for. They paid $.75/hour when the going rate was $1, did not heat their house, and had no food for you (even if you sat over a meal time). We decided it was not worth it. My mom came home from a party laughing once, the couple was there and complaining about how hard it was to find a sitter.

4of8 on November 18, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Why, at a time when Americans react to government overreach with bitter disapproval, would Pelosi baldly bid for still more control?

Thought it was obvious. SHe is bat-shi*t carazy!!!

JAM on November 18, 2011 at 12:54 PM

angryed on November 18, 2011 at 12:26 PM

That’s what sugar daddies are for, silly! ;)

StoneHeads on November 18, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Perfectly predictable, the great orator Benjamin Disreali illuminates where this is headed.

“Wherever is found what is called a paternal
government, there is found state education.
It has been discovered that the best way to insure
implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery.”

Archimedes on November 18, 2011 at 12:55 PM

They’re still bastardizing the English language I see. Take a crappy socialist agenda and wrap it up with agnostic language like “make people more productive”.

People who are personally motivated are more productive. Productivity is not conditional to whether you can find a baby-sitter or not.

It’s the same stupid logic that causes Alec Baldwin to assume high-speed trains will compete with air travel. High-speed trains will compete with airlines just as soon as the government adds a 200 dollar tax to airline tickets, which I’m sure Pelosi and Baldwin would wholeheartedly endorse.

They’re economically illiterate morons.

hisfrogness on November 18, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Pelosi proclaims her goal to “do for childcare what we did for healthcare” Heard she just hired Jerry Sandusky as her point person to do just that

Political Chef on November 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM

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.

Tina, with all due respect, you seem to have a typo in your penultimate sentence. I think you meant to type ‘Obamacare’ not ‘Obamcare’.

StoneHeads on November 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Also.. I would bet child care would suddenly become required. Parents would be required… required to meet with a child care worker periodically to ensure the children were being properly cared for and were receiving all the services they needed.

Just like ObamaCare and other health services require periodic checkups and physicals… you can bethca all parents would be mandated to have periodic checks about their childcare needs.

Are the children being monitored appropriately?
Have you ever walked out of the room and left your child alone for more than a few seconds? Minutes? Hours? Days?
Are they getting enough exercise?
Are they watching too little TV?
Are they playing violent video games?
Are you feeling stressed or overworked due to your children’s needs? If yes.. you will now be required to place your children in The People’s Day Care..

JellyToast on November 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM

It’s the same stupid logic that causes Alec Baldwin to assume high-speed trains will compete with air travel. High-speed trains will compete with airlines just as soon as the government adds a 200 dollar tax to airline tickets, which I’m sure Pelosi and Baldwin would wholeheartedly endorse.

They’re economically illiterate morons.

hisfrogness on November 18, 2011 at 12:55 PM

This is what they’re doing with energy. Wind/Solar are not economically sound. So to make them competitive, Obama is doing everything he can to keep oil at $100 which makes Wind/Solar seem competitive relatively.

angryed on November 18, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Nothing Child Left Behind alone by the government…

PatriotRider on November 18, 2011 at 12:23 PM

Someone in Northern California has got to get this woman out of our Congress.

Susanboo on November 18, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Pelosi’s agenda is spelled out here:

http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2011/10/democrats-abroad-public-education.html

Universal pre-school and federally funded childcare.

It’s a “fundamental right”. So says Pelosi, the DNC and the “Democrats Abroad”. Where is it taken from? Surprise! UNESCO and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

manateespirit on November 18, 2011 at 1:00 PM

when, in fact, the single simplest step a single mother can take to raise her children out of poverty is to marry their father.

Ellen Degenerate objects.

BobMbx on November 18, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Why, at a time when Americans react to government overreach with bitter disapproval, would Pelosi baldly bid for still more control?

Because the ultimate goal of the Communists has always been control of the next generation from birth until death. How else can they insure that they’ll be in power for generations unless they indoctrinate from birth?

Botoxi has simply stated what the goal is – first it was the Obamacare debacle to control your health. This is the next step – control of your children. Forcing my 14-year-old neice to fork over a third of her babysitting pay to the SEIU is just an added bonus.

crazy_legs on November 18, 2011 at 1:02 PM

Sacrifice material desires for the sake of your own children?

Blasphemy!

Tax the rich! They can afford nannies.

No fair! No fair! I want someone else to pay for me to be irresponsible.

reaganaut on November 18, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Shorter posts! Edit!

Back on point,are we talking about a “Federal Babysitting Service”? Nancy Pelosi wants women to return to the Democrat party because they’ll get subsidized babysitting or actual sitters?

I say, put her on “Meet the Press” this weekend to talk about it. And, while you have her, ask her about her corrupt investment practices. Ask her about her famously corrupt father and her equally corrpt brother. Ask her how a poor family like hers has developed massive wealth over three generations and never, not once, help a job.

MTF on November 18, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Think about it, (I’m sure Nan has), what a boon for a new unionized industry and the campaign dollars that would flow in. I’m surprised that she didn’t intro it as a jobs creation agenda.

This could be as big as the ever profitable Postal Service!

Rovin on November 18, 2011 at 1:10 PM

One of the reasons that The Greatest Generation really was.

Their parents would eat dirt soup and work 25 hours a day to provide for their family, and give them the things they never had (and never would because of they weren’t selfish).

Flash forward to present day and the nation is full of millions of self-absorbed slackwits who have no concept of sacrifice.

It’s just me, me, me.

Pelosi is just capitalizing on this segment of the population, and attempting to grow the ME! ME! movement.

reaganaut on November 18, 2011 at 1:12 PM

“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.

She should move to CT, where Rep. Rosa DeLauro sponsored Diaper Needs Awareness Day (no /sarc needed, this really happened!).

If Pelosi really had five kids in six years, the oldest would have been in first grade when the youngest was born. Five years later, they all were in school, and only needed care after school if Mizz Nancy needed to run an errand on her jet.

Besides, with the high unemployment among teenagers and young adults these days, they could use some babysitting jobs…

Steve Z on November 18, 2011 at 1:15 PM

This woman is an absolute loon with no redeeming values. Her pandering to the weak, parasitic class in the country is sickening.

rplat on November 18, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Let’s do to Pelosi and her party what America did to the Whigs.

SouthernGent on November 18, 2011 at 1:25 PM

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

The Liberal cant: Kids are a disturbance that keep people unproductive, enslave women and are holding back the economy.

Frickin’ Baby Boomer liberals. You aborted us, stuck us in failing schools and daycare so we didn’t interfere with your precious careers & lifestyles. What do you think we’re going to do with you when you begin to interfere with ours?

29Victor on November 18, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Pelosi will do to child care what pantyhose did to fingerf***ing.

BobMbx on November 18, 2011 at 1:29 PM

This woman is so delusional that even in dire economic times when Americans are screaming for the government to stop spending, here she is thinking up more ways to waste our money. Think of the billions we’d have in the coffers if that woman had never gone to DC.

Meanwhile, here she is, throwing her support and raising dollars to bring back the disgraced censured liar and cheat…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pay-to-play-brought-to-you-by-washington/2011/11/18/gIQAdC45XN_story.html?hpid=z3

scalleywag on November 18, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Reduce quality and availability while increasing cost. Sounds great.

Luckily my wife is a stay at home mom. Oh wait, then again there will be a mandate that everyone sends their kids to daycare.

Scrappy on November 18, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Actually, this is really a ploy to begin indoctrination into left-wing think at an earlier age than grade school. You can bet they’d load up the daycare centers with left wing loons, who will teach the youngsters all kinds of wonderful, progressive things.

realitycheck on November 18, 2011 at 1:43 PM

Pelosi’s agenda is spelled out here:

http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2011/10/democrats-abroad-public-education.html

Universal pre-school and federally funded childcare.

It’s a “fundamental right”. So says Pelosi, the DNC and the “Democrats Abroad”. Where is it taken from? Surprise! UNESCO and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

manateespirit on November 18, 2011 at 1:00 PM

Manatee, thanks for that link. That is frightening.

Laura in Maryland on November 18, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Drink your castor oil, you little brat!

- Princess Pelosi

VibrioCocci on November 18, 2011 at 1:45 PM

Show a clip of San Fran Nan touting her plans.

End panel: Support Nancy Pelosi. Vote Democrat

Usable in any State.

Thanks for helping us nationalize the House races, Nancy.

LarryD on November 18, 2011 at 1:47 PM

The Liberal cant: Kids are a disturbance that keep people unproductive, enslave women and are holding back the economy.

Frickin’ Baby Boomer liberals. You aborted us, stuck us in failing schools and daycare so we didn’t interfere with your precious careers & lifestyles. What do you think we’re going to do with you when you begin to interfere with ours?

29Victor on November 18, 2011 at 1:27 PM

I’m a baby boomer who has two kids, now grown, the first when I was forty. I didn’t do that. My idea of horror would be to have to give up my kids to the government.

And you know – I think you’re right, putting one’s kids first does engender at least a little bit the desire of the kids to take care of the parents when they have to. At least, I hope so, should it come to that!

However, there are some – single mothers through no fault of their own, etc. – who simply have to have outside help, and I don’t think anyone should look down on them. (My mother was one, except we didn’t have outside help – we took care of ourselves.)

This whole business is just part and parcel of the desire to destroy the family.

If and when the time ever comes where we’re not allowed to raise our own kids, but are instead forced to get out there and “be productive” while the government takes them over, well, it’s going to be a really terrible world. There wouldn’t be any point in living, for me, if I couldn’t have the joy of raising my kids.

Alana on November 18, 2011 at 1:48 PM

Frickin’ Baby Boomer liberals. You aborted us, stuck us in failing schools and daycare so we didn’t interfere with your precious careers & lifestyles. What do you think we’re going to do with you when you begin to interfere with ours?

29Victor on November 18, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Not saying you’re wrong, just that’s some STRONG bitterness you’re venting there.
If we start justifying euthanasia on Babyboomers because of how they didn’t raise their kids, where does it stop?

listens2glenn on November 18, 2011 at 1:54 PM

The only reason Pelosi “couldn’t find a sitter” is because she’s old as dirt and there were no affordable quality day care centers in every neighborhood back in the 30s. There are now, and they do quite well. I had 3 sons in day care and never had a problem with any of them, and yes, it was expensive, but I paid for it all myself. It didn’t kill me, I’m still here! She’s inventing a need where there isn’t one. There are all kinds of government programs to help women with day care already. She’s the pipe dream princess of progressive waste.

scalleywag on November 18, 2011 at 1:54 PM

BobMbx on November 18, 2011 at 1:29 PM

There’s a mental picture I could do without . . . . . . . . . .

listens2glenn on November 18, 2011 at 1:57 PM

she’s hit the fundraisers

At first glance I read “sh!t hit the fan.”

Funny thing, the mind.

pain train on November 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM

As close to a real life puppet as you will ever see. They work the strings on her jaw and pipe in the sound. It’s amazing.

FireBlogger on November 18, 2011 at 1:59 PM

So will singles and couples without children get a tax break?

the_souse on November 18, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Pelosi needs to go watch the old movie “Intolerance” to see the kind of trouble she wants to create.

sadatoni on November 18, 2011 at 2:03 PM

It is a choice so Nancy is being ridiculous; however, that being said there is a few fallacies in this analysis. First, while million of toys and fancy trips aren’t necessary, parents owe their kids more than just food, clothes, and homes. They also need to provide them with a safe neighborhood, a good education, and savings for the future. Living in a shack in a bad area of town and a poor school district and having children go into major debt for college and caring for elderly parents negates the positives associated with a stay at home parent. Second, not everyone can be a successful blogger or speaker. Most jobs don’t have that flexibility.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 2:08 PM

We would already be solving the child-care problem with market solutions, expect that most local and state governments now require licenses for even home daycare providers, and some require degrees in early childhood education for owners of child care centers. Several years ago I met a public housing resident activist who said she had raised nine children of her own but her state considered her unqualified to open a child care center in her community because she did not have a college degree. So five other mothers in her community were unable to get jobs and get off welfare because she could not watch their kids.

I know a few of well-off moms who got off the corporate ladder and started taking care of others’ kids in their homes along with their own kids. A couple of them are doing it without licenses and tell me that in order to get a license they would have to make costly additions to their homes and jack up their prices. As an example, one mom who owns a large home on a three-acre lot would have to have a fence built around her entire property at a cost of over $8000. She watches six children including her own two.

Once again, government stands in the way of solutions more than it can possibly help.

rockmom on November 18, 2011 at 2:11 PM

However, there are some – single mothers through no fault of their own, etc. – who simply have to have outside help, and I don’t think anyone should look down on them. (My mother was one, except we didn’t have outside help – we took care of ourselves.)
Alana on November 18, 2011 at 1:48 PM

This is a never-ending argument between my cousin and myself.
I genuinely believe today’s single moms wouldn’t have to have Government sponsored outside help, if the government would STOP taking and redistributing private sector wealth.
Next door neighbors and private charities would be more than capable to help single mothers if the government stopped stealing the private wealth.
And they could do it more efficiently and with a smile.

listens2glenn on November 18, 2011 at 2:19 PM

This alone should compel voters to vote for anyone and everyone with an (R) by their name to keep this bat and her (D) minions out of our lives.

Brat on November 18, 2011 at 2:23 PM

They also need to provide them with a safe neighborhood, a good education, and savings for the future. Living in a shack in a bad area of town and a poor school district and having children go into major debt for college and caring for elderly parents negates the positives associated with a stay at home parent. Second, not everyone can be a successful blogger or speaker. Most jobs don’t have that flexibility.

Illinidiva on November 18, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Most wouldn’t end up in a shack in the ghetto. I would argue that our country’s move toward McMansions, luxury vehicles, designer clothes, and other status symbols are a bit excessive. It depends on the age and stage of the kids and needs of the families. There are moms who have little choice in the matter, and others who relegate small children to 10 hours a day in the care of strangers so they can have more luxuries.

Then there are moms who find part time work that fits their kids’ schedules. That would be me.

Laura in Maryland on November 18, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Once again, government stands in the way of solutions more than it can possibly help.

rockmom on November 18, 2011 at 2:11 PM

I had to read your post to remind myself of what I should have said in the previous post.

Government social programs and related strategies are not the solution to the problem. Government social programs and strategies ARE the problem.

That’s my amplified version of Ronald Reagan’s original quote.

listens2glenn on November 18, 2011 at 2:29 PM

“doing for childcare what we did for healthcare reform.” In other words, “I can give away more taxpayer money, and get their votes, than you can”.

RADIOONE on November 18, 2011 at 2:45 PM

No Child Left Behind Behind Left alone by the government…

PatriotRider on November 18, 2011 at 12:23 PM

If it’s the same as Health Care, we’re all screwed.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 18, 2011 at 2:56 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

She heard someone say “nannystate” and decided to take the concept natioinal . . . .

EconomicNeocon on November 18, 2011 at 4:05 PM

the single simplest step a single mother can take to raise her children out of poverty is to marry their father. VOTE DEMOCRAT

/DEBBIE WASSERNAME SCHULTSZ

ted c on November 18, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Oh my God.

This woman is horrible. Doesn’t she have any idea what kind of mess this country is already in? Hasn’t their Messiah already spent enough of our money on losing propositions without thinking of more ways to waste it?

Does she have so little regard for the country’s children that she wants to inflict impersonal government oversight to their lives? Children need the love and supervision of parents, not government employees who couldn’t care less.

If she becomes Speaker again, I think the economic and moral collapse of this country is inevitable instead of just likely, as it is now.

Heaven preserve us from meddling bureaucrats.

hachiban on November 18, 2011 at 5:04 PM

If the bill is going to do for child care what the health care bill does for health care, might I suggest we call it the Sandusky Bill? :

Too soon? ;-)

cannonball on November 18, 2011 at 5:12 PM

she’s hit the fundraisers like the average 21-year-old hits the bars

Geez, her botox is older than 21! Of course, the analogy is apt – the liberals seem to be drunk – on power!

psrch on November 18, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2