All about you
April 18th, 2008 9:02 am · 25 comments
Watching NBC last night, Thursday being basically the only night of the week I watch network TV, and then only because “The Office” is on and I’m usually too lazy to turn it off afterward. In any event, I had it on Channel 3 out of Philadelphia rather than WGAL, and I kept seeing this one particular Barack Obama campaign commercial in particular, where he talks about education - standard boilerplate really, we need a world-class education for our kids, blah blah blah, sure.
But then, at the end - almost seeming as if it were tacked on as an afterthought - Obama says something along the lines of: We can’t wait for Washington to solve all our problems. Parents need to turn off the TV and read to their kids every once in a while.
The ears perked up.
Can’t find it on YouTube or I’d put it here. I thought it pretty amazing - can’t say the last time I heard a politician say the responsibility rests with you. Republicans talk about the politics of personal responsibility all the time, of course; but the campaign ads are heavy on fear, vote Republican or Osama bin Laden will eat your baby. And to the extent they do get into the issue of personal responsibility, it’s usually someone else’s responsibility; Republicans aren’t screwing up, it’s those other people who are screwing up.
So Obama’s approach is different, here. You have to do something. You have to turn off the TV; you have to read to your child, you have to invest in his or her education, because if you don’t do that, nothing Washington does is going to save your child.
You have responsibilities as a citizens. Which, of course, you do.
But I suppose it’s elitist to suggest that people ought to turn off the TV and read once in a while, right?
Share and Enjoy:
These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Tags: Election 2008 · Obama · Education
There are currently 25 comments on this blog postView Topic | Comment on this blogLicenseForMayhem
4/18/08
9:22 AM | I'm glad he said what he did, Gil, but how sad is it that parents have to hear that from a candidate for President, as if it's some big revelation? How could it be that, back in the day, most parents knew this stuff on their own? |
gsmart
4/18/08
9:28 AM | QUOTE(LicenseForMayhem @ Apr 18 2008, 09:22 AM) [snapback]379725[/snapback] I'm glad he said what he did, Gil, but how sad is it that parents have to hear that from a candidate for President, as if it's some big revelation? How could it be that, back in the day, most parents knew this stuff on their own?
Because we have built a culture in this country whereby everything is someone else's fault.
Take, as I noted, the GOP "culture of responsibility." At what point do you ever hear that it might, in fact, be conservatives who need to act a little more responsibly? No - it's all the other people who aren't being responsible. So while even this attempts to hit the same high note, it's all a sham; This country needs to be more responsible, but of course we aren't talking about you.
Government cannot be all things to all people, cannot solve all problems. Interesting to hear a Democrat not only say this, but direct it to the audience, and not try to insinuate that it's the other guy who's being irresponsible.
|
LicenseForMayhem
4/18/08
9:38 AM | QUOTE(gsmart @ Apr 18 2008, 09:28 AM) [snapback]379728[/snapback]
Government cannot be all things to all people, cannot solve all problems. Interesting to hear a Democrat not only say this, but direct it to the audience, and not try to insinuate that it's the other guy who's being irresponsible.
Yes, it is refreshing to hear someone say that.
|
cyberscribbler
4/18/08
10:11 AM | It's refreshing to hear someone who talks to us Americans like we're adults.
One who doesn't seek to exploit wedge issues.
|
dc
4/18/08
10:20 AM | QUOTE(gsmart @ Apr 18 2008, 09:28 AM) [snapback]379728[/snapback] Government cannot be all things to all people, cannot solve all problems. Interesting to hear a Democrat not only say this, but direct it to the audience, and not try to insinuate that it's the other guy who's being irresponsible. Thank you for sharing this, Gil. This is one thing that continues to frustrate me. No one wants to take responsibility for their own actions. From the national political scene, to the local school board, to each individual family. When parents shirk their responsibilities, the children suffer. I am amazed at the out of control children that we see in the elementary ages. Parents that refuse to teach their children the importance of making good choices, and being respectful of those in authority. Then you have a situation like what took place at that high school in Fresno. Where a 15 year old attacks an officer with a bat, and ends up dying as a result. People end up defending the kid by pointing out that the officer should not have used deadly force to stop the attacker. In my opinion, this is the thinking that has permeated our society. Bad choices made by individuals are some one else's fault..... |
Milton
4/18/08
10:36 AM | Wow, maybe we should take responsibility for our mortgages, healthcare, college savings, careers, unplaned pregnancies, and what ever else the Democrats' want govenment to fix...Let's be honest Gil...do you think that the welfare system, school breakfast programs, bailouts, universal healthcare, full day kindergarten, or any other "nany state" program is going to build a culture of responsibility? Maybe we need less government... |
LicenseForMayhem
4/18/08
11:23 AM | QUOTE(Milton @ Apr 18 2008, 10:36 AM) [snapback]379771[/snapback] Wow, maybe we should take responsibility for our mortgages, healthcare, college savings, careers, unplaned pregnancies, and what ever else the Democrats' want govenment to fix...Let's be honest Gil...do you think that the welfare system, school breakfast programs, bailouts, universal healthcare, full day kindergarten, or any other "nany state" program is going to build a culture of responsibility? Maybe we need less government...
I think, in large part, that's how we got here. Before those things, a big screw-up was a big screw-up, and an individual had to face the consequences, which could realistically doom him to a very wretched life. Now the mentality seems to be that no personal mistake is ever so horrible that you won't be rescued by someone--usually a government someone. What's the middle ground?
|
gsmart
4/18/08
12:29 PM | QUOTE(LicenseForMayhem @ Apr 18 2008, 11:23 AM) [snapback]379789[/snapback]
I think, in large part, that's how we got here. Before those things, a big screw-up was a big screw-up, and an individual had to face the consequences, which could realistically doom him to a very wretched life. Now the mentality seems to be that no personal mistake is ever so horrible that you won't be rescued by someone--usually a government someone. What's the middle ground?
To answer that you've got to first answer the question: What is a government's obligation to its citizens?
My problem with the "before that a big screw-up was a big screw-up" line of reasoning is that by this argument, the socialistic countries of Europe - Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, France, etc. - should all have crime rates, etc. that far outstrip ours. Shouldn't they? Those countries do far more for their citizens (with the far higher tax rates as a result) than we could even dream of; but if a government taking such responsibilities on itself ultimately makes individual citizens less responsible - the people of those nations should be some of the least responsible people on earth.
But that's not really the case. So maybe the connection isn't as ironclad as traditionalists like to think.
Whether or not people used to be more responsible isn't really the issue; the issue is, as Obama noted in his ad, that you must be more responsible now. Not they must be more responsible - you. Yes yes; I know this minority and that political group acts in a wholly irresponsible manner while principled, wonderful you are the pinnacle of responsibility. But let's, you know, start thinking about the logs in our own eyes first.
|
BeingReal
4/18/08
1:11 PM | QUOTE(dc @ Apr 18 2008, 10:20 AM) [snapback]379763[/snapback] Then you have a situation like what took place at that high school in Fresno. Where a 15 year old attacks an officer with a bat, and ends up dying as a result. People end up defending the kid by pointing out that the officer should not have used deadly force to stop the attacker. In my opinion, this is the thinking that has permeated our society. Bad choices made by individuals are some one else's fault.....
Clarification of the statement in bold above, DC: I did not "defend" the attacker. I questioned further what happened, how it happened and why because the article reported very scant details and left several questions unanswered, IMO. During the discussion, I stated several times that I was not condemning the officer and that I felt he had a right to defend himself. Please feel free to go back and reread my posts in the thread and you will see this more clearly.
|
dc
4/18/08
1:27 PM | QUOTE(BeingReal @ Apr 18 2008, 01:11 PM) [snapback]379859[/snapback] Clarification of the statement in bold above, DC: I did not "defend" the attacker. I questioned further what happened, how it happened and why because the article reported very scant details and left several questions unanswered, IMO. During the discussion, I stated several times that I was not condemning the officer and that I felt he had a right to defend himself. Please feel free to go back and reread my posts in the thread and you will see this more clearly. Hey BR....relax. I was not directly referring to you. This story has been a topic if discussion at my place of employment. I have heard similar opinions to yours. I have also heard a "there is never any reason to kill another" type of reaction. I posted a few pages back, how I would have handled it. I would have kept shooting until the guy dropped, or I was out of ammo. This is what I would have done, based on the information that has been supplied. I am sorry if you think that I was singling you out. Please do not view my opinion as a personal attack on you............ |
BeingReal
4/18/08
1:32 PM | QUOTE(dc @ Apr 18 2008, 01:27 PM) [snapback]379872[/snapback] Hey BR....relax. I was not directly referring to you. This story has been a topic if discussion at my place of employment. I have heard similar opinions to yours. I have also heard a "there is never any reason to kill another" type of reaction. I posted a few pages back, how I would have handled it. I would have kept shooting until the guy dropped, or I was out of ammo. This is what I would have done, based on the information that has been supplied. I am sorry if you think that I was singling you out. Please do not view my opinion as a personal attack on you............
Thanks for the clarification, DC. Some of the posts on that thread seem to twist my points (one even called me an idiot and suggested that I needed my head bashed in!  ). Given that I respect you, I wanted to ensure my position was clear. We're good. 
|
Milton
4/18/08
1:45 PM | QUOTE(gsmart @ Apr 18 2008, 12:29 PM) [snapback]379831[/snapback]
To answer that you've got to first answer the question: What is a government's obligation to its citizens?
My problem with the "before that a big screw-up was a big screw-up" line of reasoning is that by this argument, the socialistic countries of Europe - Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, France, etc. - should all have crime rates, etc. that far outstrip ours. Shouldn't they? Those countries do far more for their citizens (with the far higher tax rates as a result) than we could even dream of; but if a government taking such responsibilities on itself ultimately makes individual citizens less responsible - the people of those nations should be some of the least responsible people on earth.
But that's not really the case. So maybe the connection isn't as ironclad as traditionalists like to think.
Whether or not people used to be more responsible isn't really the issue; the issue is, as Obama noted in his ad, that you must be more responsible now. Not they must be more responsible - you. Yes yes; I know this minority and that political group acts in a wholly irresponsible manner while principled, wonderful you are the pinnacle of responsibility. But let's, you know, start thinking about the logs in our own eyes first.
European social democracies certainly have taken over the personal responsibilities of their citizens, but why would that necessarily equate to higher crime rates? Large social programs, in my opinion deminish personal responsibility by stripping our duty as parrents, for example, to provide breakfast for our kids in the morning. I'm not sure how you equate that with truning people into blood thirsty criminals...
In the end, Its all really nice for Obama to ask people to be more responsible now, while at the same time campaigning on a platform of programs that will deminish personal responsibility. On one had, he is saying that people are bitter because we've lost our sense that government can do anything about their problems and on the other saying that we need to take greater responsibility for our problems. How do you have it both ways? Maybe Obama is just telling us what we want to hear.
|
dc
4/18/08
1:51 PM | QUOTE(BeingReal @ Apr 18 2008, 01:32 PM) [snapback]379876[/snapback] Thanks for the clarification, DC. Some of the posts on that thread seem to twist my points (one even called me an idiot and suggested that I needed my head bashed in! ). Given that I respect you, I wanted to ensure my position was clear. We're good. |
gsmart
4/18/08
1:52 PM | QUOTE(Milton @ Apr 18 2008, 01:45 PM) [snapback]379880[/snapback]
European social democracies certainly have taken over the personal responsibilities of their citizens, but why would that necessarily equate to higher crime rates?
Because isn't that the canard that comes up every single time we get a report of some heinous crime - that this is all because the culture of irresponsibility?
To the extent that European societies function as nanny states - do they have higher or lower rates of drug abuse than we do? Higher or lower rates of divorce? Higher or lower rates of abandoned or neglected children?
You see where I'm going with this; if government always fosters the culture of irresponsibility then that culture should be borne out, in spades, in places where government is far more involved than in these United States. I don't see that it is; the difference, I think, is something in our unique American psyche. Maybe we simply react to governmental largesse differently - maybe it's we who are more irresponsible in the face of bigger government, rather than people in general.
|
Milton
4/18/08
2:10 PM | QUOTE(gsmart @ Apr 18 2008, 01:52 PM) [snapback]379885[/snapback]
Because isn't that the canard that comes up every single time we get a report of some heinous crime - that this is all because the culture of irresponsibility?
To the extent that European societies function as nanny states - do they have higher or lower rates of drug abuse than we do? Higher or lower rates of divorce? Higher or lower rates of abandoned or neglected children?
You see where I'm going with this; if government always fosters the culture of irresponsibility then that culture should be borne out, in spades, in places where government is far more involved than in these United States. I don't see that it is; the difference, I think, is something in our unique American psyche. Maybe we simply react to governmental largesse differently - maybe it's we who are more irresponsible in the face of bigger government, rather than people in general.
Perhaps, I do think that it is a cultural thing. Just as one example, Europeans' conception of "family" is different than ours as is their conception of personal responsibility. Remember, we are the nation of "rugged individualists," which partly explains our aversion to big government to begin with...
But Obama still doens't get a pass here in talking out of both sides of his mouth!
|
Pericles
4/18/08
2:32 PM | QUOTE(gsmart @ Apr 18 2008, 01:52 PM) [snapback]379885[/snapback]
Because isn't that the canard that comes up every single time we get a report of some heinous crime - that this is all because the culture of irresponsibility?
Creating children that will be raised in single-parent, fatherless homes is irresponsible, and one of the leading causes of the criminal behavior of these children later in life.
QUOTE(Milton @ Apr 18 2008, 02:10 PM) [snapback]379893[/snapback]
But Obama still doens't get a pass here in talking out of both sides of his mouth!
He can only go so far with the individual responsiblity bit. Otherwise he offends his base.
|
dragonrider
4/18/08
3:23 PM | Can not one have personal responsibility but also say that by pooling our money together we all as a society can get a better deal on health care. Personal responsibility is not doing everything for yourself when their is a cooperative way of doing things better together. Thats why we form cities and governments , like have a "commonwealth" of Pa. What do you think Commonwealth means?
Insurance as the Europeans handle it is far less expensive than the US and their health care results are superior. Taxes is you remove the cost of insurance we all pay now both mine payment and my employer are European tax rates really that much higher than ours. Remember their tax rates include health insurance. At my workplace the employee fraction of the cost of insurance for a family of four is $1000 a month. thats a lot of equivalent taxes.
|
Milton
4/18/08
3:42 PM | QUOTE(dragonrider @ Apr 18 2008, 03:23 PM) [snapback]379922[/snapback] Can not one have personal responsibility but also say that by pooling our money together we all as a society can get a better deal on health care. Personal responsibility is not doing everything for yourself when their is a cooperative way of doing things better together. Thats why we form cities and governments , like have a "commonwealth" of Pa. What do you think Commonwealth means?
Insurance as the Europeans handle it is far less expensive than the US and their health care results are superior. Taxes is you remove the cost of insurance we all pay now both mine payment and my employer are European tax rates really that much higher than ours. Remember their tax rates include health insurance. At my workplace the employee fraction of the cost of insurance for a family of four is $1000 a month. thats a lot of equivalent taxes.
yes, their taxes are significantly higher. The problem with "pooling our money together" is the age old problem of free riders. If I am working and paying more taxes than someone who isn't, why should they get the same healthcare I get? We do this for the poor and elderly already, do we need to do it for everyone? What incentive will I then have to work hard, study hard, and land a good paying job with good healthcare?
|
cyberscribbler
4/18/08
3:50 PM | QUOTE(Milton @ Apr 18 2008, 03:42 PM) [snapback]379932[/snapback] What incentive will I then have to work hard, study hard, and land a good paying job with good healthcare? What incentive does an employer have to keep a plant in the US when one in Canada has lower personnel costs, simply based on the presence of gov't healthcare?
|
Milton
4/18/08
4:01 PM | QUOTE(cyberscribbler @ Apr 18 2008, 03:50 PM) [snapback]379940[/snapback] What incentive does an employer have to keep a plant in the US when one in Canada has lower personnel costs, simply based on the presence of gov't healthcare?
Don't kid yourself, those tax dollars for universal healthcare have to come from somewhere...If not paying for employee healthcare, than taxes to pay for universal healthcare.
|
LicenseForMayhem
4/21/08
8:21 AM | QUOTE(gsmart @ Apr 18 2008, 01:52 PM) [snapback]379885[/snapback]
Because isn't that the canard that comes up every single time we get a report of some heinous crime - that this is all because the culture of irresponsibility?
To the extent that European societies function as nanny states - do they have higher or lower rates of drug abuse than we do? Higher or lower rates of divorce? Higher or lower rates of abandoned or neglected children?
You see where I'm going with this; if government always fosters the culture of irresponsibility then that culture should be borne out, in spades, in places where government is far more involved than in these United States. I don't see that it is; the difference, I think, is something in our unique American psyche. Maybe we simply react to governmental largesse differently - maybe it's we who are more irresponsible in the face of bigger government, rather than people in general.
I think the US "nanny state" has some significant differences from the European systems you mention, Gil. In the "socialized" European countries, taxes individuals pay benefit them directly, in addition to others, with medical insurance and a free or nomimal-cost system of higher education for qualified students. Some of your personal headaches are actually relieved by the taxes you pay.
In the US, however, "nanny state" policies actually foster the "us versus them" mentality. In the US, if YOU are as responsible as can be for yourself and your family, you pay big taxes and personally benefit nothing beyond roads, defense, the government regulatory bodies that protect or affect everyone, and all the public information brochures you care to request from Pueblo, Colorado. You are still left to foot the entire bill for your family's higher education needs and your own medical care. Under the US system, the ones who benefit most are the ones who actually make the worst personal choices. (Let aside people who truly cannot help themselves--that's an entirely different story.) That can't help but foment the "those people over there" mentality.
As previous posts noted, Americans are generally more materialistic and individualistic and much less attuned to thinking of what's best for the whole over themselves than Europeans are. I think that's what drives our relative crime rates and the rate at which we see Americans making bad choices and expecting to be bailed out.
|
Shawn
4/21/08
9:12 AM | I think the question that needs to be askes is, who are the irresponsible ones in the US? This discussion is making it sound as though the only irresponsible folks in the US are those on Welfare, or are on some kind of government support. Everyone else is apparently the epitome of responsibility. That just doesn't bear out. Many of my peers happen to be extremely irresponsible, and are also extremley wealthy, or are in the very least upper middle class. You can read about folks just like them every day in the newspaper. Heads of corporations, elected officials etc, lawyers, doctors, actors, etc. They are stealing money from their own businesses, stealing from their shareholders, alcoholics, cheating on taxes, cheating on their wives, addicted to gambling, in debt to their eyeballs, etc. I'm seeing more and more of that kind of behavior every day. None of that behavior is the result of these folks benefiting from "government programs". These are the folks who are supposed to be America's best and brightest. Highly educated, from good families. Our leaders. They are the ones that are supposed to hold themselves to a higher standard and ensure that America is on the right course. However, they are taking no personal responsibility whatsoever, and the country as a whole is suffering from this lack of leadership. We are crumbling from the top, not the bottom.
Later...Shawn
|
LicenseForMayhem
4/21/08
9:24 AM | Interesting point, Shawn. What do you think is the root of much of the irresponsibility you describe? Is it selfishness? Is it unique to or more protracted among Americans? |
Shawn
4/21/08
9:47 AM | QUOTE(LicenseForMayhem @ Apr 21 2008, 09:24 AM) [snapback]380563[/snapback] Interesting point, Shawn. What do you think is the root of much of the irresponsibility you describe? Is it selfishness? Is it unique to or more protracted among Americans?
Thats a good question. I think it comes from a sense of entitlement. I remember a comedian I heard many years ago had a great line. He said: "My parents always said that they worked really hard so that I wouldn't have to. Guess what mom and dad...It worked!" Or something along those lines. That might have something to do with it.
Later...Shawn
|
Bigmaclender2
4/21/08
9:51 AM | QUOTE(Pericles @ Apr 18 2008, 02:32 PM) [snapback]379900[/snapback]
Creating children that will be raised in single-parent, fatherless homes is irresponsible, and one of the leading causes of the criminal behavior of these children later in life.
Where did you get this information at?
|
View Topic | Comment on this blog
