By Paul Zane Pilzer. New York: John Wiley And Sons, Inc., 2002.
Why We Need A Revolution: I have no doubt there is a conspiracy between the food industry and the drug industry.
Soy milk isn’t actually very good for you.
I wouldn’t put things such as nutritional supplements and fitness clubs in the same category as cosmetic surgery and Viagra.
What You Need To Know About Food: The manipulation of our food supply wasn’t done with incidious intent? Are you kidding?
Making Your Fortune In Food: These days, most farms are owned by corporations, not “rich farmers.”
The reason milk is so bad for you these days and doesn’t prevent osteoperosis is because it is pasteurized and has had other things done to it to give it a longer shelf life. People should drink raw milk instead.
I bet Mama Cass was one of the warmest people in the world, given how fat she was. Heat in the winter, baby.
Most soy beans nowadays are genetically modified.
Making Your Fortune in Wellness Distribution: People are bucking goofy, though. They’ll spend hundreds of dollars on a vacation. However, they won’t spend 80 dollars on a nutritional supplement that could help their arthritis because it’s not covered by their company health plan. People won’t buy a certain kind of supplement even though it has better bioavailability because it isn’t in pill form an thus takes a whole thirty seconds longer to take. People will complain they don’t like the fiz that comes when a supplement in powder form is dissolved in water but they drink pop and beer.
Epilogue: Unlimited Wellness: Adam Smith was an occultist who is burning in hell.
Appendix A: In a way, there is no such thing as good and bad fat. The problem is our society doesn’t work it off.
The Body Mass Index is misleading because they keep lowering the number at which a person qualifies as obese. Also, a person with little body fat and a large muscle mass should not be called overweight by any stretch of the imagination.
Appendix B: If Monkeyboy has his way, if you have a preexisting medical condition, they’ll kill you.
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Friday, December 24, 2010
IT TAKES A PARENT
By Betsy Hardt. New York: G.P. Putnam Sons, 2005.
Introduction: Since a little dose of healthy suspicion is always a good thing, it should be noted that Betsy Hardt is divorced. Apparently, her husband one day “unexpectedly left the family.” Did he just up and take off? It’s possible. In the past, men have gotten the urge to chuck their families and take off for the open road or the sea. However, let us consider another possibility. It takes two to tango. Could the breakup of the Hardt family have been like a giant old growth tree? Termites ate at it for years and it got weaker and weaker. Then one day it finally collapsed. The collapse itself was sudden, but events had been leading up to it for years. Could Betsy’s husband, Ben, have been unhappy in their marriage for years before he finally decided to leave one day? If so, was this due to dissatisfaction solely on Ben’s part, or did Betsy also have something to do with it? In hindsight, are their things Betsy could have done to save her marriage? If Hardt wasn’t being a good wife and thus caused her husband to leave her, should you trust what she has to say? I’m not saying don’t listen to her, I’m just trying to inject a healthy bit of suspicion into you, so that you might be wary of what you read.
Hardt got divorced for the sake of integrity. So she thought it was the right thing to do? Couldn’t she and Ben have tried to work things out?
This post will take the position that “It Takes A Parent”, while it contains many true statements and much good advice, does not go far enough. The problems with today’s children go deeper than a culture of permissive parents, though this certainly is a huge contributing factor.
In the introduction, Hardt says that the aim of the book is partly to get parents to raise their children in the way which the parent sees fit. Truthfully, though, you should raise your children in the way God would have you to raise them. If you don’t know how God would have you to raise your children, then you better get about finding out.
Kids Gone Wild: Early in this chapter, Hardt brings up the infamous school shooting at Columbine High School. There’s good evidence to suggest that Columbine was staged. The principal was having lunch with the chief of police that morning. Certain students were told not to come to school that day. How do you get that many guns and bombs into a school anyway?
The school shooters—I’ve never cared to remember those bucker’s names—were demon possessed. They were into Satanic video games and admirers of the Nazis. They were also followers of Charles Darwin. This is shown in the fact that their jackets said NATURAL SELECTION. They hated Christianity and shot two students because they were Christians.
It’s not just something in the Texas water, but the increase in aggressive behaviour in children of ages five and six is in part due to substances in the water such as floride, bacteria and heavy metals. It’s also due to chemicals in food. Have you seen the kinds of poor diets even kids from middle class households have these days? This is to say nothing of the pressed meat school cafeterias term a healthy meal.
The increase in violent behaviour is also due to Satanic influences such as Harry Potter. (Oh wait, I forgot, it’s not Satanic even though J.K. Rowling took mythology in university and even though witches say it’s accurate.)
The older generation has always been complaining about the younger generation. This is what people say when they don’t want to face the fact that things have gotten statistically worse.
“Even though parents are too permissive, today’s children will turn out all right.” Oh really? If Ellen Griswald is given a reward everytime she does what she’s asked, then what will happen one day years from now when she meets someone who won’t reward her for doing what she’s supposed to do? Will she then become aggressive and beat up or shoot that person?
It’s like niggers. Today’s children want credit for doing what they’re supposed to do.
Satan wants your children. He wants to drag them deep down into the muck of sin and the lifestyle he would prefer for them. Haven’t you figured this out yet?
It is near impossible to find a G rated movie that doesn’t have bathroom humour or sexual innuendo in it. Also, lots of children’s movies are just plain propaganda. Take Shreck, for example. That franchise has the character of Princess Fiona, who acts very unladylike at times. The Jews have been trying to destroy our ladies for decades now, and the Jew Mike Myers who produces the Shreck series is no exception.
Perseverance: Mission Possible: People don’t want to persevere these days. They want “solve this problem in sixty seconds” or “three easy steps.” They want instant gratification and for everything to be quick and easy.
Do you actually believe that Todd Beamer thing? Yes, I know it’s nice to think about that Niel Young song and them saying “let’s roll” before taking on the Islamic terrorists. Sure, never mind the fact that you couldn’t use a cell phone at that altitude in 2001. I know what the last thing on the mind of the stewardess on Flight 93 was: the dessert cart.
What, a four year old can’t learn to read? Of course they can.
Hardt would call herself a Christian, but the whole getting divorced thing causes me to question that. Betsy Hardt’s a Christian and Sarah Palen’s a committed stay-at-home mom.
The story on page 42 and 43 might have something to do with why Ben left the family.
I don’t blame adult children for moving back in with mom and dad because there aren’t any jobs and the cost of living just gets higher all the time. It was bad even back in 2005 when this book was written.
I’m On Your Side, (What’s A Parent For. Anyway?): These days, we equate being on someone’s side or being a friend or being good with agreeing with whatever someone wants to do, whether they’re right or wrong.
One reason parents don’t like to exercise authority is because most people are whimps. The other reason is our society now believes there’s no such thing as absolute truth. Throwing a temper tantrum because I didn’t get invited to the birthday party might not be the right thing for me to do, but it might be right for my child so who am I to say she’s wrong.
It’s All About Me-Not!: It’s probably just a coincidence that Peter’s teacher had the class make All About Me posters. It has nothing to do with the fact that the public school system is part of helping to create a new world order where people are too selfish to care or look out for one another.
You don’t have to teach a child to be egotistical. A baby is naturally narcicistic, partly because it has to depend on adults for everything. The danger comes in not teaching the child to care about other people as soon as they’re old enough to start doing so. Teaching caring and unselfishness should start from infancy.
Our Children, Our Idols: The reason parents these days idolize their children is because they’ve bought into the lie that humans are evil and just wreck the environment so they only have a couple children.
There are actually a lot of child abductions which take place that aren’t reported. “I wish I were an Oscar Myer wiener” isn’t just a cute song.
Of course in the schools these days it’s all about social promotion so the kids don’t feel bad they don’t get to move on to the next grade with their friends.
I will not have you disparaging attachment parenting! Just because these parents believe in baby wearing (which doesn’t mean they all do it all the time), co-sleeping and extended nursing doesn’t mean they idolize their children or don’t discipline them properly. Yeah, attachment parenting is wrong even though parents all over the world have been doing it for thousands of years. Would you say that all the members of primitive tribes are overindulged people who think too highly of themselves because mothers in these tribes practice attachment parenting?
The goal of attachment parenting is to show the child that the parent is there for them. It doesn’t necessarily mean that parents who practice attachment parenting never let their kids experience frustration or disappointment. Once they get more mobile, attachment parenting will typically be practiced less in the home. Attachment parenting was probably practiced in western society for centuries, and not just because of poverty. Even if it wasn’t practiced in the western world until recently, does that mean the eastern world was wrong for doing it for these past millennia?
Oh yeah, and nice bucking cop-out: “I feel a mom and dad should practice attachment parenting if that’s what they are called to do” after labeling moms who practice attachment parenting “fiber moms” and describing them as typical of the pushover parents you write about in your book.
One of the reasons parents purchase Baby Einstein dvds is because it’s easier to just pop the kids in front of the TV to have them learn stuff than it is to teach them about the world by going around with them and telling them about things.
The Jews are going to tell us how to raise our kids? Their children are all whiny, ungrateful, lazy, intemperate Jewish princes and princesses.
The Self Delusion Of Self Esteem: “Being praised for everything makes you feel lousy. If you get praise for everything, what’s worth doing?” If everybody’s special, ain’t nobody special.
People with high self esteem are less likely to be racist? Hitler thought fairly highly of himself and he was pretty racist.
The public school system isn’t designed to teach things like math. It’s designed to fill the kid’s heads up with things like self esteem and “don’t be racist.”
Misbehaviour And Other Matters Of The Heart: “Criticize the child’s behaviour but not the child.” This goes right along with “love the sinner but hate the sin”, which I’m not sure how you can do that all the time.
You don’t have to teach a child to be selfish or unkind.
Actually, these days if an 8 year old stood up to bullies who were teasing his friend, he’d probably be disciplined for standing up to the bullies and handling the problem himself rather than just telling a teacher instead.
You need to teach your children that they have a sin nature which comes from the devil and a good nature which comes from God. There is a constant conflict in their hearts between these two natures. They need to learn to overcome their sin nature with their good nature.
Calvin taught the total depravity of man, which I can’t seem to find in the Bible. Sure, there is no question man is pretty depraved. However, it seems to me we have both a sin nature and a good nature. Otherwise, how do we do any ultruistic good?
Oppositional defiance disorder is the biggest load of bull I have ever heard. Hey, bud, you’re kid’s just a little brat. Other cases of oppositional defiance disorder can include such things as: Does your child question authority? Does he believe certain people in authority might be out to hurt him? Do you teach him that there are people in the world who want to bring about a new world order? You should teach your kids: “If an adult tells you to do something, even if and especially if they’re someone in authority like a pastor or a teacher or an army colonel, and it feels creepy or not right, than question them or refuse to obey them.”
No wonder our children are so depressed. They have to go to school and learn they came from a monkey and before that a one-celled organism in some primordial soup. They get their heads filled with all this environmentalist garbage which teaches them that all humans do is wreck the planet and that a tree is more valuable than they are.
When Did No Become A Dirty Word?: Throughout this book, Hardt repeats the refrain, “Do you want your child’s future spouse to be like that?” Another angle to this is you’re going to have to live with these kids. Twenty-five years from now, do you want to live in a world of children who’ve ruled their households, been praised for everything they do, had excuses made for all their bad behaviour, and never been told no?
Who Chose To Give Kids So Many Choices?: My sister and I never had a set bedtime. We always just got into bed and went to sleep. I would prefer to teach my children to listen to their bodies.
As regards the example of the snow cones given at the beginning of the chapter, children of that age really aren’t mature enough to know what they want out of a whole plethora of choices. Things like the “have it your way” option at Burger King work because adults are mature enough to know what they like on a burger. They’re also hopefully mature enough to realize they’re going to have to make a choice when they get there and likewise start thinking about it on the way.
Also, a four year old, for example, isn’t mature enough to understand the difference between wanting something because they legitimately want it and wanting something because someone else wants it.
Children who are allowed to make choices about everything must be really miserable. They know they’re out of their depth on so many of these decisions, but Mommy and Daddy want them to make a choice. Really, they’d rather have their parents decide for them.
These days when it comes to discourse and opinions on things, we get a theory in our heads, and anyone who disagrees with us should be put in jail. Global warming is a good example of this. Because people know a little, they think they know it all. Some of these people must have been the kind of kids who were expected to participate in conversations at dinner parties with adults. They expressed an opinion on politics or something they’d heard from their parents or someone else. Then they were praised for having an opinion or even having heard of politics. Well, if you get praise for having heard of something, there’s no need to investigate it further, so these kids grew up thinking because they knew a little, that was good enough and they thus knew everything about a given subject.
Led Zeppelin And The Culture Wars: Led Zeppelin actually had a lot of lyrics that had to do with Satanic or occult themes.
I have exposed my sister to lots of different kinds of music, and want to do likewise for my children. What about exposing your children to the music of artists like Glen Miller, Bing Crosby and Louis Armstrong? What about exposing them to music from around the world?
The verse in 1 Timothy is taken out of context. Paul is talking about food.
Hardt doesn’t follow her own advice when it comes to whether children should have phones, TVs and computers in their rooms. Up to now, she’s spent the chapter saying that we need to teach our children values, rather than just restricting things, but she won’t allow her children to ever have the above-mentioned itims in their rooms. Why not allow the phones, computers and televisions, but teach the kids to be careful about the friends they choose and what they watch on TV or look up on the internet?
Hardt defends the public school system, with the usual token proviso that she supports parent’s choices to choose a private school or home school. She says her children’s public school in Virginia was wonderful, Yet she mentions two bad things for one good thing about the school.
This part makes absolutely no bucking sense. Hardt has just spent the entire book thus far talking about how today’s children rule their households, get praise for everything and are allowed to indulge their feelings to the max. If you have your children around children like Hardt describes six hours a day for ten months of the year, are they going to emulate you or the other children? If your children are in a culture that encourages this six hours a day, how do you think they’re going to turn out?
I’m not saying you should keep children entirely sheltered from the world, because they are going to be exposed to the sinful ways of the world one way or the other. However, am I at least allowed to minimize it to some degree? Just like with attachment parenting, even though I know my children are going to experience frustration and disappointment in life, am I at least allowed, OH GREAT AND OMNIPOTENT BETSY HARDT, to minimize it to some degree?
One of the main goals of the public school system is to untrain children from the values their parents have instilled in them. Key players in the new world order have admitted this.
Before going to school, a child will be all like, “I love Jesus. I love Mommy and Daddy.” Then after they’ve been to school a few weeks, they’ll start talking back and throwing more temper tantrums, just like the other kids.
Hardt really exhibits some classic double think in this chapter.
“Children should be taught that divorce is a horrible thing.” Do as you say and not as you do, eh Betsy? It doesn’t count as a widow or a widower if you chose to end the marriage.
Divorce is a reflection of the prevailing attitudes of our society: if something’s difficult, it’s not worth doing; and if something is not 100 percent to your liking, just quit.
I really don’t have any sympathy for divorced people.
The Matrix is a propagandizing flick which shows how the world actually is. People, like the characters in the films, live in a world which they think is real, but the outside real world is actually much different.
Some R rated movies really aren’t as bad as their rating would suggest. Take “The Patriot”, for example. Yes, it has a fair amount of violence in it, because it’s about a war.
To Spank Or Not To Spank: Vaccinations are dangerous.
Time-outs are to bad behaviour what Tylenol 3s are to pain and what “just say no” is to teen pregnancy.
Parenting experts think they know more than parents. Well, that’s exactly the point. In the nineteenth century, when people like Marx and Freud and Neeche came along, we eliminated God from our lives. Then psychology and conventional medicine and parenting experts sprang up. We needed new explanations for why we do what we do and new guidance on how to lead our lives.
The decree of the psychologists is, “You’re too dumb to know how you feel. Only we know how you feel, so we have to strip you down until we find out what’s wrong with you.”
The decree of the medical profession is, “You’re too dumb to know anything about how your body works. We’re the only ones who know how your body works.”
The decree of the parenting experts is, “You’re too dumb to know how to raise your children properly, so we have to instruct you in every little thing.”
These arrogant sons of bitches are wrecking our children today.
Challenge The Experts, For The Sake Of Your Child: The children could come see the guidance counselor if they had a problem? I thought guidance counselors just advised students about their careers.
Benjamin Spock was no more human than Spock off Star Trek.
The best thing you can do for your children is pray for them. Pray the Lord’s Prayer everyday, which says “lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.” Also, pray over them every morning in the name of Jesus Christ.
Introduction: Since a little dose of healthy suspicion is always a good thing, it should be noted that Betsy Hardt is divorced. Apparently, her husband one day “unexpectedly left the family.” Did he just up and take off? It’s possible. In the past, men have gotten the urge to chuck their families and take off for the open road or the sea. However, let us consider another possibility. It takes two to tango. Could the breakup of the Hardt family have been like a giant old growth tree? Termites ate at it for years and it got weaker and weaker. Then one day it finally collapsed. The collapse itself was sudden, but events had been leading up to it for years. Could Betsy’s husband, Ben, have been unhappy in their marriage for years before he finally decided to leave one day? If so, was this due to dissatisfaction solely on Ben’s part, or did Betsy also have something to do with it? In hindsight, are their things Betsy could have done to save her marriage? If Hardt wasn’t being a good wife and thus caused her husband to leave her, should you trust what she has to say? I’m not saying don’t listen to her, I’m just trying to inject a healthy bit of suspicion into you, so that you might be wary of what you read.
Hardt got divorced for the sake of integrity. So she thought it was the right thing to do? Couldn’t she and Ben have tried to work things out?
This post will take the position that “It Takes A Parent”, while it contains many true statements and much good advice, does not go far enough. The problems with today’s children go deeper than a culture of permissive parents, though this certainly is a huge contributing factor.
In the introduction, Hardt says that the aim of the book is partly to get parents to raise their children in the way which the parent sees fit. Truthfully, though, you should raise your children in the way God would have you to raise them. If you don’t know how God would have you to raise your children, then you better get about finding out.
Kids Gone Wild: Early in this chapter, Hardt brings up the infamous school shooting at Columbine High School. There’s good evidence to suggest that Columbine was staged. The principal was having lunch with the chief of police that morning. Certain students were told not to come to school that day. How do you get that many guns and bombs into a school anyway?
The school shooters—I’ve never cared to remember those bucker’s names—were demon possessed. They were into Satanic video games and admirers of the Nazis. They were also followers of Charles Darwin. This is shown in the fact that their jackets said NATURAL SELECTION. They hated Christianity and shot two students because they were Christians.
It’s not just something in the Texas water, but the increase in aggressive behaviour in children of ages five and six is in part due to substances in the water such as floride, bacteria and heavy metals. It’s also due to chemicals in food. Have you seen the kinds of poor diets even kids from middle class households have these days? This is to say nothing of the pressed meat school cafeterias term a healthy meal.
The increase in violent behaviour is also due to Satanic influences such as Harry Potter. (Oh wait, I forgot, it’s not Satanic even though J.K. Rowling took mythology in university and even though witches say it’s accurate.)
The older generation has always been complaining about the younger generation. This is what people say when they don’t want to face the fact that things have gotten statistically worse.
“Even though parents are too permissive, today’s children will turn out all right.” Oh really? If Ellen Griswald is given a reward everytime she does what she’s asked, then what will happen one day years from now when she meets someone who won’t reward her for doing what she’s supposed to do? Will she then become aggressive and beat up or shoot that person?
It’s like niggers. Today’s children want credit for doing what they’re supposed to do.
Satan wants your children. He wants to drag them deep down into the muck of sin and the lifestyle he would prefer for them. Haven’t you figured this out yet?
It is near impossible to find a G rated movie that doesn’t have bathroom humour or sexual innuendo in it. Also, lots of children’s movies are just plain propaganda. Take Shreck, for example. That franchise has the character of Princess Fiona, who acts very unladylike at times. The Jews have been trying to destroy our ladies for decades now, and the Jew Mike Myers who produces the Shreck series is no exception.
Perseverance: Mission Possible: People don’t want to persevere these days. They want “solve this problem in sixty seconds” or “three easy steps.” They want instant gratification and for everything to be quick and easy.
Do you actually believe that Todd Beamer thing? Yes, I know it’s nice to think about that Niel Young song and them saying “let’s roll” before taking on the Islamic terrorists. Sure, never mind the fact that you couldn’t use a cell phone at that altitude in 2001. I know what the last thing on the mind of the stewardess on Flight 93 was: the dessert cart.
What, a four year old can’t learn to read? Of course they can.
Hardt would call herself a Christian, but the whole getting divorced thing causes me to question that. Betsy Hardt’s a Christian and Sarah Palen’s a committed stay-at-home mom.
The story on page 42 and 43 might have something to do with why Ben left the family.
I don’t blame adult children for moving back in with mom and dad because there aren’t any jobs and the cost of living just gets higher all the time. It was bad even back in 2005 when this book was written.
I’m On Your Side, (What’s A Parent For. Anyway?): These days, we equate being on someone’s side or being a friend or being good with agreeing with whatever someone wants to do, whether they’re right or wrong.
One reason parents don’t like to exercise authority is because most people are whimps. The other reason is our society now believes there’s no such thing as absolute truth. Throwing a temper tantrum because I didn’t get invited to the birthday party might not be the right thing for me to do, but it might be right for my child so who am I to say she’s wrong.
It’s All About Me-Not!: It’s probably just a coincidence that Peter’s teacher had the class make All About Me posters. It has nothing to do with the fact that the public school system is part of helping to create a new world order where people are too selfish to care or look out for one another.
You don’t have to teach a child to be egotistical. A baby is naturally narcicistic, partly because it has to depend on adults for everything. The danger comes in not teaching the child to care about other people as soon as they’re old enough to start doing so. Teaching caring and unselfishness should start from infancy.
Our Children, Our Idols: The reason parents these days idolize their children is because they’ve bought into the lie that humans are evil and just wreck the environment so they only have a couple children.
There are actually a lot of child abductions which take place that aren’t reported. “I wish I were an Oscar Myer wiener” isn’t just a cute song.
Of course in the schools these days it’s all about social promotion so the kids don’t feel bad they don’t get to move on to the next grade with their friends.
I will not have you disparaging attachment parenting! Just because these parents believe in baby wearing (which doesn’t mean they all do it all the time), co-sleeping and extended nursing doesn’t mean they idolize their children or don’t discipline them properly. Yeah, attachment parenting is wrong even though parents all over the world have been doing it for thousands of years. Would you say that all the members of primitive tribes are overindulged people who think too highly of themselves because mothers in these tribes practice attachment parenting?
The goal of attachment parenting is to show the child that the parent is there for them. It doesn’t necessarily mean that parents who practice attachment parenting never let their kids experience frustration or disappointment. Once they get more mobile, attachment parenting will typically be practiced less in the home. Attachment parenting was probably practiced in western society for centuries, and not just because of poverty. Even if it wasn’t practiced in the western world until recently, does that mean the eastern world was wrong for doing it for these past millennia?
Oh yeah, and nice bucking cop-out: “I feel a mom and dad should practice attachment parenting if that’s what they are called to do” after labeling moms who practice attachment parenting “fiber moms” and describing them as typical of the pushover parents you write about in your book.
One of the reasons parents purchase Baby Einstein dvds is because it’s easier to just pop the kids in front of the TV to have them learn stuff than it is to teach them about the world by going around with them and telling them about things.
The Jews are going to tell us how to raise our kids? Their children are all whiny, ungrateful, lazy, intemperate Jewish princes and princesses.
The Self Delusion Of Self Esteem: “Being praised for everything makes you feel lousy. If you get praise for everything, what’s worth doing?” If everybody’s special, ain’t nobody special.
People with high self esteem are less likely to be racist? Hitler thought fairly highly of himself and he was pretty racist.
The public school system isn’t designed to teach things like math. It’s designed to fill the kid’s heads up with things like self esteem and “don’t be racist.”
Misbehaviour And Other Matters Of The Heart: “Criticize the child’s behaviour but not the child.” This goes right along with “love the sinner but hate the sin”, which I’m not sure how you can do that all the time.
You don’t have to teach a child to be selfish or unkind.
Actually, these days if an 8 year old stood up to bullies who were teasing his friend, he’d probably be disciplined for standing up to the bullies and handling the problem himself rather than just telling a teacher instead.
You need to teach your children that they have a sin nature which comes from the devil and a good nature which comes from God. There is a constant conflict in their hearts between these two natures. They need to learn to overcome their sin nature with their good nature.
Calvin taught the total depravity of man, which I can’t seem to find in the Bible. Sure, there is no question man is pretty depraved. However, it seems to me we have both a sin nature and a good nature. Otherwise, how do we do any ultruistic good?
Oppositional defiance disorder is the biggest load of bull I have ever heard. Hey, bud, you’re kid’s just a little brat. Other cases of oppositional defiance disorder can include such things as: Does your child question authority? Does he believe certain people in authority might be out to hurt him? Do you teach him that there are people in the world who want to bring about a new world order? You should teach your kids: “If an adult tells you to do something, even if and especially if they’re someone in authority like a pastor or a teacher or an army colonel, and it feels creepy or not right, than question them or refuse to obey them.”
No wonder our children are so depressed. They have to go to school and learn they came from a monkey and before that a one-celled organism in some primordial soup. They get their heads filled with all this environmentalist garbage which teaches them that all humans do is wreck the planet and that a tree is more valuable than they are.
When Did No Become A Dirty Word?: Throughout this book, Hardt repeats the refrain, “Do you want your child’s future spouse to be like that?” Another angle to this is you’re going to have to live with these kids. Twenty-five years from now, do you want to live in a world of children who’ve ruled their households, been praised for everything they do, had excuses made for all their bad behaviour, and never been told no?
Who Chose To Give Kids So Many Choices?: My sister and I never had a set bedtime. We always just got into bed and went to sleep. I would prefer to teach my children to listen to their bodies.
As regards the example of the snow cones given at the beginning of the chapter, children of that age really aren’t mature enough to know what they want out of a whole plethora of choices. Things like the “have it your way” option at Burger King work because adults are mature enough to know what they like on a burger. They’re also hopefully mature enough to realize they’re going to have to make a choice when they get there and likewise start thinking about it on the way.
Also, a four year old, for example, isn’t mature enough to understand the difference between wanting something because they legitimately want it and wanting something because someone else wants it.
Children who are allowed to make choices about everything must be really miserable. They know they’re out of their depth on so many of these decisions, but Mommy and Daddy want them to make a choice. Really, they’d rather have their parents decide for them.
These days when it comes to discourse and opinions on things, we get a theory in our heads, and anyone who disagrees with us should be put in jail. Global warming is a good example of this. Because people know a little, they think they know it all. Some of these people must have been the kind of kids who were expected to participate in conversations at dinner parties with adults. They expressed an opinion on politics or something they’d heard from their parents or someone else. Then they were praised for having an opinion or even having heard of politics. Well, if you get praise for having heard of something, there’s no need to investigate it further, so these kids grew up thinking because they knew a little, that was good enough and they thus knew everything about a given subject.
Led Zeppelin And The Culture Wars: Led Zeppelin actually had a lot of lyrics that had to do with Satanic or occult themes.
I have exposed my sister to lots of different kinds of music, and want to do likewise for my children. What about exposing your children to the music of artists like Glen Miller, Bing Crosby and Louis Armstrong? What about exposing them to music from around the world?
The verse in 1 Timothy is taken out of context. Paul is talking about food.
Hardt doesn’t follow her own advice when it comes to whether children should have phones, TVs and computers in their rooms. Up to now, she’s spent the chapter saying that we need to teach our children values, rather than just restricting things, but she won’t allow her children to ever have the above-mentioned itims in their rooms. Why not allow the phones, computers and televisions, but teach the kids to be careful about the friends they choose and what they watch on TV or look up on the internet?
Hardt defends the public school system, with the usual token proviso that she supports parent’s choices to choose a private school or home school. She says her children’s public school in Virginia was wonderful, Yet she mentions two bad things for one good thing about the school.
This part makes absolutely no bucking sense. Hardt has just spent the entire book thus far talking about how today’s children rule their households, get praise for everything and are allowed to indulge their feelings to the max. If you have your children around children like Hardt describes six hours a day for ten months of the year, are they going to emulate you or the other children? If your children are in a culture that encourages this six hours a day, how do you think they’re going to turn out?
I’m not saying you should keep children entirely sheltered from the world, because they are going to be exposed to the sinful ways of the world one way or the other. However, am I at least allowed to minimize it to some degree? Just like with attachment parenting, even though I know my children are going to experience frustration and disappointment in life, am I at least allowed, OH GREAT AND OMNIPOTENT BETSY HARDT, to minimize it to some degree?
One of the main goals of the public school system is to untrain children from the values their parents have instilled in them. Key players in the new world order have admitted this.
Before going to school, a child will be all like, “I love Jesus. I love Mommy and Daddy.” Then after they’ve been to school a few weeks, they’ll start talking back and throwing more temper tantrums, just like the other kids.
Hardt really exhibits some classic double think in this chapter.
“Children should be taught that divorce is a horrible thing.” Do as you say and not as you do, eh Betsy? It doesn’t count as a widow or a widower if you chose to end the marriage.
Divorce is a reflection of the prevailing attitudes of our society: if something’s difficult, it’s not worth doing; and if something is not 100 percent to your liking, just quit.
I really don’t have any sympathy for divorced people.
The Matrix is a propagandizing flick which shows how the world actually is. People, like the characters in the films, live in a world which they think is real, but the outside real world is actually much different.
Some R rated movies really aren’t as bad as their rating would suggest. Take “The Patriot”, for example. Yes, it has a fair amount of violence in it, because it’s about a war.
To Spank Or Not To Spank: Vaccinations are dangerous.
Time-outs are to bad behaviour what Tylenol 3s are to pain and what “just say no” is to teen pregnancy.
Parenting experts think they know more than parents. Well, that’s exactly the point. In the nineteenth century, when people like Marx and Freud and Neeche came along, we eliminated God from our lives. Then psychology and conventional medicine and parenting experts sprang up. We needed new explanations for why we do what we do and new guidance on how to lead our lives.
The decree of the psychologists is, “You’re too dumb to know how you feel. Only we know how you feel, so we have to strip you down until we find out what’s wrong with you.”
The decree of the medical profession is, “You’re too dumb to know anything about how your body works. We’re the only ones who know how your body works.”
The decree of the parenting experts is, “You’re too dumb to know how to raise your children properly, so we have to instruct you in every little thing.”
These arrogant sons of bitches are wrecking our children today.
Challenge The Experts, For The Sake Of Your Child: The children could come see the guidance counselor if they had a problem? I thought guidance counselors just advised students about their careers.
Benjamin Spock was no more human than Spock off Star Trek.
The best thing you can do for your children is pray for them. Pray the Lord’s Prayer everyday, which says “lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil.” Also, pray over them every morning in the name of Jesus Christ.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FARCE (revised from an earlier post)
It has been nearly two years since the much-loved Canadian sketch comedy show Royal Canadian Air Farce went off the air.
Royal Canadian Air Farce premiered on CBC Radio on December 9, 1973. The cast consisted of comedians Roger Abbott, Don Ferguson, Lewba Goy, John Morgan, and Dave Broadfoot, who left Air Farce in 1985. Week after week, the show would do satirical sendups of politicians, as well as sketches about everyday life. In 1993, the comedy troupe began doing their show on CBC television, moving to television exclusively in the fall of 1997.
I first discovered Air Farce on the radio in 1994 and found it really funny. I'd listen at 10:30 on Saturday mornings on Cbc Stereo and again Sunday afternoons
at one on Cbc Radio.
I also watched the TV show from around when it first premiered, but I can't be sure when exactly.
Air Farce was good until the 97/98 season when they started being on TV only. Then the show got really dull and stupid. I think it was the late
John Morgan's fault. With his accent, he couldn't do very good impressions of most of the people he was impersonating. Then there was the stupid Mike
from Canmore sketch. That was originally supposed to be a one -trick pony on the radio show: some guy who calls a talk show and just says, "Hello ... I'm
Mike ... from Canmore." I didn't mind hearing it once, but when they started showing it week after week, it got annoying.
Then John Morgan retired and the show immediately got better. The additions of Craig Lozon, Allen Park, Jessica Holmes, and Penelope Coren raised the show
to heights it hadn't seen since probably its early days. One sketch in particular, with Jessica as a frustrated mother and Penelope as a little girl who looks at the world with a sense of wonder was very well acted and most enjoyable.
On the final episode, it seemed like they just wanted to get out of there.
The cast really hasn’t done much since the show ended.
Personally, I would like to see Air Farce come back with every living cast member, including the people who were never on the show but worked with the original cast in Air Farce’s previous incarnation, The Jest Society For Canada. That cast would include: Patrick Conlon, Gay Claitman, Martin Bronstein, Dave Broadfoot, and
the cast that was on the show itself. I would like to see it continue on until the last member is dead.
Episodes of Royal Canadian Air Farce can be purchased from ITunes.
Correction: Martin Bronstein was actually a member of the original radio cast as well.
After reading Roger and Don's book on "Air Farce", I understand why the show was the way it was. However, I still think having a majority of your sketches be news programs so you can look at the audience as you did on radio doesn't work well for television for two reasons.
First, a sketch comedy show needs to have a mixture of topical and nontopical sketches for the simple reason that, as someone once said, if you turn off the news for six months and then turn it back on, it'll be the same thing as six months ago.
Second, by the time the TV show premiered, the cast weren't right for the demographic that would be most interested in topical humour. They were middle-agedTorontonians. "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" and "Double Xposure" (the radio show, not the abomination that ran on CTV for a season and a half after the show left CBC) worked better because they were done by younger people (in the case of "22 Minutes) and childless, urban types (in the case of "Double Xposure") and played to the Newfoundland and Western Canadian sense of alienation respectively.
Also, If Lewba couldn't do news jokes, how come Brenda the Bingo Lady ran for so long instead of being killed off after a few sketches?
Royal Canadian Air Farce premiered on CBC Radio on December 9, 1973. The cast consisted of comedians Roger Abbott, Don Ferguson, Lewba Goy, John Morgan, and Dave Broadfoot, who left Air Farce in 1985. Week after week, the show would do satirical sendups of politicians, as well as sketches about everyday life. In 1993, the comedy troupe began doing their show on CBC television, moving to television exclusively in the fall of 1997.
I first discovered Air Farce on the radio in 1994 and found it really funny. I'd listen at 10:30 on Saturday mornings on Cbc Stereo and again Sunday afternoons
at one on Cbc Radio.
I also watched the TV show from around when it first premiered, but I can't be sure when exactly.
Air Farce was good until the 97/98 season when they started being on TV only. Then the show got really dull and stupid. I think it was the late
John Morgan's fault. With his accent, he couldn't do very good impressions of most of the people he was impersonating. Then there was the stupid Mike
from Canmore sketch. That was originally supposed to be a one -trick pony on the radio show: some guy who calls a talk show and just says, "Hello ... I'm
Mike ... from Canmore." I didn't mind hearing it once, but when they started showing it week after week, it got annoying.
Then John Morgan retired and the show immediately got better. The additions of Craig Lozon, Allen Park, Jessica Holmes, and Penelope Coren raised the show
to heights it hadn't seen since probably its early days. One sketch in particular, with Jessica as a frustrated mother and Penelope as a little girl who looks at the world with a sense of wonder was very well acted and most enjoyable.
On the final episode, it seemed like they just wanted to get out of there.
The cast really hasn’t done much since the show ended.
Personally, I would like to see Air Farce come back with every living cast member, including the people who were never on the show but worked with the original cast in Air Farce’s previous incarnation, The Jest Society For Canada. That cast would include: Patrick Conlon, Gay Claitman, Martin Bronstein, Dave Broadfoot, and
the cast that was on the show itself. I would like to see it continue on until the last member is dead.
Episodes of Royal Canadian Air Farce can be purchased from ITunes.
Correction: Martin Bronstein was actually a member of the original radio cast as well.
After reading Roger and Don's book on "Air Farce", I understand why the show was the way it was. However, I still think having a majority of your sketches be news programs so you can look at the audience as you did on radio doesn't work well for television for two reasons.
First, a sketch comedy show needs to have a mixture of topical and nontopical sketches for the simple reason that, as someone once said, if you turn off the news for six months and then turn it back on, it'll be the same thing as six months ago.
Second, by the time the TV show premiered, the cast weren't right for the demographic that would be most interested in topical humour. They were middle-agedTorontonians. "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" and "Double Xposure" (the radio show, not the abomination that ran on CTV for a season and a half after the show left CBC) worked better because they were done by younger people (in the case of "22 Minutes) and childless, urban types (in the case of "Double Xposure") and played to the Newfoundland and Western Canadian sense of alienation respectively.
Also, If Lewba couldn't do news jokes, how come Brenda the Bingo Lady ran for so long instead of being killed off after a few sketches?
Saturday, November 27, 2010
REPLY AWL
The book choice in the October issue of Readers Digest is Charlie: the life of a homechild. We often hear about the home children, but we are never given many details. I didn't know they actually had inspectors who came around to the farms; I thought they just assigned a child to a family and left things alone.
There is an excerpt from Douglas Coupland's new book, Player One, in the October 11 issue of Maclean's. I wonder if, in ten years, we will all become like Rachel: humanoids with no personality or ability to understand things like humour or irony.
The October 25 issue of Maclean's has an article about the gender gap between males and females. Young women interviewed for the article view men in their twenties as lazy and think twenty-something men don't have their priorities straight. Maybe this is partially due to the fact that they know there're no jobs out there and the fact men know women will get promoted ahead of them because they are women.
The November 1 issue of Maclean's has an article about people in London being told to shovel their own snow this winter. Some Londoners are up in arms about it. They say, "What about the elderly or inferm who can't shovel their own snow?" or "It's our right to have the government shovel our snow for us." Uh, can't you shovel the snow for your neighbour's who are physically unable? It's your right to have the government shovel your snow? You've got to be kidding me. I have decided the entire population of the UK is collectively insane.
There is an excerpt from Douglas Coupland's new book, Player One, in the October 11 issue of Maclean's. I wonder if, in ten years, we will all become like Rachel: humanoids with no personality or ability to understand things like humour or irony.
The October 25 issue of Maclean's has an article about the gender gap between males and females. Young women interviewed for the article view men in their twenties as lazy and think twenty-something men don't have their priorities straight. Maybe this is partially due to the fact that they know there're no jobs out there and the fact men know women will get promoted ahead of them because they are women.
The November 1 issue of Maclean's has an article about people in London being told to shovel their own snow this winter. Some Londoners are up in arms about it. They say, "What about the elderly or inferm who can't shovel their own snow?" or "It's our right to have the government shovel our snow for us." Uh, can't you shovel the snow for your neighbour's who are physically unable? It's your right to have the government shovel your snow? You've got to be kidding me. I have decided the entire population of the UK is collectively insane.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
EQUALITY AND THE IRRADICATION OF INEQUALITY
Following is something from someone else's blog. My comments are in parenthesis.
ClentonFarquharson
Do we stand together on
Equality
In 21st century United Kingdom, “
inequality”
remains a great evil to be eradicated on our long journey to the wonderful world where, at last, all have real equality.
Up to 600,000 public sector jobs are under threat. Around 65% of public sector workers are women and will bear the brunt of these job losses. Women pensioners
already suffer more poverty than men and public sector job losses and attacks on public sector pensions are likely to widen this gap even further. Women
are far more likely to pay the cost of cuts in benefits and tax credits. A staggering 72% of these cuts are paid for by women and 38% from men – according
to figures from the House of Commons library, commissioned by Labour MP Yvette Cooper.
(That's the thing about working for the government: it's a cushy job with good pay and security ... until you become a liability.)
The scale of this war on low paid women may even land the government in legal hot water. The Fawcett Society is taking the government to court arguing that
ministers are legally obliged to consider the impact of its budget measures on equality.
(War on low paid women? The British government is cutting these jobs because it's in debt up to its eyeballs, not because it hates poor women. I guess if people are going to be landing in hot water, the Faucet Society is the organization you want to have on hand. Ministers are obliged to consider the impact of the cuts on equality? That's political correctness for you: utterly bankrupt the country just so women and minorities can keep their jobs. Just because you're penniless doesn't mean you shouldn't quit paying them.)
The ConDems are clinging on to the bizarre idea that they are ‘progressive’, but as reports like this demonstrate, they are anything but. The clock is being
turned back to the days before a welfare state and women are expected to pay the bulk of the cost.
(It's always interesting when people talk about being "progressive." Progressing towards what exactly?)
The ConDem coalition says it may cut government departmental spending by between 25% and 40%. Both Cameron and Clegg claim these are fair cuts; ‘we’re all
in this together’ is their mantra. In fact, the financial times reports that the poorest 20% in society rely on public services for over 60% of their incomes,
but the richest 20% are barely affected, being 5 times less dependent on public spending for their incomes.
(Don't worry. By the time your government over there in merry old England gets through, almost everybody will be equally poor. It'll be like Russia before the supposed death of communism. Junk shops will sell things like old locker tags and used fish hooks. You'll go into a restaurant. They'll have two things on the menu and you'll only be able to get a small amount of one of them with your ration card/chip in your hand or forehead.)
Do we really believe in
equality
? Or do we like the rhetoric of being a country that says we do, yet in action we don’t?
Does it matter?
Why should we care?
ClentonFarquharson
Do we stand together on
Equality
In 21st century United Kingdom, “
inequality”
remains a great evil to be eradicated on our long journey to the wonderful world where, at last, all have real equality.
Up to 600,000 public sector jobs are under threat. Around 65% of public sector workers are women and will bear the brunt of these job losses. Women pensioners
already suffer more poverty than men and public sector job losses and attacks on public sector pensions are likely to widen this gap even further. Women
are far more likely to pay the cost of cuts in benefits and tax credits. A staggering 72% of these cuts are paid for by women and 38% from men – according
to figures from the House of Commons library, commissioned by Labour MP Yvette Cooper.
(That's the thing about working for the government: it's a cushy job with good pay and security ... until you become a liability.)
The scale of this war on low paid women may even land the government in legal hot water. The Fawcett Society is taking the government to court arguing that
ministers are legally obliged to consider the impact of its budget measures on equality.
(War on low paid women? The British government is cutting these jobs because it's in debt up to its eyeballs, not because it hates poor women. I guess if people are going to be landing in hot water, the Faucet Society is the organization you want to have on hand. Ministers are obliged to consider the impact of the cuts on equality? That's political correctness for you: utterly bankrupt the country just so women and minorities can keep their jobs. Just because you're penniless doesn't mean you shouldn't quit paying them.)
The ConDems are clinging on to the bizarre idea that they are ‘progressive’, but as reports like this demonstrate, they are anything but. The clock is being
turned back to the days before a welfare state and women are expected to pay the bulk of the cost.
(It's always interesting when people talk about being "progressive." Progressing towards what exactly?)
The ConDem coalition says it may cut government departmental spending by between 25% and 40%. Both Cameron and Clegg claim these are fair cuts; ‘we’re all
in this together’ is their mantra. In fact, the financial times reports that the poorest 20% in society rely on public services for over 60% of their incomes,
but the richest 20% are barely affected, being 5 times less dependent on public spending for their incomes.
(Don't worry. By the time your government over there in merry old England gets through, almost everybody will be equally poor. It'll be like Russia before the supposed death of communism. Junk shops will sell things like old locker tags and used fish hooks. You'll go into a restaurant. They'll have two things on the menu and you'll only be able to get a small amount of one of them with your ration card/chip in your hand or forehead.)
Do we really believe in
equality
? Or do we like the rhetoric of being a country that says we do, yet in action we don’t?
Does it matter?
Why should we care?
Saturday, October 23, 2010
BARBARA SMUCKER IS INVADING MY LIFE
Tonight, we got a call about a car running into a horse belonging to one of the Amish families that live around here. Later on, two slave-girls showed up at my door seeking freedom, and an elephant got ran over by a train.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
BANISHED
by Waldemar S. Jeske. Nashville, Tn: Southern Publishing Association, 1967.
This book seems pretty far-fetched.
On August 2, 1914, Waldemar Jeske's family was ordered out of their village along with all the other German-Russian families in the Ukraine. They were forcibly sent to Siberia. I had not previously heard of this event.
Some of the events in this book seem pretty hard to believe, such as the Siberian prison guards not allowing the prisoners to weep, or poor Siberians being so hungry they took bites out of their own flesh.
This book is pretty interesting, though. It contains a lot of neat information about the Kirghis, one of the native tribes of Siberia.
This book seems pretty far-fetched.
On August 2, 1914, Waldemar Jeske's family was ordered out of their village along with all the other German-Russian families in the Ukraine. They were forcibly sent to Siberia. I had not previously heard of this event.
Some of the events in this book seem pretty hard to believe, such as the Siberian prison guards not allowing the prisoners to weep, or poor Siberians being so hungry they took bites out of their own flesh.
This book is pretty interesting, though. It contains a lot of neat information about the Kirghis, one of the native tribes of Siberia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)