I think Florence King had the right idea:
If we want to regain the respect of the world, we should begin by announcing that children have no business expressing opinions on anything except "Do you have enough room in the toes?" -Florence King
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Children should be seen and not heard.
I read, with growing shock and horror, Dr. Helen's piece "Pinky-Swear You'll Vote for the Guy on YouTube!" In a day and age when actual grownups with rocket scientist IQs are displaying such muzzy-headed grasps of the issues, there are people who are trusting the exercise of their sacred franchise to mopey zit factories who can't tell Justin Timberlake from a real performing artist? No wonder the hadjis think they've got our number. This is the land of King Kid, after all; make American children unhappy enough and the nation will do anything to stop their little tantrum (e.g. '68-'72)
I think Florence King had the right idea:
I think Florence King had the right idea:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
So f'n true!
It depends on the individual child.
And, of course, how old they are.
I'll admit that I find that most children are, like life, "nasty, brutish, and short."
Like Miss King, I didn't much like kids even when I was one. ;)
Honestly, who pays attention to the opinion of anybody under 30?
& to make matters worse, we've had a few generations now where the children have decided to never grow up. Then they have children...and so on.
Gosh, if you let kids vote, they might do something really stupid, like trying to elect someone with no experience who'll run the country in a way that would make enacting RICO statutes look reasonable. Someone like Hillary Clinton.
Kids having political discussions is a GOOD THING. Kids VOTING (or telling their parents who to vote for) is NOT.
Kind of in the same way that teaching a kid to shoot is a GOOD THING. And handing them an AK-47 and telling them to have fun is NOT.
I'll admit that I find that most children are, like life, "nasty, brutish, and short."
This is completely off topic, but that is one of the most commonly misapplied lines in the English language. In Leviathan, Hobbes was referring to the life of men in anarchy, or "a war... of every man against every man" as he so archaically puts it. It's his way of justifying an overarching state.
Yes, but that's not funny.
...which, come to it, explains in a nutshell the complete f___ing failure of the Rondroids to gain any converts on teh w3bz this election cycle. ;)
Heh.
Yeah, I just read that book ages ago and get mildly annoyed by that quote's common usage. We all have some trivial pedantic instincts. Paulbots just don't seem to have any other instincts.
Parents are terrified that their kids won't like them, or even worse, won't find them cool.
I had a mother last night come to the P.D. to chew me out for stopping her 17 year old daughter, and writing her a warning, for Fail To Yield To Emergency Vehicle Lights and Siren. Even after I showed her the tape, she said that I should just take into account that her daughter was "scared."
Lady, if you're daughter's too scared, don't let her drive. And if she gets busted dead to rights ON VIDEO TAPE, don't come complaining for her to the P.D.
Can you imagine what kind of life that future adult is going to lead, with that demonstration of parenting?
Ahh, I miss the "Misanthrope's Corner," and the caustic wit of the inestimable Miss King. Good quote!
PolyKahr
Y'all might want to take a second, annotated read of Hobbes. He's not the champion of Leviathan you may assume him to be.
Machiavelli could surprise you, too.
Post a Comment