Comments on: Conservatives Cant Ignore The Achievement Gap

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 03 May 2009 18:50:41 +0000

Yea danbmil99, I've always like Bill Cosby, and I'm pretty sure there are plenty of blacks who agree with him. It just seems that the liberal media dismisses him anymore.

It's also hard to say that one would prefer to live in a certain place over another without having spent significant time there. I've lived in CA since I graduated from college, so I can have some insight into the problems of a liberal government. High taxes, unemployment, too much regulation, etc. I've never lived in the southeastern US or western Europe, so any opinion is just based upon statistics, and people tend to manipulate statistics.

Liberals whine about the income gap and everything, but it doesn't really tell you anything. Any extra wealth people at the top have is just being used for job creating investments. If you look at the overall picture, poorer people in this country are living better quality lives than ever before.

By: danbmil99

danbmil99 — Sun, 03 May 2009 05:26:46 +0000

One more thing: I'd point out that in many of the Bible Belt states, there is disproportionate poor, young, uneducated, unmarried parenthood -- among all races. That doesn't seem like an advertisement for extending the value system of those localities to the nation as a whole.

When it comes down to it, I probably would rather live in France or Sweden than Alabama, Arkansas, or Kansas. I'm sure most liberals would agree, and many independents and "Reagan Democrats" would too.

It's fine to scream "socialism!" at the top of your lungs, but if your alternative is a throwback to 19th century capitalism, with its income distribution, education disparity, and class structure, it's not a winning argument for the majority of Americans. The GOP has to put forth a vision of the future that is not dystopian capitalism run amok.

By: danbmil99

danbmil99 — Sun, 03 May 2009 05:21:40 +0000

Andy : "you're walking through a minefield even suggesting that around liberals."

Actually, while it would be unacceptable to talk about things like racial IQ, it has become very accepted, even among the black community, to discuss the disintegration of the family, and the issue of black fatherhood (just google what Bill Cosby has been saying for a few years).

I think the time is ripe for a meeting of minds on this issue between reasonable liberals and moderate conservatives. No one is saying it's all the evil white man's fault anymore. There need to be constructive solutions to disproportionate black unemployment and imprisonment, gang involvement, etc.

But I come back to this unarguable fact: the more poor, uneducated people who have kids in their teens or early 20's, the more this problem gets kicked down to the next generation. So I come back to the structural problem with the GOP in dealing with this issue: the hard-headed, ideological dogma of the religious right, which passes every proposed solution through the litmus test of Biblical acceptability. I just think it's time that we put that approach in its place, and start looking at real-world data and workable solutions, regardless of whether they rub up against some people's ideas of traditional values or whatever euphemism they want to use.

Otherwise, as with so many other issues, the GOP just becomes an onlooker, shaking its head in disbelief as other people make the key decisions about how our country will look in 10, 50, or 100 years.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 03 May 2009 02:22:32 +0000

danbmil99, yea, everyone’s going to end up paying for poor/absent parenting in the end, but my problem is that liberals just automatically blame the system, as opposed to the people themselves. I read a study back in the early 90’s in Scientific American. It was about Chinese immigrants going to inner-city schools. The study was looking into why these children were succeeding in such a bad environment. The answer came down to the fact that they came from two-parent families that made them study and do the homework. It was as simple as that. Maybe good parenting comes down to intelligence too, but you’re walking through a minefield even suggesting that around liberals. They seem to have this fantasy that everyone’s a potential genius. Maybe if they’d take race out of the equation, and look at it from a rich/poor standpoint.

By: danbmil99

danbmil99 — Sun, 03 May 2009 00:59:04 +0000

Andy: "Is it really the governments problem if people choose to have children and not take care of them?"

This is a great question, and I think it really defines the dividing line between moderates/liberals on the one hand, and a certain type of conservative/libertarian thought on the other.

The short answer is that in today's society, with the norms that have evolved, the answer is yes. We no longer live in the world of Dickens, where poor children can be shipped off to work farms to languish until they're old enough to beg on the streets, or die of overwork and lack of care. We pay for these children in our budget for public schools. They show up at emergency rooms for health care. In the end, they either struggle along with low-paying jobs or, almost as likely, turn to drugs and gang violence to survive and make a place for themselves. So they most definitely are our problem, regardless of what your opinion is about whether that's fair or not.

In the end, it's way, way cheaper to convince teenagers to stop having kids they can't afford than to pay the social costs of letting them bring new children into a society where they are almost bound to fail. It doesn't even matter if you ascribe to notions of social Darwinism (though I would be careful spouting that stuff in liberal or moderate circles, it's not very PC. Larry Summers knows about keeping his mouth shut on nature vs nurture).

darleenclick: "Your contempt of religious folk is noted"

Wrong. My contempt is for people who put ideology, whether religious or secular, ahead of facts. Note that 15% of the country is either avowedly atheist/agnostic, or professes no religious views at all. I promise you that this 15% is not died-in-the-wool liberal. However, they (we) definitely want religion to stay where it belongs, as part of your personal life. When it is used as an argument for policy, it's just wrong.

BTW thanks for the tip about Palin and contraception. Apparently the message didn't take very well. In the end my point still holds -- the Palins can afford another child; most 16-yr-olds who get pregnant cannot.

By: Andy

Andy — Sat, 02 May 2009 22:18:48 +0000

Why doesn’t anyone ever bother to mention that maybe rich people are richer than poor people because they’re more intelligent, and therefore their offspring are more intelligent? Is it really the governments problem if people choose to have children and not take care of them?

By: darleenclick

darleenclick — Sat, 02 May 2009 15:14:15 +0000

dnbmil99

How much straw did you have for breakfast? Palin is on record for teaching about contraceptives AND abstinence.

If nothing else, Bristol's pregnancy demonstrates that even contraceptives are not 100% effective. I give her props for not flushing away her "mistake".

Your contempt of religious folk is noted.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Sat, 02 May 2009 11:21:39 +0000

danbmil99: I agree. Scientific studies have failed to find any better results with "abstinence-only," and in fact "abstinence + safe sex education" often gives better results.

This is part of what I meant when I said that science and scientific discoveries should be respected by us conservatives. If the goal is to reduce teen pregnancy, then let's look at the scientific studies to see what actually works, not what ideology dictates. If the goal is to just have less sex (as Kathryn Jean Lopez of the National Review admitted), then let's be honest with the public and stop claiming that it's about teen pregnancy.

And you're wrong that such views won't get a hearing on this blog. New Majority is one of the few conservative forums that is not dominated by the Christian evangelical wing of the GOP. (Little Green Footballs is another alternative for you.)

So please stop shooting from the hip.

By: danbmil99

danbmil99 — Sat, 02 May 2009 07:59:49 +0000

"children deserve to be conceived in love by two parents that want them. "

Hmm -- like Bristol Palin's kid? Of course they have the resources to support a new grandchild. How hypocritical of them to bloviate about moronic, ineffective "abstinence only" programs.

The truth underneath some of these problems is frankly the push by religious conservatives who promote zero sex ed, zero contraception, zero abortion. Would I prefer that these kids don't have sex at 15? Sure. But honestly, many of the white kids do, but they are protected one way or another. The poor kids end up having kids of their own way too soon. And the religious right, and the Catholic Church especially, promote that behavior. It's unconscionable.

I know this won't go over well on this blog, but whatever. The truth just is.

By: petty boozshwa

petty boozshwa — Fri, 01 May 2009 17:29:04 +0000

Conservatives have to keep their heads down and mouths closed on this issue, because there is no way we could say anything that would not be demagogued. If any liberal Democrat read and agreed with Franco’s post, however, I’d recommend that person put forward a Child’s Bill of Rights, starting with the proposition that all children deserve to be conceived in love by two parents that want them. Society needs to get more proactive and provide financial incentives to the next generation of prospective single parents to avoid that outcome, and penalize those that burden society with the costs their decisions impose.