Parenthood Is Noble

by Smitty (via Insty)

Of all the lies of the modern Progressive movement, an overarching falsehood is that fatherhood and motherhood are not good. This is implicit in things like the Overpopulation Myth and the Gender/Sexuality Are Socially Constructed Myths. It’s been explicit in the feminist assault on motherhood.
The result? Virginia Postrel can meaningfully title an article ‘Mommy Track’ Without Shame.

But most want children, and once they have kids, these “talented and creative” women, “are willing to trade some career growth and compensation for freedom from the constant pressure to work long hours and weekends.” 

Instead of treating such women as pathetic losers to be jettisoned for a new crop of recruits, she argued, companies should recognize them as a “precious resource.” Such women could bring experience, continuity and talent to middle-management jobs traditionally occupied by short-termers on their way up or “mediocre” men whose ambitions outstripped their ability.

I submit that the real problem here is that women are fed a logical OR here: motherhood OR career.
This is steeped in falsehood. Motherhood IS a career, and anyone who’d condescend toward my mother for raising three well-adjusted children has outed him- or herself as a godforsaken fool.
Furthermore, I’d assert without proof that those saying that parenthood in general and motherhood in particular are somehow worth less than materialistic career pursuits:

  • are directly responsible to the cratering of the birthrate,
  • hasten the insolvency of the bogus social welfare programs they espouse,
  • are among the least happy members of the Brave New World they’ve created,
  • systematically project their failure on conservatives,
  • foam at the mouth when they hear the name “Sarah Palin”.

In summary, the falsehoods that threaten the long-term survivability of the American Dream tend to collect in heads which begin with false premises like ‘Parenthood sucks’.
For an excellent related post on the ignobility of treating sexuality as a video game, see The Camp of the Saints. I cannot resist preserving this particular gem:

Liberals, knowing that everyone has messed up at some point or another, would have us believe that hypocrisy involves nothing more nor less than stating the existence of an absolute moral truth.

Again, one is left to wonder how anyone believing that God is absolute moral truth, for one example, a Christian, can associate with the Left.

Update: linked by That Mr. G Guy.

Update II: more thoughts at The Underground Conservative

From the likes of Ward Cleaver, Jim Anderson and Mike Brady on TV in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s to Cliff Huxtable and Jason Seaver in the 1980s, Americans saw positive images of Dad on TV. Now where are they? Gone. At best, Dad is an idiot. A moron. If he’s even there. Sorry, but Homer Simpson is not a positive role model for a father.

Good point.

Geraldine Ferraro Passes, Sarah Salutes
Update: Another WBC WTF

by Smitty (via Snark and Boobs on Twitter)

News of the passage of Geraldine Ferraro saddens all. Prof. Jacobson has the shorter tribute: “I liked her, even when I disagreed with her.”
Sarah Palin offers an extended salute:

On the Passing of Geraldine Ferraro
by Sarah Palin on Saturday, March 26, 2011 at 9:29pm

My family and I would like to express our sincere condolences to the family of Geraldine Ferraro. When I had the honor of working alongside Geraldine on election night last year, we both discussed the role of women in politics and our excited expectation that someday that final glass ceiling would be shattered by the election of a woman president. She was an amazing woman who dedicated her life to public service as a teacher, prosecutor, Congresswoman, and Vice Presidential candidate. She broke one huge barrier and then went on to break many more. The world will miss her. May she rest in peace and may her example of hard work and dedication to America continue to inspire all women.

– Sarah Palin

Heaven rest Geraldine Ferraro

Update: from the Department of Tsk, Tsk, Tsk. (Thanks again to S&B)

Update II: via Doug Powers @Michelle Malkin:

In the name of the Savior you clowns at Westboro claim to serve, will you please give your nonsense a rest alongside the deceased!!!

Update III: Conservative Girl With A Voice gives good palate cleanser.

I Hate It When They Lay The Truth Out Like That

by Smitty

Eric Posner at Volokh presents the challenge, emphasis mine:

Today, originalists—or at least those who enjoy influence such as judges—occupy themselves with the Bill of Rights, and, with the exception of the second amendment, the whole tenor of the movement has been oriented toward eliminating the various civil-liberty related rights manufactured during the last half century. Another group of people—not all of them originalists—want to dismantle New Deal regulatory institutions but this effort has utterly failed. 

There is no constituency for reforming the executive. That is a simple political fact about the United States, and therefore no one with real influence is willing to follow the necessary implications of originalism for executive power. Why not? Because Americans want a strong president. They want a strong president to defend the United States from terrorists, to deliver humanitarian interventions, to respond to natural disasters like Katrina, to resolve financial crises, to combat climate change, to fix the deficit. The call for leadership by a strong executive in response to the crisis du jour is reflexive. When a crisis strikes, and the government does not respond adequately, everyone complains that the president has failed to display leadership. This type of response is so reflexive that it is applied even to events that occur outside the United States. Thus, a few days ago the New York Times attributed Japan’s travails to “the absence of a strong leader capable of rallying the nation.” Everyone understands the theoretical risks of a powerful executive—that was the now completely forgotten theme of the Bush administration—but, as a matter of mainstream thinking at least, those risks are worth taking.

This is precisely why no one should be surprised that Obama==Bush. Obama may want to be something different, but the Oval Office succubus could suck a bus.
And this is why I’m no raging Sarah Palin fanboi: there isn’t much indication she’d be any different than the previous two. And the more her fanbase moves in the fanatic Paulestinian direction, the more the Left will laugh, knowing that their Alinsky effort to over-personalize the Presidency is winning.
Keep increasing the involvement, Americans. We can realize the Founder’s dream of an informed electorate if we continue to expound on the ideas that
(1) the State is not God, and
(2) rock star politicians are not the answer.
Keeping those two ideas in mind, executive reform may be possible in an election cycle or two.

‘Derp’ Must Be The New
‘Shut Up, He Explained’

by Smitty

There was a fun exchange on a recent post, Troubleshooting ‘Beyond the Welfare State’, with a certain Mork.

Mork: People say they hate “welfare” until they are beneficiaries of it. Plenty of Tea Partiers show up to rallies riding their state-subsidized electric scooters.

smitty: The fact that state welfare distorts behavior in anti-liberty ways justifies welfare how, exactly?

Mork: Seems to me that providing mobility for people who lack it is “pro-liberty” in the essential sense.

smitty: Liberty is liberty is liberty.
“Providing mobility” is one of those delightfully ambiguous terms that might not be completely evil (light rail) but which may just as easily prove an albatross about the neck (entitlements).
Why can’t I have liberty? Why is some helpy-helperperson perennially attempting to obfuscate simple liberty with some term like “providing mobility for people who lack it”?

Mork: Right. So if you can’t afford to pay for your own scooter, just stay at home. God wants it that way.

smitty: Let’s break that down:
“if you can’t afford”
Why can you not afford something? Is there a legitimate lack of equal opportunity? Have you chosen to invest your treasure elsewhere? Has the government decided you should be taxed until blind in order to keep a retirement fund solvent? We have a mix of subjective and objective possibilities here.

“to pay for your own scooter”
Is the foot an illegitimate means of transportation? Are bicycles OK? Why does it have to be some high-carbon scooter? Why do you hate Gaia?

“just stay at home. God wants it that way.”
Has the subject of this thought experiment prayerfully considered the will of God, and determined to be a hermit? If so, then this result should be a source of joy. But is transportation really a theological concern?

This ‘last word’ comment has disappeared from Disqus. The nice thing is that, for all we off-load comment management to a third party, we still retain a local copy in the WP back end. Since it was the driver for this post, I produce it here with an explanatory URL added.

Mork: Derp

Stacy McCain be lovin’ him some Disqus.

About The Only Unused Obama Comparison Remaining: Elric

by Smitty

American Power has a jaunty image of a smiling BHO getting his sports on. The post title mentions ‘a disinterested and semi-retired American superpower’.
Now that BHO has his Very Own War, though the notion of the Tomahawk missile as Stormbringer

Tomahawk, Stormbringer: isn't everything these days a political metaphor?
and BHO as Elric of Melniboné comes to mind.
Once we ruled all, but the sun has set on those days, and grows weary with the rising.

From Wikipedia:

Elric was the last emperor of the stagnating island civilization of Melniboné. Physically weak and frail, the albino Elric must take drugs — later retconned to mean special herbs — in order to maintain his health. In addition to herb lore, his character becomes an accomplished sorcerer and summoner, able to summon powerful, supernatural allies by dint of his royal Melnibonéan bloodline. Unlike most others of his race, Elric possesses something of a conscience; he sees the decadence of his culture, and worries about the rise of the Young Kingdoms, populated by humans (as Melniboneans do not consider themselves such) and the threat they pose to his empire. Because of his introspective self-loathing of Melnibonéan traditions, his subjects find him odd and unfathomable, and his cousin Yyrkoon (next in the line of succession, as Elric has no heirs) interprets his behavior as weakness and plots Elric’s death.

Fortunately for us, the author seemed to be alluding to Britain, and the Eternal Champion never seems to have been female.
So much for silly literary comparisons.
Images mooched from The Platinum Warlock.