The Thinking 
Housewife
 
Page 1 of 11

The President on How to Control Women

October 4, 2012

 

IN an interview with Glamour magazine, Obama spells out his views on the proper role of women. They should go to college (preferably with federal subsidies) and get well-paying jobs. The government has an obligation to keep them from having too many children so that they can achieve these goals. And, one can infer from his statements, women must unceasingly compare themselves to men and envy what men have. Compare Obama’s philosophy with that of Theodore Roosevelt, who said in 1905:

No piled-up wealth, no splendor of material growth, no brilliance of artistic development, will permanently avail any people unless its home life is healthy, unless the average man possesses honesty, courage, common sense, and decency, unless he works hard and is willing at need to fight hard; and unless the average woman is a good wife, a good mother, able and willing to perform the first and greatest duty of womanhood, able and willing to bear, and to bring up as they should be brought up, healthy children, sound in body, mind, and character, and numerous enough so that the race shall increase and not decrease.

Read More »

 

A School for Boys

October 4, 2012

 

VINCENT C. writes:

It is rare today, and becoming rarer with each new year, to find an educational institution that personifies what I believe is the primary purpose of education: the transmission of knowledge, both sacred and secular, and the building of Christian character. Both these objectives have been dismissed as marginally relevant by many, if not most, by the leaders of our public educational institutions today. Having labored in the educational domain for a dozen years at an academically oriented public high school in New York City, I have tracked the decline of standards over time – of both teachers and students – to the point that when I inquire about schools children attend, more often than not a parent’s response is, “We home school,” which does not surprise me in the least. It shows. Homeschooled children are, among their other virtues, far better mannered, being taught that, amongst adults, they should be seen but not heard. Read More »

 

A Snapshot of Demographic Realities

October 4, 2012

 

I AM sure other commentators have remarked on the remarkable difference between the Romney and Obama families at the end of last night’s debate. The Obama daughters could not have been there because they were too young, but even if they were, it wouldn’t have made much difference. The Romneys swelled the stage, leaving the President and his wife with no choice but to be introduced to so many and blend into the crowd. On a national scale, the large family is an anomaly, but it now forms a significant and growing minority that will become more vocal with time. Almost all large families are found among white, religious minorities, including Mormons, Amish, Hasidic Jews, devout Protestants and traditional Catholics. [As a commenter points out below, this is not true. It is more accurate to say that a majority of those with large families of more than four children, families that are intact and possess a stable culture that prizes large, intact families, are among these distinct groups.]

For all their talk of collective harmony, liberals cannot produce, and will never produce, that most fundamental unit of group solidarity: the large family. [It is more accurate to say liberals cannot produce a culture that prizes and encourages large intact families.]

Read More »

 

Two Salesmen Debate

October 4, 2012

 

THERE WERE moments during last night’s presidential debate when I felt like I was watching two insurance salesmen selling their policies, down to all the boring and technical minor clauses. When they were talking about health care, I wouldn’t have been surprised if one pulled out an X-ray and said, “You see, if you break a bone right there, you will get $4,000 for rehab.” That’s what the presidential election has become, a matter of who has the best deal.

I thought Romney was terrific, as far as that format goes. He was energetic, passionate and in total command of his material. But, except for a few brief moments, he was not inspiring. But then he couldn’t be inspiring, unless he possessed extraordinary courage. That would involve answering the questions, “Who are we? Are we a people?” These are questions entirely off limits in our Tower of Babel.

Most people don’t really care about money more than anything. Most people can even endure significant hardship for the sake of some greater good. But most people can easily be whipped up into an obsession with money by politicians who cannot sound themes of grandeur and collective destiny because that would involve addressing those vital questions, “Who are we? Are we a people?” That would involve answering the second of those questions in the affirmative. If we are not a people, there really isn’t much to say, is there? Might as well focus on those technicalities.

Neither of the two candidates dared to say that even people who are unemployed and undergoing terrible disappointment might have a reason for hope and courage because they are part of some greater good.

Here’s a relevant comment from Pilgrim’s Pride at The Americanist:

There was a time, not so very long ago, when “America” meant something more than grabbing as much money however you can.

It meant a people, united by blood, history and destiny, living together on this empty, dangerous continent so that they could live in Liberty to worship and glorify their God the best they could. Read More »

 
Page 1 of 11