Feb. 22, 2013
You don’t usually get in trouble saying your boss it right. But my boss, Tony Perkins, is really right about early childhood education. Tony’s column is in USA Today.
I worked in the U.S. Education Department under the Reagan administration. Yes, I know conservatives; you don’t think there should even be a federal education department. And you’re right about that. Ronald Reagan didn’t think so, either. He would have disestablished it if liberals in Congress had allowed him to.
Tony’s right because there is no better place for a young child than in a loving home with a married mother and dad. We had an interesting experience on this issue with my former boss, Sec. Bill Bennett, in the Reagan years. The Secretary had to go up to Capitol Hill regularly to testify about the zeroing out of the Department’s budget.
Liberal committee chairmen pitched a fit. One of them came to the hearing primed to beat up the administration—and Sec. Bennett in particular—over federally-funded day care initiatives. The Chairman wanted the feds to establish a national system of secular, regulated, and unionized day care centers.
He bore down on Sec. Bennett. Why even the Soviet Union is ahead of us on this, the Chairman growled.
Happily, we Reaganauts had prepped the Secretary for this.
Bennett politely rejoined. “Mr. Chairman: I can tell you why the USSR has a national system of day care.”
Once he drew everyone’s attention, Bennett informed the committee that we had a copy of Raisa Gorbachev’s Ph.D. dissertation. In it, the atheist wife of the Communist Party General Secretary made an impassioned case for Soviet day care for all dyeti—children.
It seemed that too many of the little ones were being raised by their grandparents. And their grandparents were filling their heads full of “superstition.”
Superstition is the Marxist term for religion. In order to raise a properly indoctrinated Soviet citizenry, they had to be taught atheism from the start. That was the motive behind Raisa’s strong insistence that little children increasingly be raised by the state.
So what is President Obama’s motive for pushing for more institutionalized child-rearing? I cannot of course claim that it’s because of those Marxist professors he sought out on campus. I doubt they taught the young Columbia student about day care.
Still, in order to have more “Julias,” it will be necessary to push more and more children out of the home and into institutionalized state care earlier. “Julia” is not the new Soviet man; she’s the new Obama woman. “Julia” was the fictional character invented by the Obama team last year to represent an American who finds government support—from Head Start to Social Security and Medicare—a seamless web of dependence.
In “Julia’s” life, there is no father, no brother, no husband, no father of her child, no male friend or business partner. The only man in “Julia’s” life is President Barack Obama.
And now, they want Barack Obama to be father to the nation’s pre-schoolers. Remember Mmm-mmm-mmm—Barack Hussein Obama? Head Start may not improve children’s cognitive skills, but it’s the seedbed for social engineering.