Do you object to the characterization of children as the country's most defenseless constituents? I mean, yes, there are perhaps individual exceptions (a severely handicapped person), but as a class I think that's clear.
Perhaps you read too much government intrusion into my statement. If so, re-read it. I am not saying that the government should be serving children directly---I am saying that the government should uphold the institution of marriage, in which children are best served by their parents. In other words, support a social and legal framework for marriage, and then get out of the way for the actual childrearing.
So I don't see the connection here to Hillary "It Takes A Village" Clinton.
I am dead serious in objecting to your "for the childrun" statism.