Posted on 02/04/2009 2:26:31 PM PST by pissant
It's been weeks since the last one, so on Sunday, The New York Times Magazine featured yet another cheery, upbeat article on single mothers. As with all its other promotional pieces on single motherhood over the years, the Times followed a specific formula to make this social disaster sound normal, blameless and harmless -- even brave.
These single motherhood advertisements include lots of conclusory statements to the effect that this is simply the way things are -- so get used to it, bourgeois America! "(A)n increasing number of unmarried mothers," the article explained, "look a lot more like Fran McElhill and Nancy Clark -- they are college-educated, and they are in their 30s, 40s and 50s."
Why isn't the number of smokers treated as a fait accompli that the rest of us just have to accept? Smoking causes a lot less damage and the harm befalls the person who chooses to smoke, not innocent children.
The Times' single motherhood endorsements always describe single mothers as the very picture of middle-class normality: "She grew up in blue-collar Chester County, Pa., outside Philadelphia, and talks like a local girl (long O's). Her father was a World War II vet who worked for a union and took his kids to Mass most Sundays." Even as a girl she dreamed of raising a baby with a 50 percent greater chance of growing up in poverty.
(Excerpt) Read more at anncoulter.com ...
Dang!
Eat a cheeseburger, woman!
Another great one from Ann. And, I know she will get flack from the anti-smoking zealots...but she draws great analogies.
And looks really cool doing it...
;) PaMom
“Single motherhood, by contrast, directly harms children, occurs at a rate of about 1.5 million a year and has a causal relationship to criminal behavior, substance abuse, juvenile delinquency, sexual victimization and almost every other social disorder. “
Ann nails it again.
But I only give my bullseye award out to board posters ;)
Nails it again.
Eat the pudding.
For the proof.
I think you broke the record.
America was better when cigarette companies could advertise and lawyers could not == my old tagline
“Free and Dumb.
Eat the pudding.
For the proof.
I think you broke the record.”
Dude!
That was uncalled for — she’s a bit thinner than looks healthy. Ann is hot but would be hotter if she had some meat on them bones.
“Most are not single, they are married to the government.”
Yep. Nobody but nobody (among public figures) is directly attacking food stamps anymore. But I’m mad as Hades about the whole stinking program. I’m tired of seeing the most beautiful cuts of meat that I can’t afford paid for with food stamps.
America has the most obese “poor” people in the world. Let’s put ‘em on a work and scrimp diet. Lets make ‘em worry about stuff so they can be nice and skinny and beautiful like Ann Coulter. I love Ann and my wife knows it.
The claim of a “causal relationship” is a crock. Studies that come up with statisticis about the children of single mothers lump them all together, so that the outcomes for children of the majority of single mothers — poor, uneducated, on welfare, even before they had any children — are implied to show a statistical “chance” of the same outcomes for children of any sort of single mother. The studies of children who were raised in mother-only households due the husband-father’s death before or shortly after the child’s birth, show outcomes bearing no resemblance to those in the generalized “single mothers” studies.
The primary *cause* of the poor outcomes is the combination of poverty, lack of education, and the propensity for poor judgement which results in thinking it’s a great idea to have babies while poor, uneducated, and lacking a financially stable and reasonably well-educated co-parent. The statistical *correlation* between single mothers and poor outcomes for their children is due to the statistical correlation between possessing those causative factors and being a single mother.
If Ann got pregnant by accident and ended up having the baby and raising it by herself, there is virtually zero chance that the child would grow up to exhibit “criminal behavior, substance abuse, juvenile delinquency, sexual victimization and almost every other social disorder.” Eating disorder would be much more likely . . .
Ann looks up over the trench, and sees a liberal fortification, bristling with defenses,in this case labeled "single moms". She jumps up, takes her flamethrower and heads right for it. She immolates everyone in the bunker.
Meanwhile, all the other pundits cower back in trenches, some clucking with disapproval over Ann's audacity. Now some of them feel safe to leave the trench as it were, and write and speak about single moms, but only because Ann identified and reduced the libs fortification.
Bravo! Thank you Ann.
Link?
WoW thats a piece of info that leads to a jug eared clodhopper Halfrican elected as president..
SO Thats what happened..
Thanks for taking this on, Ann. You are so right about the curiously revered Single Mother. (I wish I had your courage. Oh, and your brains. Okay, lets throw in long legs, shiny hair and fat-incinerating metabolism.)
Pinging the Coulter List.
On or off, FReepmail or ping me.
Cheers,
knewshound
http://www.knewshound.blogspot.com/
You’re late.. (hands on hips)..
Hot? Eh I think not. Like her ideas but it just doesn’t do it for me. I know that will generate a lot of anger here on FP.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.