Which would be better for your children's development in education?
Who would be able to give a child more personal time?
Should a child in a developing stage have one teacher, or many who more like than not, will not teach them the same values?
Would you choose Laura, or Hillary?
2007-11-23 07:32:47 · 16 answers · asked by xenypoo 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
LAURA !! What the Hillary supporters don`t take into consideration is the fact that when Hillary speaks of a "village" , that she means "Your Children" to be raised by the "village" that is run by her rules . However , those rules do not apply to her child or any other liberal elite children . This conforms` to the Liberal Socialist mantra that has always stated , " do as I say ; Not as I do ", as is still evident even today with Gore and his Gorebal Warming mantra. He wants all but himself and his liberal elitist cronies to do without to combat his sky is falling mantra.
2007-11-23 11:31:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Everyone with children would choose to have several people working with there child rather than just one. The child would get a more rounded education.
But Hillary to me would not even make a good teacher. She would be to demeaning, self righteous and a control person.
Where as Laura would be a kinder, moralistic person.
As far as Chelsea vs. Bush twins. Chelsea was brought up as a single child and was around more adults as all single children are. The twins had each other to play and talk with so they are more in tuned to the real population.
I would rather have Laura.
2007-11-23 07:59:07 · answer #2 · answered by My Baby! 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
School teachers don't live in castles on top of mountains, they are part of the village.
Parents should be teaching values, the community watches the child and forms extra eyes and mouths to tell the child, no, you can't do that.
I grew up in Brooklyn, we played outside, always with a watchful neighbor on a bench to keep and extra eye on us, so the bully wouldn't bully and we all got our turns at stickball.
If we messed up Mom would know about it before we got up the stairs, and you didn't sass those ladies either, you learned politeness. Or else.
The guy at the candy store knew not to give candy to some kids that would get in their braces, pointing out the kinds that would be OK.
That's the sort of thing Hillary means when she quoted the old African saying of it takes a village to raise a child, not some kind either/or situation.
Would I choose Laura, or Hillary, don't be silly, I'd choose both.
2007-11-23 08:09:33 · answer #3 · answered by justa 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
OK, here's my analogy: being taught by Laura is like being taught by a Catholic nun, while being taught by Hillary is like education in a public school.
In Catholic school, there are practically no ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) kids, or any of that nonsense. If you aren't paying attention.... WHACK comes the ruler on your hands, and quickly you learn to pay attention.
Your grades are very good because these wily nuns know how to use shame to very good use. If you slack off and don't work hard, the nun lets you know that she is devoting her LIFE to teaching students. When you do poorly, you feel ashamed that you are letting her down. Hence, you try your best.
Hillary would be like a typical public school, with teachers who don't care very much, who complain all the time, and are looking at the clock more than the kids. They might collectively have more formal education than the one nun, but the nun will teach you much better.
My mom was taught all the way through high school by Benedictine nuns. In her class of 23 girls, guess how many were accepted to a good University? Ten? Fourteen?
No, the answer is..... all twenty three. Was this some miraculous class of brainy girls? No, they were all "average" girls, but each one tried their best every day to make the nuns proud.
Think Hillary would inspire the same dedication? Or would they succumb to boredom and develop a bad attitude?
2007-11-23 07:53:55 · answer #4 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Who knows what Hillary"s values are. Is she a real person, or just another puppet like what we have. I suspect the latter after hearing her flip-flops. The Clintons are for a one government world. Is that what you want your children to learn? Laura Bush doesn't have her own agenda. She will make the better teacher. Better yet, I would rather see children grow up in co-ops. Safer, much safer.
2007-11-23 07:42:05 · answer #5 · answered by The Rabbi 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
The village includes the school teacher and many other professionals. As a former school teacher I choose to expose my child to the most opportunities possible as I recognize that child development does not mean limiting my child in interactions.
2007-11-23 07:38:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Without a doubt Laura would be the one. Hillary has a mouth and is full of hate and lies, besides, my girlfriend (a democrat liberal mother of two) hates Hillary and that's good enough for me.
2007-11-23 08:42:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Laura. Why would I place my child in the hands of someone who has no moral fiber?
2007-11-23 11:51:10 · answer #8 · answered by wider scope 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I never understood the uproar over the book, I mean I think she was just saying that inevitably a lot of people and factors influence a child's development. I never thought it was anti-family like people said, just that it happens either way.
2007-11-23 07:38:03 · answer #9 · answered by Super Tuesday 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
A wife the mother of the children.
2007-11-23 10:10:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋