The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Unexpected Endorsement for Schlafly

Posted on | August 2, 2010 | 25 Comments

Remember my defense of Phyllis Schlafly? Well, now comes some blunt truth from Patterico:

Here is a generalization for you: when I see violent criminals in court, they tend to be fatherless. When government welfare policies encourage fatherless households, they encourage crime and violence. And when anyone — unmarried women or anyone else — votes for expanding the welfare state, they are voting for a continuation of this depressing and dangerous cycle.

Policies that enable anti-social attitudes and behaviors will tend to increase anti-social attitudes and behaviors. And the people who adopt those anti-social attitudes and behaviors will reliably vote for more such policies. This is how bad policy can be “good” politics, if by “good” you mean the re-election of people who promulgate bad policy.

Exactly why it should be controversial to say that, I don’t know.

Category: Crime

Comments

25 Responses to “Unexpected Endorsement for Schlafly”

  1. Joe
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 8:10 pm

    Most sane people recognize that subsidizing bad behavior is a bad idea. Even Patterico gets it.

  2. Joe
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 4:10 pm

    Most sane people recognize that subsidizing bad behavior is a bad idea. Even Patterico gets it.

  3. Bob Belvedere
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 8:24 pm

    This is why The Founders believed that only property owners should have the franchise.

    ROBERT HEINLEIN put it best: [O]nce a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader — the barbarians enter Rome.

    Once again, The Founders have been proven right.

    I have seen the enemy and he is us.

  4. Bob Belvedere
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 4:24 pm

    This is why The Founders believed that only property owners should have the franchise.

    ROBERT HEINLEIN put it best: [O]nce a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader — the barbarians enter Rome.

    Once again, The Founders have been proven right.

    I have seen the enemy and he is us.

  5. Roxeanne de Luca
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 10:39 pm

    Why “unexpected?” Aside from the fact that Patterico is a prosecutor and intelligent (and therefore capable of seeing that defendants are unusually likely to come from father-less households), he gets the conservative movement. Patterico might not be as strident as y’all are, but he’s no Peggy Noonan, either.

    (Of course, my adoration of Patterico knows no bounds, so my opinion might be a wee bit biased.)

  6. Roxeanne de Luca
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 6:39 pm

    Why “unexpected?” Aside from the fact that Patterico is a prosecutor and intelligent (and therefore capable of seeing that defendants are unusually likely to come from father-less households), he gets the conservative movement. Patterico might not be as strident as y’all are, but he’s no Peggy Noonan, either.

    (Of course, my adoration of Patterico knows no bounds, so my opinion might be a wee bit biased.)

  7. Fritz Katz
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 12:19 am

    I’ve often wondered what the percentage of criminals incarcerated in jails and penitentiaries — are registered Democrat verses Republican? Shouldn’t be too hard to match the voter registration roles in states that allow prisoners to vote.

    The answer seems self-evident. Why else would the Democrats keep pushing to give felons and illegals the vote? But, I wonder why the sociological study hasn’t been done?
    .

  8. Fritz Katz
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 8:19 pm

    I’ve often wondered what the percentage of criminals incarcerated in jails and penitentiaries — are registered Democrat verses Republican? Shouldn’t be too hard to match the voter registration roles in states that allow prisoners to vote.

    The answer seems self-evident. Why else would the Democrats keep pushing to give felons and illegals the vote? But, I wonder why the sociological study hasn’t been done?
    .

  9. young4eyes
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 1:49 am

    “Why else would the Democrats keep pushing to give felons and illegals the vote?”
    Um, maybe that little inconvenient truth called “taxation without representation”. Hey, if you’re willing to let felons off the hook from paying taxes then we might talk.Otherwise, you’re just a hypocritical know-nothing.What’s new?

    Patterico’s “analysis”, if you want to call it that, is so weak and banal as to elicit the kind of laughter usually reserved for slapstick.Then again, he’s taking his cue from a decrepit, antiquated self-loathing broad who probably reminds most Conservatives of their mommies.Unfortunately, there are Oedipal implications in your lame defense of her…”views”.
    “When government welfare policies encourage fatherless households”–and there is the major fail in the argument:
    Welfare policies don’t encourage fatherless households. Deadbeat dads don’t justify their absence with the Welfare safety net. It’s probably the most ridiculous argument I have heard yet.
    Your argument implies that without Welfare more fathers would stick around to raise their kids. That’s laughable! The real problem is cultural, in that deadbeat fathers are selfish pricks.
    But retarded arguments are the Conservative bread and butter. So why should i be surprised?

  10. young4eyes
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 9:49 pm

    “Why else would the Democrats keep pushing to give felons and illegals the vote?”
    Um, maybe that little inconvenient truth called “taxation without representation”. Hey, if you’re willing to let felons off the hook from paying taxes then we might talk.Otherwise, you’re just a hypocritical know-nothing.What’s new?

    Patterico’s “analysis”, if you want to call it that, is so weak and banal as to elicit the kind of laughter usually reserved for slapstick.Then again, he’s taking his cue from a decrepit, antiquated self-loathing broad who probably reminds most Conservatives of their mommies.Unfortunately, there are Oedipal implications in your lame defense of her…”views”.
    “When government welfare policies encourage fatherless households”–and there is the major fail in the argument:
    Welfare policies don’t encourage fatherless households. Deadbeat dads don’t justify their absence with the Welfare safety net. It’s probably the most ridiculous argument I have heard yet.
    Your argument implies that without Welfare more fathers would stick around to raise their kids. That’s laughable! The real problem is cultural, in that deadbeat fathers are selfish pricks.
    But retarded arguments are the Conservative bread and butter. So why should i be surprised?

  11. Adobe Walls
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 2:15 am

    Young4eyes: thank you for that visual for a few moments I had an image of you in front of a mirror smacking yourself.

  12. Adobe Walls
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 10:15 pm

    Young4eyes: thank you for that visual for a few moments I had an image of you in front of a mirror smacking yourself.

  13. Dave C
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 2:42 am

    maybe that little inconvenient truth called “taxation without representation”.

    Maybe they should have thought of that before committing the crime, being caught then convicted.

    Consequences of one’s actions and all that.

  14. Dave C
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 10:42 pm

    maybe that little inconvenient truth called “taxation without representation”.

    Maybe they should have thought of that before committing the crime, being caught then convicted.

    Consequences of one’s actions and all that.

  15. JeffS
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 2:48 am

    Um, maybe that little inconvenient truth called “taxation without representation”. Hey, if you’re willing to let felons off the hook from paying taxes then we might talk.Otherwise, you’re just a hypocritical know-nothing.What’s new?

    In the alternate reality where Y4E resides, felons are not convicted criminals, deprived of their civil rights because of their crimes, but victims of Da Man, and hence worthy of charity.

    But not my charity.

  16. JeffS
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 10:48 pm

    Um, maybe that little inconvenient truth called “taxation without representation”. Hey, if you’re willing to let felons off the hook from paying taxes then we might talk.Otherwise, you’re just a hypocritical know-nothing.What’s new?

    In the alternate reality where Y4E resides, felons are not convicted criminals, deprived of their civil rights because of their crimes, but victims of Da Man, and hence worthy of charity.

    But not my charity.

  17. Randy Rager
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 3:40 am

    Simple answer to y4e: You’re wrong. Completely, utterly and unforgivably. Don’t bother responding, I can no longer bring myself to give a flying fuck what you think.

    Schlafly and Patterico have nailed this one.

  18. Randy Rager
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 11:40 pm

    Simple answer to y4e: You’re wrong. Completely, utterly and unforgivably. Don’t bother responding, I can no longer bring myself to give a flying fuck what you think.

    Schlafly and Patterico have nailed this one.

  19. Must See Trailer – Agenda: Driving America Down :: The Lonely Conservative
    August 2nd, 2010 @ 11:56 pm

    […] Speaking of Phyllis Schlafly. “One of the things Obama’s been doing is deliberately trying to increase the […]

  20. Kojocaro
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 11:15 am

    yes youngforeskin felns are just hard wortkers deprived of their civil rights by da man honsetly if you believ that so much you punk why not join the Civil rights movement you ignorant jackwagon

  21. Kojocaro
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 7:15 am

    yes youngforeskin felns are just hard wortkers deprived of their civil rights by da man honsetly if you believ that so much you punk why not join the Civil rights movement you ignorant jackwagon

  22. Kojocaro
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 11:23 am

    felons*

  23. Kojocaro
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 11:23 am

    believe*

    i apologize for my shoddy spelling

  24. Kojocaro
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 7:23 am

    felons*

  25. Kojocaro
    August 3rd, 2010 @ 7:23 am

    believe*

    i apologize for my shoddy spelling