Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC...

[thereisnospoon]

...has some interesting ideas about Detroit bankruptcy.
Her claim is that big government is required to run a city.
She also complains about Detroit's crumbling tax base tying it to depopulation.
This is my assessment after reading between the lines of her rant.
It appears her belief is that non-residents should be taxed to support cities.
That it may be 'unfair' that people can leave a city and those who remain are left to fend for themselves.
What she ignores, most likely for purely political purposes is that Detroit has 13,000 employees on payroll and another 22,000 pensioners.
Melissa Harris-Perry?s ?Delusional? Analysis of Bankrupt Detroit May Stun You | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[The2ndAmendment]

​

Here is the RAW transcript of the Promotion Ad:

1. We have never invested as much in public education as we should have, because we've always had kind-of-a private notion of children.

2. [Sarcastic] 'Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility.'

3. We haven't had a very collective notion of these are OUR children.

4. So part of it is that we have to break through our kind-of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families;

5. and recognize that kids belong to WHOLE COMMUNITIES;

6. Once it's everybody's responsibility, and not just the household's, then we start making better investments.

Here is the transcript edited to fix her inability to speak proper English:

1. We have never invested as much in public education as we should have, because we have always had a private notion of our children.

2. [Sarcastic] 'Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility.'

3. We never had a collective notion that these are OUR children.

4. So part of it is that we have to break through our private idea that kids belong to their parents, or that kids belong to their families.

5. We must recognize that kids belong to the WHOLE COMMUNITY;

6. Once it is everyone's responsibility, and not just the household's [responsibility], we will start making better investments.

Ok, she states a problem: We're not investing enough/correctly into education.

Then she diagnoses the cause of the problem,

Then she proposes the solution.

She says her solution will better our investments into education.
---------------------------

Here are the Questions:​

Instructions: Only use the Transcript to answer these questions.

1: Which problem does she identify? That we aren't investing enough/properly into education - This is derived from Line 1.

2: What does she claim to be the cause of the problem? [It is your job to answer this]

3: What is her solution to the problem? [It is your job to answer this]

4: What are the means by which to implement her solution? [It is your job to answer this]

5: What will be the end result? That our investments in public education will succeed once we implement the solution to the cause of the problem. This is derived from Line 6.

------------------------

Here are my answers:

1: Which problem does she identify? That we aren't investing enough/properly into education - This is derived from Line 1.

2: What does she claim to be the cause of the problem? That parents are sovereign over their children - From Line 1, Line 2

3: What is her solution to the problem? To make government sovereign over your children - From lines 3 and 5

4: What are the means by which to implement her solution? To break (force) the idea of parental sovereignty over their children - From line 4

5: What will be the end result? That our investments in public education will succeed once we implement the solution to the cause of the problem - This is derived from Line 6.

--------------------------

In depth answers:

1: This promotion ad starts with the premise that we are not investing enough into education; however, statistics show (that are well agreed by both liberals and conservatives) that we spend more than any nation on earth per student, and get the worst return on that money as well.

But, if we look at the end of line 6, she says "we'll make better investments," so we'll give her the benefit of the doubt, and assume that her problem is that we don't invest CORRECTLY into education, instead of not investing enough.

2: She immediately identifies what she believes is the Cause of the problem. She says in Line 1:
"beCause we have always had a private notion of our children."

Thus, she claims the Cause of the problem is that Americans believe in parental sovereignty over their children, unless someone can else can dispute what "private notion" means.

Then, in Line 2, she mocks and derides the idea of parental sovereignty:
[Sarcastic] 'Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility.'

Thus she believes that any person who believes that their kid is theirs, that they have sovereignty over their children, who believes that they are ultimately responsible for their child, is a person who should be derided.

3: Her solution to the problem is that we must declare that the government is sovereign over our children, not the parents, that parents may only have their children as a PRIVILEGE that is graciously extended to us by government, a privilege that can be revoked for any or no reason (such as teaching them something against the government's values).

We get this from Line 3 and Line 5:
"We haven't had a very collective notion of these are OUR children."

So, since we've translated "private notion" to "parental sovereignty," then we must translate "collective notion" to "government sovereignty." Although it is easy to see how "notion" is being used as euphemism for "sovereignty," how are we translating "collective" to "government?"

Well, she talks about "public education," with public education being the entire premise of her very short speech. Unless you know some form of public education that is NOT run by government, I cannot see how the word "collective" (which itself is often associated with Marxist ideology) can be construed to any other meaning.

Now let's investigate Line 5,
"and recognize that kids belong to WHOLE COMMUNITIES; "

First, we must draw our attention to the word "Community." So far, she has talked about Public Education, and thus, Government; she has also invoked the idea of "government sovereignty." People often confuse society and government, and will use the word "community" to mean either when they cannot decide which term [society or government] to use, or to conceal which one they actually mean.

In the words of Thomas Paine (Common Sense):

SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state an intolerable one;

However, we're not here to engage in discourse on Common Sense, I quoted this to show the difference between society and government.

So let's return to the word "Community," in Line 5.

If she is saying that children belong to the "Community," as in society, then it contradicts her own premise that government should have sovereignty, because society and government are separate entities.

Therefore, in order for her own thesis to make sense, the word Community must imply government, which solidifies the logical foundation of her argument. To say that she actually meant "society" would only serve to turn her speech into an incoherent mess, as the speech would be plagued with an illogical union of phrases.

Thus, we finally conclude that her "solution" is to transfer the sovereignty and absolute responsibility over children from the parents and families to the government. This doesn't mean that the Government is going to rush in and take your kids, it simply means that legally, the government is the final authority over your children.

Today, the government can only claim sovereignty over your children if you do something that warrants the removal of your sovereignty (custody), such as abusing your children. Only then may the government become involved, and via due process, the government must prove its case against you.

Her solution is to make government sovereign right from the start, and thus allow them to remove custody of your children for any and no reason, because the custody was already theirs to begin with.

Now, how does she plan to implement this solution? We need only look at Line 4:
"So part of it is that we have to BREAK through our kind-of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families;"

This implies the following:
1) They must convince parents that the government knows better, because the government has "experts" in raising, teaching and nuturing your children. If they can convince us of this idea, then we will Consent to transfer sovereignty of our children over to government, without any resistance.

2) For parents who will not agree to this, then the sovereign relationship between mother and child must be BROKEN, by convincing the child to Consent to the transfer of Sovereignty from the parents to the Public Education (Government) system. This would be accomplished by teaching them these ideas while they are young and then fooling them into signing some sort of devious contract that would complete the transfer of sovereignty.


Finally, she says that once her solution is implemented, our failed investments will magically better themselves, because the government will now have sovereignty over your children, instead of the parents. The problem isn't the Government, it's You!
----------------------------
If you don't agree with my interpretation, ask yourselves the following:
Did she say that we weren't investing correctly into education? The obvious answer here is yes, however, I'll let you privately answer the rest of the questions.

Ok, since she says we're not investing correctly into Public Education, who does she blame the problem on, the government, or the people?

Furthermore, she never even said why our investments have failed. Has she mentioned that there are children whose schools are decrepit and dilapidated? Has she mentioned that there are children without desks? Without textbooks? With paper? Without computers? Without pens and pencils?

No, she says that the "people" are the problem, not government, and that government can fix the problem.

No, she never mentions that children are missing proper supplies, or that their educational facilities are either too small or not maintained correctly (or both), she says that YOU having the final authority over your children is the problem.

----------------------------

Overall, this is a very well designed and intentionally deceptive script. It conveys MILLIONS of words by only using hundred; it presents a dangerous and repulsive ideology, whilst masquerading a caring and loving philosophy.

----------------------------

However, if Progressives would like to give me their alternate explanation of the TRANSCRIPT, by using the TRANSCRIPT in their explanation, please, do so, I don't want to think that this is what MSNBC (Progressive Headquarters) was trying to preach.

 

[Oddball]

You want to start repopulating Detroit, start with the pensioners.

Make all who have left to move back or forfeit their pensions.

Then, make everyone who has a job with the city and county live there as well.

 

[blackhawk]

...has some interesting ideas about Detroit bankruptcy.
Her claim is that big government is required to run a city.
She also complains about Detroit's crumbling tax base tying it to depopulation.
This is my assessment after reading between the lines of her rant.
It appears her belief is that non-residents should be taxed to support cities.
That it may be 'unfair' that people can leave a city and those who remain are left to fend for themselves.
What she ignores, most likely for purely political purposes is that Detroit has 13,000 employees on payroll and another 22,000 pensioners.
Melissa Harris-Perry?s ?Delusional? Analysis of Bankrupt Detroit May Stun You | Video | TheBlaze.com

How has big Government done running the country? Given the state of things why would one thing big Government could do any better with a city?

 

[thereisnospoon]

You want to start repopulating Detroit, start with the pensioners.

Make all who have left to move back or forfeit their pensions.

Then, make everyone who has a job with the city and county live there as well.

One of Detroit's issues is that most of the city's municipal employees live OUTSIDE of Detroit. That is most likely because they can afford to live in the suburbs.
So the residents of Detroit are paying these people via taxation while the city workers are able to escape those taxes.
Of course this is a guess. Some cities have residency requirements for municipal employees. Detroit may be one of those cities.

 

[R.C. Christian]

I say just raise the joint, send the population to and Island in the Bikini Atoll, and blame aliens for their disappearance.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I say just raise the joint, send the population to and Island in the Bikini Atoll, and blame aliens for their disappearance.

Hmm.....You do realize Bikini Atoll is where we tested atomic bombs..There isn't much left of what little land mass there....
Of course I suspect you are being sarcastic..I had to point out the above because there are so many people on here and across the nation who have no clue where this place is nor its historic significance.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Black culture is vastly different then white...They're almost totally opposite in their idea of government and how things should work.

This is what we need to understand.

 

[ScienceRocks]

...has some interesting ideas about Detroit bankruptcy.
Her claim is that big government is required to run a city.
She also complains about Detroit's crumbling tax base tying it to depopulation.
This is my assessment after reading between the lines of her rant.
It appears her belief is that non-residents should be taxed to support cities.
That it may be 'unfair' that people can leave a city and those who remain are left to fend for themselves.
What she ignores, most likely for purely political purposes is that Detroit has 13,000 employees on payroll and another 22,000 pensioners.
Melissa Harris-Perry?s ?Delusional? Analysis of Bankrupt Detroit May Stun You | Video | TheBlaze.com

1. Blacks feel that they're owed something.
2. Maybe it was depopulation as the successful people got the fuck out of the gang infested shit hole.
3. Taxing non-residents goes back to being owed something mindset.
4. Unfair is always something blacks have on their minds. lol
5. Blacks believe in socialism very strongly.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Black culture is vastly different then white...They're almost totally opposite in their idea of government and how things should work.

This is what we need to understand.

I do not subscribe to your generalizations.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Black culture is vastly different then white...They're almost totally opposite in their idea of government and how things should work.

This is what we need to understand.

I do not subscribe to your generalizations.

Explain why they vote 90% for it? You may not like it but there's some truth.

 

[Rozman]

I remember a phone call to a radio station where the caller said
he received more in the way of pension and benefits after he retired then he did
when he worked for the automotive industry.

 

[Zona]

Hey [MENTION=42689]The2ndAmendment[/MENTION]....since you claim she is somewhat less educated than you are?....here are her credentials..

She received a bachelor of arts in English from Wake Forest University in 1994 and a Ph.D. in political science from Duke University in 1999. She also received an honorary doctorate from Meadville Lombard Theological School.[2][3] Motivated to better understand the role of the black church in political movements, she was a Master of Divinity student at Union Theological Seminary of New York City.
She was an associate professor at Princeton, and is Currently a Professor of Political Science at Tulane University.

Oh and I love her lisp. She is adorable.

Bow down bitch.

 

[Katzndogz]

As Detroit lost population, the government should have gotten smaller. It didn't. It kept growing with more and more benefits to unproductive people. The police had cuts to pay the pensions. This leads to fewer police. It doesn't take a mathemetician to figure that one out. Detroit should have promised and paid pensions and legacy benefits commensurate with the size of the population. Instead of cutting spending to match the diminished size, Detroit sold municipal bonds to make up the shortfall, some of that money was skimmed to start with. Detroit wanted, above all, black leadership. They got Kwame Kilpatrick. That's what they wanted. He robbed and raped them. When he was being tried, the blacks of Detroit took to the street in protest. He was their chosen leader. That's what they wanted.

 

[ScienceRocks]

As Detroit lost population, the government should have gotten smaller. It didn't. It kept growing with more and more benefits to unproductive people. The police had cuts to pay the pensions. This leads to fewer police. It doesn't take a mathemetician to figure that one out. Detroit should have promised and paid pensions and legacy benefits commensurate with the size of the population. Instead of cutting spending to match the diminished size, Detroit sold municipal bonds to make up the shortfall, some of that money was skimmed to start with. Detroit wanted, above all, black leadership. They got Kwame Kilpatrick. That's what they wanted. He robbed and raped them. When he was being tried, the blacks of Detroit took to the street in protest. He was their chosen leader. That's what they wanted.

This shows how illogical blacks are within detroit. This is what they wanted and never expected any creditability. I hope all forms of welfare is now cut in Detroit and blacks are thinking of ways to improve the shit hole they created.

 

[Rozman]

Who is responsible for Detroit?

Detroit.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Hey [MENTION=42689]The2ndAmendment[/MENTION]....since you claim she is somewhat less educated than you are?....here are her credentials..

She received a bachelor of arts in English from Wake Forest University in 1994 and a Ph.D. in political science from Duke University in 1999. She also received an honorary doctorate from Meadville Lombard Theological School.[2][3] Motivated to better understand the role of the black church in political movements, she was a Master of Divinity student at Union Theological Seminary of New York City.
She was an associate professor at Princeton, and is Currently a Professor of Political Science at Tulane University.

Oh and I love her lisp. She is adorable.

Bow down bitch.

Credentials aside Ms Harris-Perry has radical ideas which are incompatible with the concepts of freedom and liberty. She seeks to use the power of government to force her will on others.
She may be book smart, but book smarts are no guarantee of intelligence.
So you can cram that up your ass.

 

[Antares]

Hey [MENTION=42689]The2ndAmendment[/MENTION]....since you claim she is somewhat less educated than you are?....here are her credentials..

She received a bachelor of arts in English from Wake Forest University in 1994 and a Ph.D. in political science from Duke University in 1999. She also received an honorary doctorate from Meadville Lombard Theological School.[2][3] Motivated to better understand the role of the black church in political movements, she was a Master of Divinity student at Union Theological Seminary of New York City.
She was an associate professor at Princeton, and is Currently a Professor of Political Science at Tulane University.

Oh and I love her lisp. She is adorable.

Bow down bitch.

She is a racist asshole....bitch.

 

[Zona]

Hey [MENTION=42689]The2ndAmendment[/MENTION]....since you claim she is somewhat less educated than you are?....here are her credentials..

She received a bachelor of arts in English from Wake Forest University in 1994 and a Ph.D. in political science from Duke University in 1999. She also received an honorary doctorate from Meadville Lombard Theological School.[2][3] Motivated to better understand the role of the black church in political movements, she was a Master of Divinity student at Union Theological Seminary of New York City.
She was an associate professor at Princeton, and is Currently a Professor of Political Science at Tulane University.

Oh and I love her lisp. She is adorable.

Bow down bitch.

Credentials aside Ms Harris-Perry has radical ideas which are incompatible with the concepts of freedom and liberty. She seeks to use the power of government to force her will on others.
She may be book smart, but book smarts are no guarantee of intelligence.
So you can cram that up your ass.

Thats hot. (Speaking of no guarantee of intelligence. )

 

[thereisnospoon]

Hey [MENTION=42689]The2ndAmendment[/MENTION]....since you claim she is somewhat less educated than you are?....here are her credentials..

She received a bachelor of arts in English from Wake Forest University in 1994 and a Ph.D. in political science from Duke University in 1999. She also received an honorary doctorate from Meadville Lombard Theological School.[2][3] Motivated to better understand the role of the black church in political movements, she was a Master of Divinity student at Union Theological Seminary of New York City.
She was an associate professor at Princeton, and is Currently a Professor of Political Science at Tulane University.

Oh and I love her lisp. She is adorable.

Bow down bitch.

Explain how your angry comments, which have ZERO to do with the problems of Detroit, have anything to do with the fact that this woman's ideas are so far fetched, they may defy the laws of gravity.
There are highly educated criminals. Shall we excuse them because they have Degrees?
There are highly educated people who represent the very institutions you liberals despise..CEO's Wall Street, Corporations, etc, do they get your hall pass because of their degrees?
You libs are quite efficient at figuring out the best way to step in mud when circling the wagons around fellow libs.