Nominee's son bites his mom--at the White House

Debra: When you take the opportunity to post a political message, expect political responses. You are too much of a dyed-in-the-wool liberal for me to believe you intended to limit your critique to pure parenting technique, and did not relish the opportunity to take a swipe at Roberts and wife -- particularly since this is a SC nominee. Many liberals have taken shots at the Roberts family since the nomination was announced, including criticizing the children's clothing, and questioning the son's sexuality. I saw your post in line with such an attack.

Now, aside from the political aspect, I would not tolerate such behavior from my children, but am unsure what I would have done in a similar situation such as Roberts' wife had to deal with. Obviously, I don't think my children would have behaved similarly, but then again, I don't know their situation, and would not presume to judge them. As Noddy said, perhaps the 4 year old is a "special needs" case. If my little ones had previously demonstrated such poor behavior in public (and I heard they did at his prior confirmation), I think I would have opted to leave them at home.

Oh. I see, Tico.

When the national spotlight is on the behavior of a child who bites his mom at a ceremonious event at the White House and in my admiration for SUPERNANNY, I suggest its time to invoke Nanny Jo Frost's parenting techniques . . . then my post has nothing to do with parenting, but everything to do with an opportunity to take a political swipe at the nominee. ROFL

However, when you suggest that you would have opted to leave the misbehaving child at home, that is NOT to be construed as taking a political swipe at the nominee?

My parenting suggestion is clearly politically motivated according to you; however, your parenting suggestion is not politically motivated--but we're both talking about parenting a child who misbehaves in public. I don't understand your logic because it's illogical.

I don't know how much more ridiculous this can get. I believe liberals who are parents, conservatives who are parents, democrats who are parents, republicans who are parents, theists who are parents, atheists who are parents--ALL parents would benefit from using consistent parenting techniques designed to correct behavior problems in their children.

And, even if it is suspected that the boy in question might be a "special needs" child, if that is the case, then the boy would definitely benefit even more than non-special needs children from consistent discipline and corrective measures designed to teach the child the difference between appropriate and inappropriate behavior.

This NON-POLITICAL message is brought to you from the FAN of SUPERNANNY.

Did I say that, Debra? But your post had a political aspect to it which you can't deny.



Apparently you missed that part of my post where I said, "Now, aside from the political aspect ..."



Walk a mile in that mom's shoes before you start slinging the mud. Fan of "supernanny" or not, your superior attitude is disgusting to me.

Echoing DrewDad, Boomerang and Tico...

See, that's another thing I like about you, nimh (for inclusion on your other thread): You have the good sense to agree with me every now and then. :wink:

You are absolutely right Debra - follow through and consistency is important. I have two children at extreme ends of the spectrum - so I am "fortunate" to experience both situations. Believe me my strong willed one continues to push me to the limits. Funny thing is I am constantly praised about how well she is behaved especially from her teachers. So although she can be an absolute monster at home at times (and at others and absolute angel - like this morning), I have seen the advantages of having to be tough on disciplining a child.

I, personally, just do not like to judge a parent on one incident. If we do get the pleasure of continuing to see these children, it just might confirm one way or the other.

That's true Noddy - it really is not a good setting for a young child no matter what their personal issues are. I think it is pure bad judgment to bring young children to such an event. Best case would be the kids are bored out of their minds, worst case - well we and all the world saw it.