Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Rate the new Rauner TV ad on Pritzker/Blagojevich
Next Post: Caption contest!
Posted in:
* From earlier this month…
Democratic governor contender Chris Kennedy abruptly left a candidate forum Monday, criticizing Republican candidate Jeanne Ives for what he called “ignorance and stupidity” after she said Chicago’s gun violence could be solved if more fathers stayed in the home.
The controversy came when Ives, a three-term conservative lawmaker from Wheaton who is challenging Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner, responded to a question on curbing gun crimes.
“The problem is the gun violence in this city of Chicago, predominantly. And you know how you’re going to solve it? Fathers in the home,” she said.
As the audience booed and shouted, she repeated, “Fathers in the home.”
The Ives campaign later doubled down on the comment, explaining in a statement released to media that “many have advocated the same idea, including President Obama.”
The Ives statement quoted from a 2008 Father’s Day speech in which then-candidate Obama, himself raised mostly by a single mother and her parents, called on fathers to own up to their family responsibilities.
So is Ives seeking to further an idea that was earlier championed by Obama? Did Obama say fathers actively raising their children will solve the epidemic of gun violence in Chicago? We decided to check.
* Conclusion…
Ives claims she was echoing comments from former President Obama as she declared recently that the solution to curbing rampant gun violence would depend on more fathers taking responsibility for their families.
In his 2008 speech, Obama drew a link between children from fatherless homes and those who stray into crime. But Ives took it a lot further than Obama ever did.
Her sweeping claim is not supported by the passages from Obama’s speech that her campaign pointed to as evidence. A reading of the full speech doesn’t support Ives either.
As president, Obama made several speeches about the proliferation of guns and violence, and also laid out an array of proposals to deal with the problems. In his public pronouncements, however, Obama did not make statements linking the problem of absent fathers with gun violence.
Ives is taking the message from Obama’s 2008 Father’s Day speech out of context. We rate her statement False.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 11:54 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Rate the new Rauner TV ad on Pritzker/Blagojevich
Next Post: Caption contest!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Her campaign also cited Bill Cosby. Alleged serial rapist bill Cosby.
Comment by ste_with_a_v_en Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 11:57 am
“Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today that family is the most important. And we are called to recognize and honor how critical every father is to that foundation. They are teachers and coaches. They are mentors and role models. They are examples of success and the men who constantly push us toward it.
But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing — missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.
You and I know how true this is in the African-American community. We know that more than half of all black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled — doubled — since we were children. We know the statistics — that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioral problems, or run away from home or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it.”
What an important message President Obama gave on Father’s Day.
I wonder why conservatives don’t trust Politfact?
http://thefederalist.com/2016/12/16/running-data-politifact-shows-bias-conservatives/
Comment by Lucky Pierre Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:02 pm
Until a recent upticks, gun crime in the United States has been on a steady decline since the 1990s.
By Ives’ logic, do we thank the single mothers for that?
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/what-caused-the-crime-decline/477408/
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:12 pm
How does trying to quote a Democrat bode for the campaign of a right-wing conservative? And incorrectly quoting for her own benefit, at that.
Comment by Confued Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:13 pm
LP, are you crying out for help that you can’t read? You’re missing every point possible.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:13 pm
Bottom line, more fathers being good dads would help a lot of things. I can’t believe this is fodder for anything or even being talked about.
Comment by Shemp Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:15 pm
Jeanne is in far over her head. Her brand of ignorance might play well in ultra-conservative Wheaton, but that’s about it. It’s becoming more and more apparent every day.
For example, I believe it was last week(or earlier this week), there was an interview she did with a Peoria news channel on TV. She came out strongly against legalizing marijuana, but she didn’t stop there. She went on to compare medical marijuana to heroin. And she still didn’t stop there - by then stating that marijuana comes from a plant but bad things come from the poppy plant too - like heroin and cocaine.
That’s right. Jeanne thinks cocaine comes from poppy plants, and uses that ‘knowledge’ to rationalize why she is against legalizing marijuana.
I want to see her in a televised debate, because the only person that could possibly embarrass themselves more than rauner, appears to be Jeanne.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:26 pm
–Bottom line, more fathers being good dads would help a lot of things. –
That’s a truism, and also not what Ives said at all. Read it again.
You must know that the overwhelming majority of children of single mothers are not out there busting caps in the street.
I bet you know a few yourself.
Conversely, you can read about some of the most murderous gangsters in Chicago history — Accardo, Giancana, Spilotro, etc. — and they all had fathers at home.
So, maybe it’s a bit more complex than her red-meat “solution.”
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:29 pm
=We rate her statement False.=
As most people do once they hear her speak.
Comment by Just Visiting Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:31 pm
When did all these conservatives fall in love with Obama’s social message?
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:38 pm
The issue isn’t that Ives talked about fathers in the home. The issue is that she said that it would solely solve the problem of gun violence. Anyone with half a brain knows it’s more complicated than that.
And LP, nothing in Obama’s speech suggested fathers in the home would solely solve the problem. You’re good at copying a pasting. Not so good at reading comprehension.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:55 pm
==I wonder why conservatives don’t trust Politfact?==
And thanks for getting that in at the end. A post from you wouldn’t be complete without some form of victimhood.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 12:56 pm
Take this in a different way - not only related to gun violence -
If the question was asked of all who grew up without a father in the home whether they would have preferred to have one growing up, what % do you suppose would have answered “Yes”.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 1:01 pm
“We know the statistics — that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. They are more likely to have behavioral problems, or run away from home or become teenage parents themselves. And the foundations of our community are weaker because of it.”
Explain it to me. The difference is in the words crime and gun violence.
What is the biggest crime problem in these poor Chicago neighborhoods? Gun violence by far -that is what Chicago is infamous for.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 1:14 pm
To anonymous at 1:01. I think the answer is lots. Two parents in the home mean two people to read to you, teach you to read and help you with your home work. Two people in the home mean two sets of eyes to keep you out of trouble and two sets of hands to help get you out of it. Even Obama wasn’t wrong about the value of a father. As I remember it a lot of his problem was with the left saying that as an educated caring man he wasn’t black enough. have two people love you enough to devote 20 years of their lives to socializing you has to be a good deal.
Comment by Matt Vernau Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 1:24 pm
–Explain it to me.–
Are you enrolled in some government program that entitles you to this special attention?
Can’t you find a loved one to break down the post for you at your own pace?
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 1:26 pm
==Explain it to me==
Ives said fathers will solve the problem. Obama talked about the difficulties faced in homes without fathers.
He didn’t make a decree that fathers will solve the gun violence problem. Ives did.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 1:27 pm
No one has argued that fathers aren’t valuable and important in a child’s life. Again, that’s a truism.
Some of you are just not interested in the subject of the post and are commenting on something else entirely.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 1:31 pm
Ives is showing shallow thinking. There is a problem with family structure and culture in some of the black communities in Chicago. I don’t want to paint with a broad brush because not all black families and communities have this problem.
Nobody blamed the Viking raids on single Norwegian mothers. They came from a culture and economic system that rewarded violence and conquest.
That is what we have created in parts of Chicago. I think changing the economics of illegal drugs will help reduce the payoff to violence. Changes in welfare rules might change the incentive to have children one cannot support. Better education might help, but socialization is more important than education and that happens at an early age.
Ives’ answer is easy, shallow, and fundamentally incorrect. Changing a culture is hard, and I am not sure we know how to do it.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 2:17 pm
Word…The problem of gun violence is a lot deeper than any correlation between single mothers and gun deaths. There is also a correlation with abortion indicating reduction in crime rates. How many factors should we ignore?
This blog told us that 1800 known people in Chicago will be tied to half that carnage…But just like making people get married or stay married can’t be forced there is no legal way to round those 1800 people up and force them into reeducation camps.
The candidates mentioned here Kennedy and Ives, are probably toast after the primary. Neither of them will be part of any long term solution. So why does Politifact even care?
It is good of you to concede that parenthood matters in this process. Building better people is a long involved process. Ives is closer to being right than Kennedy.
Comment by Matt Vernau Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 2:37 pm
–It is good of you to concede that parenthood matters in this process.–
Oh please.
The idea that anyone was saying fathers aren’t important was a pathetic strawman peddled by some.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 2:40 pm
===How many factors should we ignore?===
Your side has managed to ignore the correlation between violence and easy access to firearms. That would appear to be easier to address than fatherless children. And yet, nothing but crickets chirping between you and Ives.
But plenty of “thoughts and prayers” I’m sure.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 2:43 pm
–It is good of you to concede that parenthood matters in this process.–
Can’t stay away from that pathetic strawman, can you?
Is this the part where I’m supposed to say that I’m a father at home, and that I had a father at home?
No one questioned the importance of fathers. Just Ives’ obvious dog-whistle “solution.”
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 2:48 pm
47th Ward. The reason some of us have trouble with the easy access to firearms argument is because we grew up with easy access to firearms and were not drawn to violence. My Dad’s guns were in an unlocked cabinet in the living room. None of those weapons were used against other people (at least not once in our home).
Guns make violent people more effective in their violence. So that part of your argument is correct. I don’t think control over the firearms in Chicago is possible, so it is not high on my list of solutions.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 2:58 pm
No one is “conceding” that fathers are important. Who is saying otherwise? It’s just Ives way to wash her hands of the problem and do nothing.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 3:03 pm
Thanks LBM. I grew up the same way.
But Ives and her apologists think it’s the lack of fathers that is the primary cause of gun violence. I would suggest that easy access to guns correlates higher than absent fathers. And to your point, it’s very difficult to fix that.
But I disagree that because something is difficult to solve, it becomes less urgent. There are plenty of artificial incentives for men to be fathers but abandon their children. The fact that the poverty line is based on family size is but one example of how we create incentives for fathers to “disappear.”
But someone is out there selling guns to criminals and I don’t believe that is impossible to solve, nor is it less urgent because it is difficult.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 3:10 pm
Thanks LBM and 47th Ward. I am for not selling guns to criminals. That is a National level problem if only because Chicago is so close to Indiana. Candidates for Governor are not much help on the gun violence question. Heck, Ives is toast but she is at least for things that might help get us better people, I am not wasting a vote on her even if she is smarter the Kennedy.
Comment by Matt Vernau Friday, Jan 26, 18 @ 3:45 pm