Skip Nav
Valentine's Day
To All the Single Women Spending Valentine's Day Alone
Valentine's Day
15 Hilarious GIFs That Sum Up What It's Like to Be Alone on Valentine's Day
Netflix
18 Sex-Filled Films to Stream on Netflix

Bookmobile: Why Daddy Is a Republican


Liberty's Little Democrats books caused quite a stir this week , so I just had to go on a search for the teeny-tiny littlest Red State version. Now I'm not going to lie, kids book or no, it's not . . . easy reading? The book's called Why Daddy Is a Republican. And well, it's not exactly the reasons my parents told me when I was little. To wit (or the opposite of wit?):

"Republicans believe in you, just like Daddy does."
"Republicans stop bullies from hurting you, just like Daddy does."

So why was the book written? According to the website, "the hope is that parents can use Why Daddy Is a Republican to help explain to their children why they are Republicans and why the Republican Party is the party of strength, values, and valor."

I suppose even the very notion of a two-party system is divisive, but I can't help but think that talking to kids about politics might be better for our country without an us-versus-them relationship? I'd love to teach kids that there's a reason behind Daddy's beliefs without implying the opposite is true for those who think differently. What do you think?

Around The Web

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
Red77 Red77 7 years
For goodness sake, what do you think a public school education and the universities teach kids? They all come out brain-washed with the exception of those well-versed. Public school texts books scream liberal -bias. You CANNOT refute that. Let kids have a mind of their own. When they grow up and have to pay their own bills and learn how city, county, state and federal budgets work, then we'll see if they're Red or Blue.
chancleta chancleta 7 years
overall both books (democratic and republican) are silly and not accurately portraying the views of both parties
chancleta chancleta 7 years
overall both books (democratic and republican) are silly and not accurately portraying the views of both parties
chancleta chancleta 7 years
ditto on trixie 6's comment! well said.
chancleta chancleta 7 years
ditto on trixie 6's comment!well said.
Community-Manager Community-Manager 7 years
Hey everyone, while this subject matter can bring about a great discussion, please no direct attacks at any member (have at it when it comes to voicing your opinion about Republicans or Democrats, etc.) but just not at any old or new member to the community. Thanks!
Trixie6 Trixie6 7 years
I'm a Republican and I think this book sucks. There is such a huge political divide. Why add to it? Why is it OK to teach our children that it's OK to hate someone because their political ideals are different from ours? How stupid. SubmarineSailor - While I agree with a lot of what you posted, I have to say that the way you went about it was just wrong. People like you are what has contributed to the great political divide. Attacking someone because their political ideals are different from yours is wrong. Doing so shows disrespect and intolerance.
Trixie6 Trixie6 7 years
I'm a Republican and I think this book sucks. There is such a huge political divide. Why add to it? Why is it OK to teach our children that it's OK to hate someone because their political ideals are different from ours? How stupid.SubmarineSailor - While I agree with a lot of what you posted, I have to say that the way you went about it was just wrong. People like you are what has contributed to the great political divide. Attacking someone because their political ideals are different from yours is wrong. Doing so shows disrespect and intolerance.
potc-crazyy potc-crazyy 7 years
I honestly don't like these books. If it's a joke, it's okay. But if a parent seriously buys one and reads it to their kid(s), that's horrible. I'm glad my parents let me choose for myself as a kid. Well, mostly. The only way they may have 'brainwashed' me was with all those Miyazaki Hayao films (almost all anti-war and/or save-the-environment).
trésjolie1 trésjolie1 7 years
totally weird sentence at the top there; "but I think you are taking this one a little far", it should say. Not night.
trésjolie1 trésjolie1 7 years
I'm all for diving into the material, but I you night be taking this one a little far, SubmarineSailor. Or take it a little too seriously. But we could agree to disagree. I didn't get caught up in the Daddy vs. Mommy aspect, but for those who did I doubt it was their biggest concern about these book. I read it as half jokes. By the way, many Pro Life'ers think that I am going to burn in hell because I don't believe in their interpretation of the Bible. I don't know how that is not decisive. And that goes for gay rights and stem cell research too. It's all fear based, which kids are very sensitive too and take seriously. So, as I stated above, we should teach our kids values, but not make them define right from wrong by partisan standards.
trésjolie1 trésjolie1 7 years
I'm all for diving into the material, but I you night be taking this one a little far, SubmarineSailor. Or take it a little too seriously. But we could agree to disagree. I didn't get caught up in the Daddy vs. Mommy aspect, but for those who did I doubt it was their biggest concern about these book. I read it as half jokes.By the way, many Pro Life'ers think that I am going to burn in hell because I don't believe in their interpretation of the Bible. I don't know how that is not decisive. And that goes for gay rights and stem cell research too. It's all fear based, which kids are very sensitive too and take seriously. So, as I stated above, we should teach our kids values, but not make them define right from wrong by partisan standards.
javsmav javsmav 7 years
I think you're missing my point, Submarine Sailor--and that could be because my answer was short, so I apologize for being unclear. However, there is a big difference in teaching your children to hate and pity other people because they believe differently than you and these organizations that exist to promote equality. I don't believe those organizations have an us versus them mentality. They are not trying to oppress men, white people, young people, or rich people, nor are they trying to promote hate. They are trying to be promote equality with young rich white men. Obviously, you feel differently about that, but I believe they are trying to bring our society together rather than break it apart. But I'll go with your argument for a moment---maybe trying to give a voice to people who are neglected and marginalized is creating dissension or discord. I will admit there is an appropriate time for divisiveness and that it can be a good thing. However, I still believe that supporting these organizations as an adult is VERY different than teaching your 5 year old that democrats (or republicans, or PETA members or the boy scouts) are bad people. There are differences in our society and you can't ignore them, but when you teach your children to HATE people who are different, then that's a problem. Really, that was my only point. Again, I apologize for not being more clear. Also, as far as I know this is not just a website for women--I have seen posts from men before, so feel free to come back.
javsmav javsmav 7 years
I think you're missing my point, Submarine Sailor--and that could be because my answer was short, so I apologize for being unclear. However, there is a big difference in teaching your children to hate and pity other people because they believe differently than you and these organizations that exist to promote equality. I don't believe those organizations have an us versus them mentality. They are not trying to oppress men, white people, young people, or rich people, nor are they trying to promote hate. They are trying to be promote equality with young rich white men. Obviously, you feel differently about that, but I believe they are trying to bring our society together rather than break it apart. But I'll go with your argument for a moment---maybe trying to give a voice to people who are neglected and marginalized is creating dissension or discord. I will admit there is an appropriate time for divisiveness and that it can be a good thing. However, I still believe that supporting these organizations as an adult is VERY different than teaching your 5 year old that democrats (or republicans, or PETA members or the boy scouts) are bad people. There are differences in our society and you can't ignore them, but when you teach your children to HATE people who are different, then that's a problem. Really, that was my only point. Again, I apologize for not being more clear. Also, as far as I know this is not just a website for women--I have seen posts from men before, so feel free to come back.
SubmarineSailor SubmarineSailor 7 years
The Boy Scouts are mostly a positive organization, they have flaws, but they separating people into groups is not what they're all about like those other organizations I mentioned above.
SubmarineSailor SubmarineSailor 7 years
AKirstin, You're right (I knew someone would mention that), the Boy Scouts don't allow homosexuals. Of course you forgot to mention that the Supreme Court upheld that decision. And you also forgot to mention that some chapters allow gay members. It's not an "anti-gay" organization, that is it doesn't exist to end homosexuality. There is a big difference. There is another big difference, there are plenty of people in Boy Scouts who are fighting to change the national policy. There is an unwritten "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. It was good enough for the (DEMOCRAT) President Bill Clinton concerning the military, so why not for the Scouts? Besides, I have a feeling most Gays wouldn't want anything to do with the Scouts. Unless, well.. Nevermind.
SubmarineSailor SubmarineSailor 7 years
AKirstin,You're right (I knew someone would mention that), the Boy Scouts don't allow homosexuals. Of course you forgot to mention that the Supreme Court upheld that decision. And you also forgot to mention that some chapters allow gay members. It's not an "anti-gay" organization, that is it doesn't exist to end homosexuality. There is a big difference. There is another big difference, there are plenty of people in Boy Scouts who are fighting to change the national policy. There is an unwritten "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. It was good enough for the (DEMOCRAT) President Bill Clinton concerning the military, so why not for the Scouts?Besides, I have a feeling most Gays wouldn't want anything to do with the Scouts. Unless, well.. Nevermind.
AKirstin AKirstin 7 years
Also, just because the Sugar sites have a woman's voice doesn't mean boys aren't allowed. I haven't seen anything on here that attempts to make guys feel unwelcome in any way.
AKirstin AKirstin 7 years
The Boy Scouts don't allow homosexuals to join their group. Maybe you don't think that's divisive, but I'm betting the millions of gay Americans would.
SubmarineSailor SubmarineSailor 7 years
Javsmav, I don't know what's more pathetic. The fact that as a guy I'm posting here, or the fact that you, as a self-proclaimed Democrat, say that divisiveness is unhealthy. By the way, I only found this site while searching for My Daddy is A Republican (and it's alter ego My Daddy is a Democrat). After reading your comments, I couldn't let you off the hook without pointing out a few things first. Most of the organizations in this country that support Democratic, liberal, the left's etc values are divisive in nature. Here are just a few. I'm leaving out the extreme groups, such as PETA, etc, because I don't think those groups necessarily represent the majority of the left. I'll also leave out those groups that by nature of their name, they support Democrats (i.e. Democrats for Life in America). These groups not only promote divisiveness, they encourage it! NOW- "Our purpose is to take action to bring WOMEN into full participation in society" (not men) (women vs. men) NAACP- "To advance the interest of colored citizens" (not white citizens, etc etc) (black vs. white) United Negro College Fund- fundraises college tuition money for BLACK students and general scholarship funds for 39 historically BLACK colleges and universities. (black vs. white) National Education Association- The NEA asserts itself "non-partisan", but critics point out that the NEA has endorsed and provided support for every Democratic Party presidential nominee from Jimmy Carter to John Kerry and has never endorsed any Republican or third party candidate for the nation's highest office. Based on required filings with the federal government, it is estimated that between 1990 and 2002 ninety percent of the NEA's substantial political contributions went to Democratic Party candidates. Although this has been questioned as being out of balance with the more diverse political views of the broader membership (workers vs. management) AARP- "is a liberal membership organization" for members 50 and over. (old vs. young) AFL-CIO- "American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations is a liberal organization of 55 national and international labor unions." (poor working class vs. greedy corporations) Are you starting to see my point? I could go on and on. How about social programs? Welfare- Poor vs. rich This is too easy. For you to call yourself a Democrat and also believe that divisiveness is unhealthy is hipocritical. I know what you're going to say. You'll try to come up with conservative groups that promote divisiveness. Again, to be fair, you have to leave out the radical groups, just like I did. I challenge you to find MAINSTREAM conservative groups that divide the nation like the liberal ones that I mentioned. The NRA?? Not based on race or sex or social status or type of job you have. Anyone can join. The Boy Scouts? That's easy, the Girl Scouts are their sister organization. Pro-Life? Their goal is to save human life, again, not based on race, sexuality, social status, etc etc. Again, anyone can join. Another thought, what side of the political spectrum does most of the protests? The demonstrations? The boycotts? Those things that divide our nation and not only create divisiveness, but also creats animosity? It's not the conservative side, that's for sure. Finally, and if this doesn't convince you, nothing will, I'm telling you this on a site that was created for WOMEN. If there wasn't any divisiveness in this world, most Democrats would be miserable.
The-City-Girl The-City-Girl 7 years
Where are all the Republicans that decried the Democrat book up to 86 comments on the other post? I guess it's not as 'sick and brainwashing' when it's promoting their own beliefs.
javsmav javsmav 7 years
I remember when I was 5 or 6 during the 1984 elections and there was a woman as the VP candidate on the democratic side (Geraldine Ferraro). I told my parents that I hoped they won because if the President died we would have a woman president. I was immediately told that they were bad because they supported abortion. Democrats = bad, abortion-loving people. I thought god was a card-carrying republican for most of my life. It wasn't until I was 20 or so before I realized that you can be a good person and a democrat. I'm sure my parents would have bought that book for me if it were around back then--definitely if it mentioned god as blessing the republican party. I don't think it's a good parenting technique--it's fine to tell your kids what you believe and why, but the divisiveness is not healthy. People who don't believe what you believe should not be considered bad people--that's what my parents and these books do. PS. Brainwashing your children does not guarantee they will come out how you want--both my sister & I are democrats. oops!
javsmav javsmav 7 years
I remember when I was 5 or 6 during the 1984 elections and there was a woman as the VP candidate on the democratic side (Geraldine Ferraro). I told my parents that I hoped they won because if the President died we would have a woman president. I was immediately told that they were bad because they supported abortion. Democrats = bad, abortion-loving people. I thought god was a card-carrying republican for most of my life. It wasn't until I was 20 or so before I realized that you can be a good person and a democrat. I'm sure my parents would have bought that book for me if it were around back then--definitely if it mentioned god as blessing the republican party. I don't think it's a good parenting technique--it's fine to tell your kids what you believe and why, but the divisiveness is not healthy. People who don't believe what you believe should not be considered bad people--that's what my parents and these books do. PS. Brainwashing your children does not guarantee they will come out how you want--both my sister & I are democrats. oops!
PixiePup PixiePup 7 years
I guess that's easier to sell than "Daddy doesn't want the big bad government taking his money away and giving it the lazy poor people." or "Daddy doesn't want the gays to marry."
bethany21 bethany21 7 years
Cabaker- You crack me up. Maybe Mommy is off writing her own "Why Mommy is a Libertarian"? lol Philleif- Those punny titles are amazing.
Latest Love
X