« Links With Your Coffee - Monday | Main | Links With Your Coffee - Tuesday »

Mr. Rogers is an Evil Man?

Really??? MR. ROGERS! You Jerkwads, suck!




Once again, the party of no accountability looks for a scapegoat rather than accept any responsibility for their own miserable parenting skills.

Mr Rogers was right. Each and every one of us is unique and "special." His message was never one of entitlement nor did he encourage irresponsibility.

I'd say these people are simply stupid or spiteful, but their word "evil" is probably a better fit.

This is the equivilant of Trolling. Saying something crazy to get people riled up/get ratings.

I grew up on Mister Rogers and I work TOO hard (ask anyone who knows me). The argument that Rogers was even a significant force in anyone's life is difficult to prove, let alone the huge personality change being described. Utter crap. These assholes have thier generations confused in any case. The new kids are not Mister Rogers kids.

All this said however, my father the professor is noticing the same trend they complain about. About entitlement, about kids demanding a grade bump when they barely attended class, or being utterly rude in class and simply not caring. The problem the University faces tho is that the traditional method of dealing with failing kids is to expel them. In the current ecomonic environment, that would stress the finances of the Dept., so... the kids keep on being rewarded for lazy bullshit.

As a society, America is the most entitled I've met. Maybe the kids just looke daround and did what they saw others doing? Or perhaps all the parents that "worked hard so thier kids wouldn't have to" have achieved their goal?

I think its pretty much utter crap all around.

Our universites are getting to be more and more McUniversites that would rather float you along and keep the income, than send you packing, but really are young people lazyier?

Wages have been falling for 40 years, and pensions are nearly extinct. Our parents could afford cabins, bug houses in the suburbs, third cars, and still retire to a nice place in FL, TX, or AZ.

The idea that the younger generation is somehow sitting around waiting for life to be delivered to them on a platter is stupid.

ANd clearly, DR. Spock, Mr Rogers, and the youth of today are from 3 very different eras. SO the idea is just moronic that they would all be linked.

its just a piece of ageism combined with anti-liberalism.

No to mention the number of unemployed youth caused by the older generations love of free money on wallstreet.

Hey R7,

It is absolutely true that the new crop of kiddos is different in some fundamental ways. My father has taught for 30 years and isn't a rash man prone to exageration. The reasons for this trend can be argued, but the trend is real and widely observed.

Plenty of kids seemed lazy in the 80's. My parents had lazy friends in the 60's.

It's largely BS.


I read somewhere once that one of the earliest written records includes people complaining about the bad attitudes young people have.

You must be a professional that has worked with these kids for the last 30 years.

This is different than the 'kids these days...' crap.

I know plenty that have and did a little teaching myself.

I would conceed that what you are talking about it part of what is going on. I think there are factors of

  • "kids today..."
  • Changing technology and learning oppurtunities and a 100 year old education system that is slow to change
  • Spoiled children that think they can bully and complain their way to good grades.

I do think those that complain about the third ussually ignore the first 2. I also think that #3 is ussually blamed on dr spock and rogers and the like but the simptoms appear mostly from suburban family values conservatives who mostly think they shouldn't have to do any real work because of their white privilaged background and not their parents psychology readings.

Ok, I think we mostly agree.


I think that social standards are changing (as they always have) and that the new generation has different ideas of what 'polite' is than the old. We can likely argue that the internet, cell phones and cable TV have influenced this change, just as music and TV influenced changes in the 60's and 70's.

I believe that a correlation could be found between a child's early wealth and being 'spoiled' or perhaps 'lazy'. Warren Buffet, the richest man in the world, said "I want to give my kids just enough so that they would feel that they could do anything, but not so much that they would feel like doing nothing". America is the wealthiest country and celebrates celebrity more than utility. It would then make sense that children that have rarely wanted for much and worshiped rude people famous for being famous, needy and bitchy would be spoiled and rude when seen through the eyes of an older generation.

I do not think this means they are doomed. I think hard workers are better than entitled managers for a society (and so does Warren Buffet, btw

So while not doomed, these kids are not blessed either.

The rich have usually had the benefit of better educations and thus broader opportunities. If the new 'entitlement' destroys their education (esp. compared to the Asians I know who never take a break) then the 'lazy' generation will find itself outmatched, and it will fail.


I'm old enough that I only remember Mr. Rogers as an exceedingly tedious guy who, for reasons I couldn't fathom at the time, little kids just loved to watch.

The idea that the judgment of morons at FOX and Friends might be taken seriously by anyone is too pathetic to think about without getting truly depressed.

Never could stand the guy. Captain Kangaroo rocked though! Anyone remember Bill Cosby and his worksheets we could get in the mail? Sure beats the heck out of Barney and Dora kids today have.

Picture page.

I still want that Pen.

Thats right! 'Time to get your crayons and your pencils'

Thanks Red ;)

I picked up a DVD of Howdy Doody just to see what all the old people watched when they were kids. That guy was just creepy! The puppet would have given me nightmares! I guess it's easy when there aren't any other channels.

And here I've heard that this generation's "entitlement" has actually been beneficial in some ways, because people who are assured of their own value drive a harder bargain and don't simply assume "If I'm honest and work hard I'll get what I deserve." (which turns out to be a bit naive in many situations). Or perhaps this "entitlement" is good for those who would otherwise be underconfident, or bad for others.

To be honest, though, I'm not going to make any calls on the matter until some causal links are demonstrated. And Mr. Rogers is that powerful? Come on.

By the way, what about Europe? Any similar concerns across the Atlantic?

Grammar Protip: That misplaced comma is a tad Freudian. It should read "You jerkwads suck!"

The addition of the comma turns it into a command: "You jerkwads, suck!"


The speech and lip movements are not synchronized, and can't be. At one point the visual shows a weather forecast, but the speech is about Mr. Rogers.

It's a troll alright, but not by Fox.

I think their recording just got screwed up.

I think you're right. The clincher for me is the final segment, from 4:50 to the end. The audio is about 6 seconds ahead of the video.

The weather section seems to be completely out of place, but with about 6 seconds of slippage, it looks as though it could line up.

What a shame: to speak ill of the dead and show their contempt for humanity at the same time.

Did I hear right? Has Fox turned anti-capitalist? One of the group said, make your own sweater, don't go to Macy's. It's almost revolutionary.

My age may show, but the children's program I liked most was Soupy Sales. Fox might really have fun going after him.


That's assuming they are actually thinking about what they are spouting.

The study that sparked this complete distortion of facts was a study on narcissism conducted by San Diego State, amongst others:

Though it does blame YouTube and MySpace a little, there's no mention of Fred Rogers in it, of course. That would be the sole invention of Don Chance, a financial professor at LSU who conducted no study, pulled the idea out of his professorial buttocks, then retracted his "metaphor" after the Fox & Friends Broadcast, calling Mr. Rogers a "great American."

In other words, same 'ol Fox. Make crap up to infuriate people, hide the retraction. Rinse, repeat.

i think i probably spent a little too much time in the magic kingdom myself. that's why i lack ambition. yeah, that's the ticket.

It was probably the weed and the rock and roll.

Not to mention the depressed economy on the west bank.

"the magic kingdom" means different things to different people...

there's no depressed economy here, for us or the arabs. there is a building freeze (for jews only of course) but that's set to be lifted pretty soon.

i love how my very presence here can turn a post on fred fucking rogers into a political exchange. :)

You have a knack for that


I grew up thinking Mr. Rogers was kind of weird, weird in the same way, in the way as the atheist (!) astronomy professor who wore among other weirdities, wore the funniest looking wahtchmacallit, never seen before,... it was... a bike helmet. That was weird. As an adult, also the fact that he actually rode a bike, to work, even in the snow-- that was weird. Weird, and ahead of his time. Like Mr. Rogers. Dare to discipline, if you want to raise Nazis, I've found.

I also find it ironic that Nathaniel Branden, Ayn Rand's lover, and heir to her Throne, once, was also the Father of the Self-esteem movement.

Anyway, Science has weighed in and found that we are indeed special, each one of us. Even identical genetic twins, natual "colones", developmentally are unique. And not just the lucky famous meme-weed growers like "Que-Sarah-Sarah" Palin. Also the obscure unknowns like Gregor Mendel, and Anonymous IV, the Ars antiquarians.

Fred Rogers and Jimmy Carter were Oases in a desert of individualism-cum-corporate-collectivism.

Fox Sux!

I don't know who Mr Rogers is and I don't care for Fox News, but I largely agree with the sentiment that telling your kids they're special (or "talented") is setting them up for failure.

Hard work isn't necessarily what we should be telling them either. To become really good at something nothing beats repetition. So the best thing you can tell your kids is to find a passion in life, find something they really like doing.

Good advice - find what you like and are good at - you're much more likely to find a way to make a living in something related to that.

I do have to agree with the sentiment that giving every kid an award in grade school assemblies is idiotic. Even by fourth grade the smart kids have figured out which awards, if any, are 'real'. They also get the message that life will be filled with cynical bullshit - which, it turns out, doesn't help them prepare for that portion of it that is.

They also get the message that life will be filled with cynical bullshit - which, it turns out, doesn't help them prepare for that portion of it that is.


So true.

But I think what we are missing here is that Mr. Rogers wasn't trying to give everyone an award. He was trying to give every child the message that they are loved and worth loving, "just the way they are." and that being different really was no reason to look down on anyone.

I grew up in this era and never went to a school assembly where they gave everyone an award.

I think they did that shit in the republican suburbs.

Yeah, there were some BS awards, but I don't think anyone was hiding that they were BS awards, just thought 'hey, this kid busted his ass at practice every day, didn't complain much, and cheered his teamates - throw the kid a bone.'

What I remember about the educational trends from when I was growing up was these idiotic group projects where one smart kid did pretty much all the work, and the rest got to share the grade. To be fair, that seems to be how the real world of work turns out to be much of the time, but all it taught most students was either 'if I don't do it, we'll get a crappy grade' or 'find a hard working smart kid, and hitch my wagon to his/hers'

Made me think of this:

"In 1994, the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology published a paper showing that when people get feedback that they believe is overly positive, they actually feel worse, not better.",8599,1909019,00.html#ixzz0wKidI0hV

lol.. I've used that technique at work.. I am brutally honest about the parts they need to improve.. explaining that I respect their work, etc.. and later after fixes give them private praise and then public praise for the work they did that was fantastic. By being 'mean' earlier, it makes the reward of great work praised publicly a huge win for them. They then do better work, are happier with their end work, and are happier people who help the company more. For those who don't know Mr. Rogers, here he is explaining his program to congress. Fox are trolls on every level.

I'm on a Warren Buffet kick today.. love this guy:

"My luck was accentuated by my living in a market system that sometimes produces distorted results, though overall it serves our country well... I’ve worked in an economy that rewards someone who saves the lives of others on a battlefield with a medal, rewards a great teacher with thank-you notes from parents, but rewards those who can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions. In short, fate’s distribution of long straws is wildly capricious."

...can detect the mispricing of securities with sums reaching into the billions.

Let's take that a bit further. It even rewards those who, by withholding information they're ethically bound to disclose, create mispricings in securities. It extends the rewards when those "heroes of capitalism" use a small sliver of their rewards to buy the appropriate lawmakers and law enforcers to ensure that they can continue such practices until they drive the country into the ground - and to ensure that the tax rate levied on their "earnings" remains lower than their secretarial staff.

I can't believe I'm arguing this side of the argument, but having been an age-group swim coach for many years I can tell you ignoring the progress of less competitive kids is irresponsible and just plain wrong. You never know when those kids will blossom, and if you spend several years ignoring their minor (in your mind) achievements, they may never blossom.

Kids are hard enough on each other - they don't need adults to confirm their low self image.

It is the job of parents (or coaches) to praise kids for putting out their best effort whether any formal "award" is ever bestowed upon the kids- and I don't consider 'inspirational' awards for extra effort in sports to be BS. I was really thinking more about academic achievement. I sat through some painful assemblies in which just about every kid in the school got an award - some for little more than just showing up most of the time.


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives