C-Span First Ladies
C-SPAN’s exclusive interview with former First Lady Laura Bush. In the interview she talks about her upbringing, meeting and marrying George W. Bush, their life together before the White House, as well as her reflections on her time as First Lady, including the 9/11 attacks and her causes. She also talks about what she’s been doing since leaving the White House.
In the C-Span "First Ladies" Interview, (click here) Laura Bush stated educating children from all walks of life have a civil right to an education in the United States.
I don't recall an American saying that before. Education of all children in the USA is a civil right. That was a statement I could respect. She was great in this interview. She is exceptionally proud of her own "First Ladies" meetings in Africa and also held in the USA. She invites First Ladies from all over the world, or in this case a continent to participate in the idea they are powerful women that can change a nation.
She has lost weight. To me a little painfully more than she should have, but, Texas women in their social circles tend to be slender. She seems very happy. She is somewhat different to me, but, her years in the White House were very dark times.
I found her statements about children's civil rights as something another lady shares with her. Former Secretary Hillary Clinton was on the front of attempting to achieve rights for children. I am thrilled First Lady Laura Bush and Former Secretary Clinton view the issue of education of our children so strongly. It creates hope our children will be valued, loved and provided a good education no matter the status of their parents or income level.
Children's rights under the law (click here)
by Hillary Clinton
Harvard Educational Review, November 1973, p. 493.
Her focus on children having civil rights is not unfamiliar to the American dialogue. Some time ago we had a woman working for the rights of children, namely Former Secretary Hillary Clinton.
The basic rationale for depriving people of rights in a dependency relationship is that certain individuals are incapable or undeserving of the right to take care of themselves and consequently need social institutions specifically designed to safeguard their position. It is presumed that under the circumstances society is doing what is best for the individuals. Along with the family, past and present examples of such arrangements include marriage, slavery, and the Indian reservation system. The relative powerlessness of children makes them uniquely vulnerable to this rationale. Except for the institutionalized, who live in a state of enforced childishness, no other group is so totally dependent for its well-being on choices made by others. Obviously this dependency can be explained to a significant degree by the physical, intellectual and psychological incapacities of (some) children which render them weaker than (some) older persons. But the phenomenon must also be seen as part of the organization and ideology of the political system itself. Lacking even the basic power to vote, children are not able to exercise normal constituency powers, articulating self-interests to politicians and working toward specific goals. Young children in particular are probably not capable of organizing themselves into a political group; they must always be represented either by their parents or by established governmental or community groups organized to lobby, litigate, and exhort on their behalf. The causes of younger children have not fared well, partly because these representatives have loyalties diluted by conflicts between children's rights and their own institutional and professional goals.
