Hitting a Child IS "Child Abuse." Period!

One thing I'd bet dollahs to quatloos: Someone who beats a child was beaten AS a child.
You NEVER forget...(Woody blushes, autobiographically)...
Ask anybody.
There's never any ambiguity: you were beaten (spanked, whipped, call it what you will) by someone who was supposed and pretended to protect you (a parent); you remember.
If it happened more than once, there is no "why." It's just a fact of life: When you get home, yer gonna GIT it!
Abusers were abused. It's not an "excuse" It's what happens. Even when there's a realization that it might be "wrong," the abuser finds rationales for their actions, which also function to excuse their abusive parent.
Did you see/watch that Hannity clip where he's smacking the crap outta his desk with a belt while explaining how he'd bee3n beaten by his father, and HE was okay?
Funny how that works.
Oh, yeah, no doubt: It's probably the main reason I NEVER wanted children.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/9/adrian-peterson-nflspankingchildrencorporalpunishment.html

Labor Day: The USer Middle Class IS Closed

How yer ol' Perfesser seezit, applicationz to the middle class in the USofA, as a function of mobility dependent upon advancing status of workers, are closed, til further notice.

"The Middle Class," itself, has been the most significant USer 'export' for the last 30 years.

Prosperity--'the Middle Class'-- is what has been sent overseas with all those millions of USer jobs that went along with the industries which the Gummint--BOTH "Parties"--encouraged, via tax incentives, etc., to relocate to Asia and Latin America...

In the early '80s, "IT" began to take over, and it taught GlobalCorpoRatz that increased productivity did not NEED to be shared with mere workers; the proceeds could and should be funneled to execs and shareholders. With "IT" it was no longer necessary that workers be "literate." All that was taken care of in the programming of the work/machines. All they had to be was "trainable." And this reduced the need to educate workers, and hence undercut the "Middle Class" aspirations of labor.

The world-corpoRatz learned that they didn't really need a relatively affluent USer middle class--which had grown 'spoiled,' and 'too demanding,' and unruly in it's acquisitions, unions, and privileges.

So the JOBS were exported to 'newly developing' economies where the workers would be 1) (more) grateful for their jobs, 2) less demanding about pay and conditions and 3) less careful about regulation and pollution, and where developing STATES could reap financial benefits and social stability.

Moving the jobs CREATED markets in the newly developing locales by making consumers out of the locals, willing to purchase and use the international "brands." Cars, refrigerators, cell-fones, computers! Suddenly brands like Marlboro took OFF!

To the optimists, I caution: The jobs won't be returning to the USofA anytime soon; not as long as there are environmental regs, unions, and "high" corpoRat taxes. Not, that is, until USer workers are willing to be recompensed like their counterparts in the 'developing world.'