Paulyanna on daycare:
"How much for ze little girl?"
On Monday, on the electoral battlefield, you have decided to thow your gauntlet in the ring by promising to shell out $1200/year per child under 6 (after using it to smack the opposition upside their heads repeatedly).
Hell... I didn't know that ankle-biters can now vote. When did that happen?
Promising daycare to anyone with a pulse and some semblance of a synapse is a little bit too freaking generous, especially when you have falmilies that can afford either that or taking care of the kids at home.
Of course, Steve-O, you'll get the challengers off and running and they'll start to outbid and outdo you. Maybe, in the long run, the Enemy will expose itself to be a spend-thrifty opportunitst that should be denied power.
Sadly, by the looks of polls in Scary Ontari-ari-ari-o and Lotustan, people love PORK! And they're afraid that if you got elected, everything will look too freakin Kosher for these trough-aholics to handle.
"Parents can spend the money however they wish. You can choose the child-care option that best suits your family's needs," Harper said.Maybe you should limit that to low-income types, not to spoiled-brat wannabe Yuppy families.
"It's hard enough to be a parent. But government should help parents with choices not limit them," Harper said.
"In fact, the only people who should be making these choices are parents, not politicians, not the government."
At the same time, Jacko and Paulyanna (don't get me started on Gigli - he just doesn't count as a real Federal candidate) have issued counterproposals to win the Toddler vote...
In the Grit camp, Paulyanna wanted to jack up the $5-billion pledge to $11-billion to the national daycare scheme.
Jacko's peeps are still trying to determine a suitable price-tag for the rugrats.
Meanwhile, the tots are clueless about the candidates' plans to buy their tiny souls.