There is a thread out there right now asking what we should do for the children of irresponsible parents who, due to thier own failings, are unable to provide for their own children. http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/114407-what-do-we-do-for-the-children-in-need.html The idea is that, while the parents are irresponsible and therefore undeserving of anything, their children are innocent - so what about them? And thus, the conservative theme of "personal responsibility," albeit somewhat obliquely, once again rears its ugly head. "Personal responsibility" SOUNDS like a great thing to emphasize. Shouldn't everyone be personally repsponsible for their actions (or lack thereof)? One would certainly think so. How could anyone argue against that? Unfortunately, as used by so many conservatives, "personal responsibility" is nothing more than a code phrase for: "I've got mine - screw you!" "Personal responsibility" seems to be always dragged out by many conservatives whenever the subject of government programs or welfare comes up. The recipiants of such programs are vilified as being undeserving of any government aid because, if they had just had some "personal responsiblity," none of this would be necessary. Of course, the "this" is tax dollars going into the government programs and guess what is REALLY on the mind of those objecting to such programs - hint: it has noting to do with "personal responsibility." It is SO easy for the "haves" to become morally judgmental toward the "have-nots" when it comes to such things as tax dollars going out to help the have-nots. Sure, there is such a thing as welfare fraud. But there is also such a thing as people who truly need welfare, and it has NOTHING to do with a lack of "personal responsibility." So let's not be so hard on the "irresponsible" parents of children. It is entirely possible that the parents fall into the classification of those who really are in legitimate need of welfare - a need not caused by any perceived lack of "personal responsibility."