Posted by Tina
Sorry folks if this seems like a petty effort to slap back. The story below was in the news and caused me to pause and ask myself, “What would Chris think about this?” I don’t wish to be petty, on the other hand, I feel an obligation to never let an opportunity go to waste.
First Lady Michelle Obama was visiting a group of young people last week, graduates of the Santa Fe Indian School, when she repeated a slew of radical left talking points:
“Your communities need you. They need you to develop your potential and become who you’re meant to be, and that goes for every student in here who is thinking about dropping out, who is feeling discouraged. Your community needs you, and more than ever before, our world needs you, too,” she said during commencement exercises on Thursday. …
All you have to do is tune in to the news, and you’ll see that right now, some of the loudest voices in our national conversation are saying things that go against every single one of the values that you’ve been living at this school,” Mrs. Obama said.
“They’re telling us that we should disrespect others because of who they are or where they come from or how they worship. They’re telling us that we should be selfish – that folks who are struggling don’t deserve our help, that we should just take what we can from life and not worry about anyone else,” she said.
“And they’re saying that it’s okay to keep harming our planet and using our land, our air, our water however we wish,” Mrs. Obama added.
I understand that this is how the First Lady interprets voices of dissent. Voices that struggle to point out the harm that has been done by policies, actions and inaction affecting immigration, national security, terrorism, social programs, healthcare and the environment. I understand that her message is political. I understand that she’s motivated by the left activist goal to recruit minority groups by creating a straw man enemy and giving it a name. For now it’s “the strongest voices” but there’s no doubt that she refers to conservative or Republican voices.
The First Lady, according to the Chris rules, is lying. Her description of conservative positions and intentions is off base. I believe she doing this purposely. She adds a deceptive voice to hammer the message home. Wrapping her message in the warm blanket of deep concern she implies that these unnamed evil people have an agenda to purposely harm the kids, their families and the planet. “Your community needs you,” sounds like a call to service but it’s actually a call to activism of the Alinsky variety which is service to the radical left agenda.
Will Chris be able to see this or will he once again attempt to tell me I didn’t hear what I heard and couldn’t tell what the First Lady was doing? Will he admit that this is, whether we like it or not, part and parcel of the political world or will he post scary quotes, taken out of context to show us the O-mans wife is just stating “facts?”
…Yeah, I know.
Michelle represents the voice that Americans with conservative values have had to contend with for decades. Radical left activists have perfected the game of smearing both the messenger and the message in the arena of competing ideas. They’ve perfected the game of getting out in front of the facts to discredit anything that doesn’t fit within their agenda on any issue. They seek a single way of thinking and nationalist solutions and then deny these fascist tendencies. They’ve gotten away with it for so long that young people don’t even notice they are being asked not to think for themselves or consider alternate positions.
Radical left voices get more radical and extreme when they are under scrutiny, when their failures are exposed for all to see. Their failures and extremism are on display now more than ever before. Those of us who are interested in many perspectives and ideas and finding policy that works are frustrated by this partisan activist game. We are interested in seeing people rise and grow strong, in seeing the nations economy robust, and in addressing environmental problems according to the findings of real science that are also in accord with reasonable goals and the economic needs of the people. We believe it’s possible to take care of the environment through innovation and sound regulation without destroying jobs and destroying industry.
What is the solution to this partisan impasse? The left (Democrats) seem to want a monopolistic choice…a one party system of government. Like the Islamists who expect non-Muslims to bow to the superiority of Islam, Democrats demand that the right (Republicans) bend to their superior will. Thus when they speak about congressional issues they demand that Republicans “compromise” and “work together” (cave) to “get things done.” Democrats are never asked to do the same. Democrats are never told they must compromise or cooperate with Republicans EVEN when the people have place Republicans in the majority. So the solution is to expose the hypocrisy and deception, the imbalance of media coverage, and the insulting notion that citizens must get in line with left thinking and eschew dissent, investigation and individual thought. The challenge is daunting and fraught with risk. Anyone who dares to express alternative ways of thinking is immediately labeled and disparaged. But what choice do we have but to take the risk and speak up?
I abhor left activism and the radicals that have taken control of the Democrat Party. They do not honor the American people as individuals but see them as the masses who must be managed and controlled in groups, a recipe for division and strife if ever there was one! They are arrogant and self-serving as they they peddle fraudulent crisis after fraudulent crisis and invent victim group after victim group. Given power, their “credentials’ fail to translate to real world positive change. The war on poverty has cost the American people trillions of dollars and none of it spent to train the poor to become contributing accomplished citizens. Likewise, trillions have been spent to “combat global warming,’ an issue that has never been proved and that’s filled with controversy and contention. Many of the so-called green solutions have done great harm to the economy with very little to show for it. Meanwhile the pockets of opportunistic speculators and crisis pushers have been lined with the spoils from the manufactured “crisis.”
This post turned out to be a rant, much longer than I originally intended and veering away from the original story of Michelle’s “lies.” But we all need to vent some of the frustrations we feel in dealing with lies directed toward us and people like Chris who carry the water. I’d like to be able to just take a hammer and bust the entire terrible BIG LEFT LIE into a million pieces and set the people free. That’s not an option, just a visual that expresses my frustrations and desire; I soldier on. Thanks for being there.
First: Thanks for thinking of me, Tina.
Second: No, nothing you quoted her saying was a lie; the views expressed were statements of opinion, not fact. This is not a double standard; these views, expressed by you, also were not lies:
“[Liberals] do not honor the American people as individuals but see them as the masses who must be managed and controlled in groups, a recipe for division and strife if ever there was one! They are arrogant and self-serving as they they peddle fraudulent crisis after fraudulent crisis and invent victim group after victim group. Given power, their “credentials’ fail to translate to real world positive change. The war on poverty has cost the American people trillions of dollars and none of it spent to train the poor to become contributing accomplished citizens.”
I don’t agree with these statements about liberals, but they’re not lies; they are, by definition, opinions, just as Michelle Obama’s statements about conservatives were opinions.
And at least one of them was factual:
“All you have to do is tune in to the news, and you’ll see that right now, some of the loudest voices in our national conversation are saying things that go against every single one of the values that you’ve been living at this school,” Mrs. Obama said.
Who can deny that Trump does exactly this? He’s a bully, and his conduct goes against the values of tolerance we teach our children.
“They’re telling us that we should disrespect others because of who they are or where they come from or how they worship.”
Trump has absolutely disrespected Muslims, falsely claiming that he saw thousands of Muslims cheering 9/11 in NJ (now THAT was a lie, not a wrong opinion), and has endorsed banning all Muslims from entering the country.
“They’re telling us that we should be selfish – that folks who are struggling don’t deserve our help, that we should just take what we can from life and not worry about anyone else,” she said.
“And they’re saying that it’s okay to keep harming our planet and using our land, our air, our water however we wish,” Mrs. Obama added.”
Now these venture into strawman territory, but they’re still opinions, not lies, just like your opinions about liberals.
“Who can deny that Trump does exactly this?”
I can deny it. You don’t know Trump. You don’t know whether the fabric of his life reflects the values practiced in that school. You are judging the book by it’s cover from a position of extreme bias!
“Trump has absolutely disrespected Muslims, falsely claiming that he saw thousands of Muslims cheering 9/11 in NJ (now THAT was a lie, not a wrong opinion), and has endorsed banning all Muslims from entering the country.”
are Muslims above reproach? These remarks do not show disrespect for all Muslims. I’ve heard many reports of people working in buildings on 911 who witnessed Muslims cheering and smiling…my son was one of them. I don’t know what Trump witnessed on a very stressful day, who he may have spoken to and what they said they saw in the agonizing weeks that followed and you don’t either. News accounts are meaningless in this regard. Trump may have erred, saying he “saw” them, but it doesn’t mean that wasn’t his impression. Your own insensitivity to a man that witnessed this event and knew hundreds of people who died is interesting. it’s like you’re talking about a cocktail party instead of a terrorist attack o our nation.
And although Trump clarified his remark about “banning Muslims,” admitting that he should have said and meant “temporarily until we can figure this out” you continue to scorn him for the original remark. Petty, Chris…you really are being petty.
Now contrast this obsession with the apologies and excuses you’ve made for Obama and Hillary who have lied, deceived, and used people to further their causes at the expense of the people and the unity of this nation. Perhaps to you there’s no comparison but from…you are way off base.
Amazing…Michelle is allowed opinions…
“are Muslims above reproach?”
Reproach? Reproach? This is how you characterize The ELE’s wildly fascistic rantings? Well, plainly you agree. Know what that makes you?
Tina, this has got to be your most illogical reply yet. You are saying things you obviously don’t believe in order to defend a man who isn’t worth it.
“I can deny it. You don’t know Trump. You don’t know whether the fabric of his life reflects the values practiced in that school.”
You can’t possibly believe that I’m talking about Trump’s conduct in his private life. There’s no way. Even if I hadn’t already made it clear to you plenty of times that I don’t give a rip how Trump treats people in private, no rational person could think I was referring to his private life rather than his many public instances of bullying. So why are you choosing to be irrational?
The only explanation I can come up with is that you know you can’t deny that Trump is a bully in public, because doing so is impossible. Saying John McCain isn’t a hero because he was captured. Calling Marco Rubio “Little Marco.” Making derogatory comments about the looks of Carly Fiorina and Heidi Cruz. His tantrum over Megyn Kelly’s fair questioning and refusing to show up to the next Fox News debate. These are all clear instances of bullying, and this is just how he treats other Republicans.
I assume bullying and name-calling are discouraged at the school Michelle Obama spoke at, which makes the first part of her comment you quoted completely accurate. If you can make a case that the instances of Trump’s public behavior I referred to above are not bullying tactics, then I’d love to hear it.
“You are judging the book by it’s cover from a position of extreme bias!”
You can’t possibly believe it is unfair to judge Trump based on the public persona he has chosen to portray to the world.
You’ve created an impossible standard here, one you’d never apply to Obama or any Democratic politician; you’re saying I can’t criticize Trump because I don’t “know” him personally. By that logic, you should take back everything you’ve said about Obama over the past eight years. This is an absurd argument, Tina, and you don’t believe it; if you did, you would believe that no one could criticize any politician unless they knew them personally! That is mind-numbingly stupid. You are letting Trump make you stupid.
“are Muslims above reproach?”
A ridiculous question. No one is above criticism. But we’re not talking about criticism. We’re talking about lies and bigotry. We’re talking about targeting an entire religion out of vengeance, and using a blood libel (“thousands of cheering Muslims in New Jersey”) in order to do it. Everyone deserves better than that, regardless of their religion.
“These remarks do not show disrespect for all Muslims.”
Of course they do. If anyone suggested banning white males from immigrating to this country on the basis that white males commit the greatest number of mass shooting, such a proposal would be disrespectful to all white males. This is no different; you are simply biased against Muslims, so you can’t see that.
“I don’t know what Trump witnessed on a very stressful day, who he may have spoken to and what they said they saw in the agonizing weeks that followed and you don’t either. News accounts are meaningless in this regard.”
You don’t even know what you’re talking about.
This is what Trump said:
“I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down,” the Republican presidential candidate said at a Nov. 21 rally in Birmingham, Ala. “And I watched in Jersey City, N.J., where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering.”
The next day, ABC This Week host George Stephanopoulos asked Trump if he misspoke, noting that “the police say that didn’t happen.”
Trump — who has said he was in his Manhattan apartment the morning of the attack — doubled down.
“It was on television. I saw it,” Trump said. “It was well covered at the time, George. Now, I know they don’t like to talk about it, but it was well covered at the time. There were people over in New Jersey that were watching it, a heavy Arab population, that were cheering as the buildings came down. Not good.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/nov/22/donald-trump/fact-checking-trumps-claim-thousands-new-jersey-ch/
So it is ridiculous of you to claim that “News accounts are meaningless in this regard.” Trump claimed he saw this on the news, and no such news reports exist. What you are really saying is that there is no proof or evidence required for Trump to make such an outrageous statement, and we should simply believe it just because he says it. That’s outrageously irresponsible.
“Trump may have erred, saying he “saw” them,”
That’s not the only part where he “erred;” he also said there were “thousands and thousands of people” cheering, and that this was on television. NONE of these things are true, Tina.
“who he may have spoken to and what they said they saw”
Who cares who he spoke to and what they said they saw? Trump said HE saw it! You really don’t see how that makes his statement a lie? What’s wrong with you?
“but it doesn’t mean that wasn’t his impression.”
Again: who cares? I’m supposed to respect Trump’s “impression” of events, even if that impression is totally counter to the facts? I’m supposed to respect his absolute refusal to rethink his “impression” after it’s been proven factually incorrect? No, I will not respect that, and no one who cares about the truth should.
“Your own insensitivity to a man that witnessed this event and knew hundreds of people who died is interesting.”
Reprehensible. This is you saying that anything Trump says or does is justifiable because he lived through 9/11. Because of this tragedy, Trump is allowed to tell whatever lies about the Muslim community he wants. Disgusting, Tina. Deranged. You should be ashamed of yourself.
“it’s like you’re talking about a cocktail party instead of a terrorist attack o our nation.”
No, it’s like I think lying about what happened during that terrorist attack is wrong, and you think it’s OK as long as it suits your narrative. It’s like I take 9/11 more seriously than you do, because I think it’s unethical to lie about it, and you think it’s not only totally fine, but also that no one should question such lies because that’s insensitive to poor poor Trump. Screw that. I’m sorry 9/11 broke your brain, and I’m sorry Trump has turned it into a complete soup. But what you’re arguing here is a travesty.
“And although Trump clarified his remark about “banning Muslims,” admitting that he should have said and meant “temporarily until we can figure this out” you continue to scorn him for the original remark.”
How many times do I have to explain to you that it doesn’t matter if he said it should be “temporary?” What language do I have to say that in for it to compute? How many times do I have to explain that Japanese internment, while also temporary, was still a bigoted overreaction before you stop pretending that this is a valid counter-argument?
It’s also idiotically naive: “until we can figure this out?” What does that even mean? What if Trump never figures it out–then it would be permanent, right?
“Amazing…Michelle is allowed opinions…”
Everyone is allowed opinions. You do not know how to distinguish between facts, opinions, and lies–something most children learn at a young age–because your mind is rotted by bias. You have a kneejerk, pathological instinct to always bash Democrats and defend Republicans–even fake Republicans like Trump–which overrides your basic common sense. That’s why you can’t admit that Trump’s false statements about thousands and thousands of Muslims cheering in New Jersey on 9/11 was a lie, while you inaccurately use that word to describe Michelle Obama’s expression of opinion.
I don’t know what your son saw. Maybe he did see some Muslims cheering. I know he did not see “thousands and thousands,” so Trump’s statement is still a bigoted lie meant to unfairly target the larger Muslim community. And maybe your son just thinks he saw it. Lots of people saw Goody Proctor with the Devil, after all, and if your son has inherited your capacity for self-deception, who knows.
In conclusion, your response is a trainwreck of dishonest rationalizations and nonsensical arguments. You have still not provided one sensible, coherent defense of Trump, because no such defenses exist.
Given the frequency of repeated outright lying by her spouse, it’s not surprising that similar behavior is displayed by Moochelle.
Counting the days until the white house can be fumigated.
Oh, Tina … Gotta reformat that post.
And then you gotta read the Sullivan. Seriously, there is a good bit in there about the citizens becoming incomprehensible to each other.
You may consider underfunding the CDC acceptable, even virtuous, but we think it’s selfish, and unacceptable.
And we are going to be quite some time working this out.
Thanks Libby…it was ghastly!
I agree that we are losing the ability to communicate with each other. it’s not surprising since we are politically divided, swamped by PC, and losing the language to boot!
The CDC is not underfunded and would not become underfunded. It might become more efficient and effective…and that would be a good thing given that we work hard for those dollars. That’s not selfish; it’s wise.
“And we are going to be quite some time working this out.”
To me it depends on how long you hold on to that picture in your head about how “selfish” our motives are…and how impossible it is to demand more of our representatives and public servants. How about they only get raises or bonuses when it can be demonstrated that they improved conditions rather than rewarding them even when they mess up badly. (IRS, VA)
I imagine it looks like a much different challenge to you…something to do with silencing and squashing the opposition…single party rule?
“The CDC is not underfunded and would not become underfunded.”
The CDC says they need so much money for Zika research, and the House says tough noogies. That is underfunding.
The unfortunate thing here is that if any of these students at the Santa Fe Indian School go on to higher education, and they haven’t already been subject to progressive indoctrination, they will be under heavy pressure by the left to conform to progressive dogma or shut-up and keep their heads down at university. Those who are not of the left-wing progressive ilk who do not shut up will be shouted down, intimidated, labeled and personally attacked. Since Tina has made this post also about Chris, I can only add that his constant barrage of personal attacks on Jack and Tina and anyone who does not march in lock step to his ideological values is testament to the achievements of progressive academia.
Today there was a perfect example of progressive intolerance and free speech denial tactics at UCLA where gay conservative Milo Yiannopoulos’ event was shut down by progressives that ultimately included a bomb threat.
This inspired me to look up Milo Yiannopoulos on YouTube and this is what I found.
BEWARE — There is some foul language and one instance of explicit verbal sexual content in this video which are not appropriate for children, but Yiannopoulos is a brilliant speaker and the reaction from the progressive crowd in attendance illustrative of their tactics.
You can see similar sort of progressive tactics happening inside of but now mostly outside of Trump rallies. Chris likes to go on and on about how he thinks Trump is racist, bigoted, xenophobic, misogynistic and so on. He also has a habit of using these terms on people he disagrees with in Post Scripts. This is part and parcel of the progressive bullying he was taught which is practiced and dominates many American college campuses.
From Michelle Obama’s statements it seem she possesses an intellectual capacity no further developed than a 3rd grader. “They’re … They’re … they’re …” Who is this they? I almost expected her to say, “Everybody knows …”
Michelle Obama is lying when she claims that “And they’re saying that it’s okay to keep harming our planet and using our land, our air, our water however we wish.” No one says that, it is pure political hogwash.
The rest of is an attempt to create a false narrative which is also a lie because it is intended to do just that, create a false narrative. This is what progressives do. They lie and then attempt pass off a lie without it seeming to be a lie. (And when caught in a lie, they say it was for a good cause.)
This was nothing more than a cheap and tawdry, political hack speech. The students deserved better. I hope a few of the graduating students were sharp enough and not so awed by her presence not to see that speech for what it was.
I don’t know how this version got posted. I thought I stopped it so I could do some editing. It seemed to work. The next post is what I intended to appear here.
The unfortunate thing here is that if any of these students at the Santa Fe Indian School go on to higher education, and they haven’t already been subject to progressive indoctrination, they will be under heavy pressure by the left to conform to progressive dogma or shut-up and keep their heads down at university. Those who are not of the left-wing progressive ilk and who do not shut up will be shouted down, intimidated, labeled and personally attacked. Since Tina has made this post also about Chris, I can only add that his constant barrage of personal attacks on Jack and herself and anyone who does not march in lock step to his ideological values is testament to the achievements of progressive academia.
Today there was a perfect example of progressive intolerance and free speech denial tactics at UCLA where gay conservative Milo Yiannopoulos’ event was shut down by progressives that ultimately included a bomb threat.
This inspired me to look up Milo Yiannopoulos on YouTube and this is what I found.
BEWARE — There is some foul language and one instance of explicit verbal sexual content in this video which are not appropriate for children, but Yiannopoulos is a brilliant speaker and the reaction from the progressive crowd in attendance illustrative of their tactics.
You can see similar sort of progressive tactics happening inside of, but now mostly outside of, Trump rallies. Chris likes to go on and on about how he thinks Trump is racist, bigoted, xenophobic, misogynistic and so on. He also has a habit of using these terms on people he disagrees with in Post Scripts. This is part and parcel of the progressive bullying he was taught in college — bullying which is taught, practiced and dominates many American college campuses.
From Michelle Obama’s statements she seems to possess an intellectual capacity no further developed than a 3rd grader. “They’re … They’re … they’re …” Who is this they? I almost expected her to say, “Everybody knows …” Perhaps she was just talking down to them, which isn’t very impressive either.
Michelle Obama is lying when she claims that “And they’re saying that it’s okay to keep harming our planet and using our land, our air, our water however we wish.” No one says that, it is pure political hogwash.
The rest is an attempt to create a false narrative which is also a lie because it is intended to do just that, create a false narrative. This is what progressives do. They lie and then attempt pass off a lie without it seeming to be a lie. (And when caught in a lie, they say it was for a good cause.)
This was nothing more than a cheap and tawdry, political hack speech. The students deserved better. I hope a few of the graduating students were sharp enough and not so awed by her presence not to see that speech for what it was.
Pie I am once again blown away by the quality not only of your writing but of your thought process. I beg you…please do more of this in comments and if you have the time write a few articles for Post Scripts. I’d love to post them. Everyone has his own unique perspective and yours is definitely more available in this form.
I will have to listen again to Milo Yiannopoulos. The little I could hear, there’s too much background noise presently, was very interesting and entertaining.
Activist agitators spoil the atmosphere as always. I don’t think most of America appreciates it.
It’s getting late; time to catch some Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
“BEWARE — There is some foul language and one instance of explicit verbal sexual content ….”
I just about laughed myself silly. You should be warning people off this blog!
But it is nice to see you forming thoughts, composing entire paragraphs for a change.
Libby the coward won’t watch it.
Well, tell me something identifying and I might go find I myself, but I’m certainly not clicking on any link you put up, because you are not a trustworthy person, are you?
There are consequences to your appalling behavior.
But I probably won’t because, I’ll tell ya, I’m just off the whole LGBT thing, generally. One of the worrisome bits in the Sullivan piece was where he took a real jab at the community … except … I agree with him. Liberal, conservative, they could give it a rest for awhile, they really could.
So you are a coward. No skin off my nose.
I don’t know what you mean by “there are consequences” for my supposedly appalling behavior, should I be afraid?
Are there consequences are there for your appalling behavior, Libby?
Oops, I had an Obama moment and stuttered.
The consequence is just what I said, I don’t trust you.
On the rare occasions when you post something that is not solely vulgar abuse, it gets independently verified … and corrected … If I’m in the mood.
Re Libby : “The consequence is just what I said, I don’t trust you.”
HAH! That is a “consequence?” That is too much. Thanks for the belly laugh! Using a scolding phrase like, there are consequences!
Well, dear Libby, try this on for size —
I-could-not-care-less-if-you-trust-me-or-not.
You didn’t answer my question. Are there consequences are there for your appalling behavior, Libby? Perhaps one is that you always look like an angry harpy left-wing fool.
Well, what terrible thing is it that I do?
See, what you need to do is develop a substantive method of abuse. Bigotry is an actual thing to be defended against. Tell us how you justify Trump’s bigotry. So far all you do is holler your denial. You cannot deny a fact.
Harpy is not a thing. It’s sexist abuse devoid of substance and gets ignored.