Thursday, November 30, 2017

Liars' Poker at Family Research Council

Tony Perkins
At Heritage Foundation's blog, Hate Group Leader Tony Perkins writes: “The Big Changes the Trumps Are Making at the White House to Celebrate Christmas.” Tony Perkins is incurious and lacking in some critical thinking skills but he is not stupid. He is trying desperately to sell the idea that Trump is just the most wonderful thing in the world. The reason for Perkins' praise is the idea that Christmas is much more Christmasy in the Trump White House than Obama's. Perkins is lying. The reality is that nothing has changed.

Petty lies — lying about something as unimportant as seasonal decorations — means, in my opinion, two things: The first is that Perkins is so accustomed to fabricating that it comes naturally to him without pause. Secondly, Perkins' self-importance is boosted as an influencer and someone who visits the White House.

Sadly it is true that the leader of a notorious hate group has some influence over the current administration. How much is unknown. LGBT for Trump makes me want to vomit.


Trump is not a practicing Christian and never has been. Trump pretended to be pious and Christians got him elected. In return they got Gorsuch and Sessions (for starters). Trump, in turn, considers the Christian right to be his base; what he needs to get re-elected.

Trump is a narcissistic, impulsive, erratic and unbalanced sociopath who is also a pathological liar and panderer. As commander in chief he is downright scary. He seems to be trying to pick a fight in order to become a wartime president. Everything is always about Trump's fragile ego. What is best for the country has become irrelevant. Perkins puts that all aside for a crèche in the East Room of the executive mansion. Agent Orange might blow us all to hell but a replica of baby Jesus is more compelling.

Here comes some more BS from Perkins:
There’ve been a lot of wise men in the White House. But this Christmas, there are three more in the East Room, where the Trumps are highlighting a Nativity scene.

That’s just one of the ways the first family is separating itself from the Obamas, who came dangerously close to ditching the 50-year-old display in 2009. There wasn’t room for Jesus at the inn—and for eight years, there wasn’t much room for him at 1600 Pennsylvania either.
The spread gets deeper:
The Obamas famously wanted a “nonreligious Christmas” (which makes about as much sense as a vegetarian barbecue). But they were outed by their social secretary, Desiree Rogers, in an eye-opening profile piece for The New York Times.
The lunch conversation inevitably turned to whether the White House would display its crèche, customarily placed in a prominent spot in the East Room. Ms. Rogers, this participant said, replied that the Obamas did not intend to put the manger scene on display—a remark that drew an audible gasp from the tight-knit social secretary sisterhood. (A White House official confirmed that there had been internal discussions about making Christmas more inclusive and whether to display the crèche.)
Famously? The full quote from the New York Times (December 4, 2009):
But Washington is a city that likes its traditions, and Ms. Rogers has raised a few eyebrows by trying to bend them. When former social secretaries gave a luncheon to welcome Ms. Rogers earlier this year, one participant said, she surprised them by suggesting the Obamas were planning a “non-religious Christmas” — hardly a surprising idea for an administration making a special effort to reach out to other faiths.

The lunch conversation inevitably turned to whether the White House would display its crèche, customarily placed in a prominent spot in the East Room. Ms. Rogers, this participant said, replied that the Obamas did not intend to put the manger scene on display — a remark that drew an audible gasp from the tight-knit social secretary sisterhood. (A White House official confirmed that there had been internal discussions about making Christmas more inclusive and whether to display the crèche.)

Yet in the end, tradition won out; the executive mansion is now decorated for the Christmas holiday, and the crèche is in its usual East Room spot.
Does anyone think that Christmas decor was more important than the two wars and economic meltdown that Obama inherited? The pressures on our president are beyond our comprehension. Perkins continues:
Ultimately, the Obamas caved to pressure and included a Nativity scene in its décor. For two terms, that was the extent of Christmas in the White House.
That is utter nonsense. These decisions and discussions are among staff and probably not very senior staff. The President's actual intentions are unknown. A junior social staffer claiming to know what the President wanted probably got that third hand. There is simply no way to know who wanted what. Perkins has no way of knowing if the Obamas were pressured into doing anything regarding their first Christmas in the White House. Obama tended to be Socratic. He might have simply asked the question which was then misinterpreted as his sentiment. I don't know and Perkins doesn't know.

The bottom line is this:

For eight years the White House was decorated pretty much the same way as it is decorated this year

In the final analysis Perkins claim of “Big changes” is big bullshit. The idea that the Trump administration (quoting Perkins) “is separating itself from the Obamas” when it comes to Christmas season decor is a separation from reality.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.