I am no threat and should never have been detained as a white, petite woman traveling with a child. Many patriotic, liberty-loving Middle Easterners I know would be happy to cooperate with profiling if it meant that generally speaking, the groping of those who simply don’t fit the profile came to an end.Nice.
Thanks for pushing maybe one or two new readers to my page (you have so few! Pity!). I fail to see the hatred you speak of. I don't hate black people and believe blacks can accomplish everything any other race can...by hard work, making quality life decisions and education. The same as it is with anyone else.And my response:
No, you don't like my words but it doesn't mean they aren't true. I refuse to allow myself to be chained to political correctness. In your pitiful world, ANY criticism of blacks is hate or racism. I don't live in your world...I live in the real world.
Um, wow. Not very good at reading comprehension, are you? What I actually did was point out very specific examples of objectionable content from you. For example, you claim that "Black people hate white people." And what, exactly, did you use to back up this claim? You based it on anecdotal evidence from "two acquaintances." So, according to you, you spoke to two whole people and then used that conversation to make a generalization about everyone with dark skin. In other words, you're willing to judge people you haven't met because of their skin color. What exactly do you think bigotry is other than making sweeping, negative generalizations about entire groups of people based only on selective evidence?
And your crybaby complaints about political correctness don't make your claim any more plausible or any less obnoxious. Maybe you and Gina Loudon believe that you both are the most persecuted people in the world, but I don't, and not many other people do either.
And yes, he is as obnoxious as his name suggests. I don't have the interview from the show, but from his blog you can see that this is the kind of crap Loudon's guest says on a regular basis: While it will chill the blood of liberals, AWD will break it down for you: Black people hate white people. Certainly, there are some who have broken the hate for whites that nearly every black person learns from an early age. But nearly every black person in America has an ingrained hatred for white people. Black people can be civil towards whites in work and at play but never let yourself believe your black acquaintances don’t really hate your white guts deep down.He later said:
Hatred, violence, ignorance and laziness is the hallmark of the American black race in general.In previous posts, he also called Kanye West, "stupidious negroidus rapperious," and said the following:
I don’t think it’s racism if white women avoid black males. I’d say it’s pretty damn good sense…according to crime data.This type of hateful rhetoric is nothing new for Loudon, who in the past has claimed that she had reason to believe a reporter was gay because, according to her, he had "the psychological profile of person who attacks children" and compared gay marriage to marrying animals. On yesterday's show, she asked Pamela Geller how her children should interact with Muslim children "to assess their level of radicalism."
For the record, Dana (who I sort of knew prior to her going Tea Party global) has NEVER said one homophobic thing. If anything she has always come across (to me) as very non-judgmental ...in the area of LGBT. However, I will suggest Chris plenty of other "Tea Party" folks, like Dr. Gina Loudon and her husband, do come across very much anti-gay and homophobic. Dr. Gina Loudon and her husband, former Sen. John Loudon both supported the recent National Organization for Marriage rally held in Clayton. NOM (as it is known) is a political organizational front for mostly fundamental christian members to send their tax-free donations out-of-state to help create anti-LGBT legislation under the guise of democracy and patriotism. Their recent $1 million effort helped oust three Iowa Supreme court justices all because they did their jobs granting same-sex couples the freedoms of marriage supported by the Iowa Constitution. Not only did these three Judges do their job by protecting a minority from the tyranny of the majority, it was an unanimous ruling was made by a 7 justice panel appointed mostly by previous Republican Governors -- ironic no?In response to this, Chris Loesch, Dana's husband (who also is a central member of the St. Louis Tea Party), replied:
The Tea Party has been very good to these folks. It put them in the echo chamber, with a chance to cash in if they can sell stuff to enough grouchy people. It's what makes America great.Read the whole thing here.
I've been reading about Samuel Adams, the original Tea Party guy. There's some dispute about whether he organized the Boston Tea Party in 1773, but there's no dispute that he organized the meeting that preceded it.
Oddly, Sam Adams never made a single dime off his protests or his patriotism, unless you count being elected governor of Massachusetts late in life. Historian Pauline Maier of MIT, one of his biographers, wrote that Adams was "a man utterly uninterested in making money or possessing money."
He'd never make it in politics today.
The C4P Meet-up Committee is happy to announce that Dr. Gina Loudon will be speaking at the meet-up in Chicago November 12th-14th. Dr. Loudon is very active in the St. Louis Tea Party movement and is the host of the Truth Show on 630 AM.Perhaps the most tragic thing of all: they never mention each other during #FollowFridays on Twitter anymore. What is this world coming to, people?
"Getting Closer," the e-mail states. "Audio attached conversation with Abbie. What do you think of her reaction guys. She said she could do it Monday, Tuesday. Ben, you think I could get her on the boat?"Izzy Santa, it turned out, had a conscience and warned Boudreau about the plot. Burns and Wetmore, obviously, did nothing to stop it.
There sure was a big distance between Dana and Gina Louden that day. Later Gina had on her Facebook wall:Loesch bills herself as the "conservative alternative to old white dudes." Gina Loudon says she's the, "the freshest conservative, Christian voice in the St. Louis area." Hmmm, sounds kinda similar to me. Is Dana peeved that Loudon is copying her schtick? Knowing Loesch, she's probably threatened to sue for copyright infringement about 10 times by now.
"The beauty of years in politics and a fun run in the Capitol is that you know the prize goes to those who rise above, stay humble and focused, and don't compromise with evil. If only all the good guys could get that before they lose everything."
No sign of Louden at the tea party headquarters "grand opening the next day either.
There were only a couple grassroot leaders introducted by Dana on stage at the tea party, but their websites and other websites list dozens of them. Then you just know Dana makes friends all over the place. She needs to return her too-cool-for-school attitude to the actual owner.
Matchmakers abound, but many aren't effective because they lack insight as to what really makes relationships last. We are not a dating service. The Pro Match is a professional, scientifically based, strategic personal recruiter. Dr. Gina Gentry Loudon, founder and creator of our company is a Life Designer and Relationship Coach, with two Master's degrees and a Ph.D. in Human Development. She has written "Love in the Heartland: The Experience of Extraordinary Love" and "Finders/Keepers: Finding and Keeping Love that Lasts a Lifetime."And, fascinatingly, Loudon has deleted the links since palingates started writing about them. But one of the readers of palingates had already grabbed screenshots of the site, and it sure looks like a dating site to me!
In an industry where it is surprisingly rare, Dr. Gina Gentry Loudon has been happily married to Senator John Loudon (ret.MO) for almost 20 years.
Our clients can range from successful politicians, doctors, lawyers, models, business leaders, professional athletes, actors, and producers, but you do not need to be famous to enlist our help. We cater exclusively to commitment-minded single people around the world. Our program is based on solid research, and our proven selection process anticipates unvetted problems that can occur by other means of introduction. Often, only one or two meetings are necessary prior to actual success and fulfillment!
Let me state this as unequivocally as possible: Loudon’s accounts have no basis in reality. I do not mean simply that the facts are wrong—I mean that the episode did not occur. I have never met Gina Loudon. I have never spoken to Gina Loudon in person or by phone. I have never exchanged e-mail or snail mail with Gina Loudon. I did not even know Gina Loudon’s name until it began cropping up in connection with the accounts quoted above. Furthermore, I could not have spoken to her in Independence, because I was not allowed backstage on the floor of the arena, where Loudon was; that was a restricted space, and, as far as I am aware, all reporters were barred from the area. (I was sitting several rows up, in a place where I was able to observe what was happening both in front of and behind the curtain.)Today, Gina Loudon wrote another response where she continued to accuse Gross of lying, and she said on Twitter that she had "proof." In fact, she presented proof that she is being completely dishonest.
It could be that Loudon spoke to another reporter that day, and that this is a case of mistaken identity. The other possibility is that Loudon has simply made everything up, inventing and publicizing a complete fabrication for her own purposes. It is either the one thing or the other.
I could not have spoken to her in Independence, because I was not allowed backstage on the floor of the arena, where Loudon was; that was a restricted space, and, as far as I am aware, all reporters were barred from the area...Loudon then highlighted the word "backstage" in this passage from Gross's original article:
(I was sitting several rows up, in a place where I was able to observe what was happening both in front of and behind the curtain.)
Backstage in the arena, a little girl in Mary Janes pushes her brother in a baby carriage, stopping a few yards shy of a heavy, 100-foot-long black curtain...Now anyone with a rudimentary understanding of the English language would understand that the phrase "Backstage in the arena" is not referring to the reporter, but rather to the the subject of the sentence: "a little girl in Mary Janes." Yet Loudon seems to think that the sentence counts as evidence that Gross implied he was backstage. as you can see in this quote from her:
Okay then, how was it that Mr. Gross was, in his words, “backstage at the Arena” writing about an incident that he later retracted,So that bit from Loudon was obviously nonsense, but she did attempt to provide "evidence" that disproved Gross's statements. Her evidence consisted in a statement from "the organizers" of the event that Gross could not have been sitting in a place where he could observe both the stage and behind the stage. Here is the quote from the organizers:
From a logistical standpoint, if an individual was able to report about activities going on behind the curtain they could not have done so from solely sitting in the audience but would have had to knowingly gone behind the curtain and into the backstage area.However, by doing a little research on the internet, I can now prove that the organizers' statement is false. First of all, take a look at the seating chart for the Independence Events Center, where the event was held:
From a logistical standpoint, if an individual was able to report about activities going on behind the curtain they could not have done so from solely sitting in the audience but would have had to knowingly gone behind the curtain and into the backstage area.Furthermore, if you read the passage in question from Gross, the language is all referring to events that could be observed from a distance, and in fact he makes explicit reference to being able to see the split in the stage:
Backstage in the arena, a little girl in Mary Janes pushes her brother in a baby carriage, stopping a few yards shy of a heavy, 100-foot-long black curtain. The curtain splits the arena in two, shielding the children from an audience of 4,000 people clapping their hands in time to “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” The music accompanies a video “Salute to Military Heroes” that plays above the stage where, in a few moments, the children’s mother will appear.Gina Loudon's latest piece for Big Journalism is blatantly dishonest. It falsely claims that Gross could not have seen the stage from the audience, which is clearly not true based on photos of the event provided by Preserving American Liberty. It is Gina Loudon and Preserving American Liberty who owe an apology to Michael Joseph Gross for falsely accusing him of lying.
When the girl, Piper Palin, turns around, she sees her parents thronged by admirers, and the crowd rolling toward her and the baby, her brother Trig, born with Down syndrome in 2008. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, bend down and give a moment to the children; a woman, perhaps a nanny, whisks the boy away; and Todd hands Sarah her speech and walks her to the stage. He pokes the air with one finger. She mimes the gesture, whips around, strides on four-inch heels to stage center, and turns it on.
Larry O'Connor: Just for the record it's not a secret...Michael Joseph Gross is actually an out-of-the-closet gay man, so I don't think he has any children that I'm aware of...The "hidden-the-deck-next-door-thing" is referring to the fact that Gross visited a reporter who had rented a house next door to the Palin's mansion.
Loudon: Oh! See and that...I mean I'm sorry I did not know that Larry, I honestly didn't, and I could have speculated as much just by several little pieces I had picked up in looking at the sort of psychological profile of someone who behaves like this...attacks someone's children. And then you just don't even want to consider the whole hidden-on-the-deck-next-door-thing.
When the girl, Piper Palin, turns around, she sees her parents thronged by admirers, and the crowd rolling toward her and the baby, her brother Trig, born with Down syndrome in 2008. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, bend down and give a moment to the children; a woman, perhaps a nanny, whisks the boy away; and Todd hands Sarah her speech and walks her to the stage. He pokes the air with one finger. She mimes the gesture, whips around, strides on four-inch heels to stage center, and turns it on.Seems obvious to me that this quote was not intended to portray Palin as "elitist:" why wouldn't a politician need to hand off her child if she was giving a speech? Loudon blew the original context of the quote out of proportion in order to hype up her own correction.
As I stood backstage with the Palins I remember a reporter asking me if I were “Trig’s Nanny” with a hint of something I didn’t trust in his eyes. I coldly retorted, “no, I am Samuel’s mother.” He looked confused, and had more questions to follow. . . .Here is Gross's response to Loudon's bizarre delusions of self-grandeur:
After I explained which children were Todd and Sarah’s, and which were mine and my husband’s, Mr. Gross moved into a sinister line of questioning. I let him know that I was surprised that he believed the baloney written about her during her 2008 race with John McCain.
Let me state this as unequivocally as possible: Loudon’s accounts have no basis in reality. I do not mean simply that the facts are wrong—I mean that the episode did not occur. I have never met Gina Loudon. I have never spoken to Gina Loudon in person or by phone. I have never exchanged e-mail or snail mail with Gina Loudon. I did not even know Gina Loudon’s name until it began cropping up in connection with the accounts quoted above. Furthermore, I could not have spoken to her in Independence, because I was not allowed backstage on the floor of the arena, where Loudon was; that was a restricted space, and, as far as I am aware, all reporters were barred from the area. (I was sitting several rows up, in a place where I was able to observe what was happening both in front of and behind the curtain.)Given Gina Loudon's history of shameless self-promotion, I'll put my money on "complete fabrication for her own purposes."
It could be that Loudon spoke to another reporter that day, and that this is a case of mistaken identity. The other possibility is that Loudon has simply made everything up, inventing and publicizing a complete fabrication for her own purposes. It is either the one thing or the other.
After the 2008 election, Sarah Palin and her advisers decided that it was time to “go over [the] heads” of the media, as one of her former press aides told me, and, in effect, invent a new way of doing political business. Palin began using Facebook and Twitter to send messages directly to the public. At the same time, she and her staff made themselves virtually inaccessible to reporters. Palin, moreover, is the most powerful person in a sparsely populated, geographically isolated community. She has often used intimidation. Many who have been close to Palin say they are frightened of her. They claim they have seen her ruin reputations. To speak out against such a person in a small community is risky.This seems like a reasonable point, albeit one that could easily be abused by reporters. But if Michael Joseph Gross has a history of quality reporting, I think his reporting on Palin should be taken fairly seriously.
This reality presents reporters with a choice: either repeat the official statements and official facts that are made in Palin’s name, or find a way to report other information under the terms that sources will permit.
I made the latter choice—very cautiously. Forced to rely on anonymous sources for certain information, I made an effort to get to know those sources well, talking with them over periods of weeks or months. If I sensed that sources were motivated by the desire to attack Sarah Palin, I did not use the information they gave me. Those who told the most startling stories about Palin spoke not with glee or satisfaction but with trepidation and sadness.
I do agree with you on one thing, Mr. Gross. You said that “Her talk of leading with ‘a servant’s heart’ is a dog-whistle for the born-again. Her dig at health-care reform as an expression of Democratic ambitions to “build a Utopia in the United States is practically a trumpet call (because the Kingdom of God is not of this earth), and perfection can be achieved only in the life to come.Got that? While Gina Loudon and her husband John rake in the cash as Republican consultants, she wants to remind you to keep your head down, pray a lot, and don't worry about silly, unrealistic things like making sure your family has access to health care. After all, only the most naive idealists could possibly think that the United States, with the largest economy in the world, could provide its residents with affordable health care the way many other countries do. Yep, Gina reminds us all to "Work and pray, live on hay, cause there's pie in the sky when you die:"
Bill and I spoke at that time along with others in Tea Party leadership. We knew, without asking around or knowing the details, that this was not a Tea Party tactic...While I'm glad that the tea party is not endorsing the use of molotov cocktails, I think I'd be a little more comforted if they thought of what happened not as a "tactic" but rather as an act by someone who is clearly emotionally disturbed and in need of help. Isn't it pretty bizarre that she used the word "tactic" to describe what happened?
The land surrounding Ground Zero is a war memorial. The proposal of an Islamic mosque there is synonymous with a Nazi war memorial in downtown London. How would the world react to that proposal? Wouldn’t Western Europe just about leap off the map if that were proposed? Where is the outrage from our European “friends?”She goes on to say that the only way Muslims can really prove that they are peaceful is to give up their freedom of religion:
If the Muslim world continues to fight for this mosque to be built at Ground Zero, they are not interested in peace, or religious dialogue. They are interested in war. They are using the Sharia law concept of lying in the best interest of Allah, and they will be further from the hearts of America than ever before.This is a classic tactic of the Right: to try to tie all Muslims, or at least all Muslims that don't automatically go along with their right-wing ideology, to terrorists. Loudon is suggesting that the most peaceful, family-oriented, generous, loving Muslim is still "for war" if that person disagrees with Loudon about Park 51. Absolutely ridiculous.
And so, our mission evolved from simply memorializing the victims of Islamic terror to trying to educate the open-minded on how Islam is so tragically different from other religion, including its incompatibility with secularism and Western liberal values.Straight, unadulterated, unapologetic bigotry. That's all it is.
"We are not the ones threatening our culture!" Loudon declared. "They're the ones threatening our culture!"Yes, that's right, gay couples getting married in California has completely destroyed Gina Loudon's life. I can only assume that she will now go on a cocaine fueled rampage in Las Vegas for the next month, seeing as how her "culture" is so dependent upon what people 1,500 miles away are doing.
If you want gay marriage, keep the federal government out of it. Move to a State of your choosing, and live happily gayly married ever after. This crap of you leftists getting one judge to make laws really irritates the heck out of people who believe in the rule of law. It is disgusting that you people cannot learn from the past. Live by the sword, die by the sword. You leave no choice but a US Constitutional Amendment.But Gina Loudon's blog post is even more obnoxious, in my opinion.
So one should not be surprised that progressives who could find a Constitutional right to “privacy” buried deep in the penumbras of that precious document, could also find a Constitutional “right” for men to marry men or a man to marry multiple women for that matter. How about the right of a Missouri man who did his State proud by telling the BBC that he wanted to marry his horse?Second, Gina Loudon appears to be threatening protesters in her update:
Update: The opposition plans to be out in protest ahead of our event at 5:30. It will be interesting to learn 1) if they secured permits and 2) if they will be permitted to protest without permits. See YOU there!I thought Mrs. Loudon was the world's biggest propoment of free speech: now she's trying to stifle people's ability to celebrate the fact that loving couples can now be legally recognized?
Posts
All Comments
