by Jared Law on August 13, 2011
How hateful, how full of vengeful rage against ‘white man,’ must one be, to create such a disgustingly unfair portrayal of Thomas Jefferson, one of America’s greatest Founding Fathers, Presidents, and Patriots.
This is just another illustration of the fact that Michelle Obama really meant it when she said the following, as recounted by Glenn Beck during his TV show on December 16, 2009:
FNC
Change you can believe in?
FNN: At the very least, I’d expect the tea party protesters and 9/12ers to be included in the way I’ve grown accustomed to journalists covering them: The tea-bagger people standing in the way of reform.
But it’s even worse than just being slandered with lame sex jokes. Millions of Americans united in a belief that government is out of control and needs to scale back the spending, the corruption, the special interests and who are publicly demonstrating their frustration at health care town halls, on tax day and on 9/12, they aren’t being mocked anymore. They are being completely ignored. You don’t even exist.
But this is not unexpected for people who take the Obamas at their word. Listen to what Michelle Obama has said in the past:
(BEGIN MAY, 2008 VIDEO CLIP)
MICHELLE OBAMA: “Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we’re going to have to change our traditions, our history; we’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation.”
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Change our traditions and change our history. What did she mean by that? I think we are starting to see it.
Changing history means not just telling the same old tall tales of the free market system and the Founders.
No, it’s the history according to progressives. And it’s not merely spinning the old facts; it’s taking current events and molding them to fit the progressive agenda and, in this case, completely ignoring history.
What else did she say? Change traditions. Here are some facts:
• 92 percent of Americans believe in God
• 83 percent believe public schools should celebrate religious holidays
• 66 percent say they will celebrate Christmas as a religious holiday honoring the birth of Jesus Christ
• Only 6 percent don’t celebrate Christmas at all; 3 percent were not sure how to answer
That’s what we believe. Those are our traditions. But here’s what happens on the ground:
Teachers of a second grade class in Taunton, Massachusetts gave an assignment to their class: Make a Christmas drawing, something that reminds you of the holidays. One of the 8-year-old students knew exactly what he’d draw. He and his family had just visited nearby National Shrine of Our Lady of La Salette where they have crucifixion statues. So, the little boy drew a stick figure Jesus hanging on the cross. Makes sense: Christmas is, after all, Jesus’ birthday and the crucifix was fresh in his mind.
Now, imagine an 8-year-old boy. He must have been so excited to see how the teachers would react. Like Ralphie in the movie “A Christmas Story,” eager to win his teacher’s approval of the Red Rider story he concocted. And just like when Ralphie’s teacher responded with a “You’ll shoot your eyes out” reaction, this boy was also completely devastated. Instead of reacting with praise, the teachers immediately sent him home and ordered that he undergo a psychological evaluation.
Where is the common sense? The principle says “school safety protocols” in place that were followed. They had a safety net in place — great — but they still thought a picture of Jesus fit in the risk category?
Let’s go to New Jersey: A third grader was getting ready for quiet time at school. During this time the kids can read a book, sleep, rest or whatever. This little girl, her name is Mariah, decides she’s going to read her bible. The teacher walks over to Mariah and tells her that the bible is not appropriate reading material and she has to put it away. Mariah was upset and confused.
See what’s happening? Ninety-two percent believe in God; 64 percent celebrate Christmas as the birth of Jesus. But God is “inappropriate” and what your parents have shown you is so risky you may need a psychological exam?
It doesn’t match the real values of the country. But removing God does fit the progressive agenda.
Change history. Change traditions. But you can’t just wipe them out, you need to replace it with something. And we are constantly being force-fed the progressive agenda through intentional propaganda:
• NEA art propaganda: Obama-care regularly polls worse than Hillary-care, so they “create” the illusion of support through art
• Those who stand up for the Constitution: Free speech isn’t highlighted — no, no! You are part of some crazy right-wing militia
• If you aren’t convinced global warming is man-made and it might be that giant ball of fire in the sky slightly fluctuating from time to time, you are a flat-Earther. You think the moon landing was fake? You are a Holocaust denier!
• If you believe in lower taxes for all, are you an opposing voice? Nope, you must hate poor people
• Tea party-goer? Well, you don’t even exist. You’ve been crossed out of the history books
But if you are crossed out, who is being put in?
Dateline, Wisconsin: Teachers at a Wisconsin schools will have to teach the history of organized labor, under a bill signed by Governor Jim Doyle. Doyle added that he was “happy to sign the bill so students would understand the importance of the labor movement.”
I know the cheese unions were crucial in building Wisconsin, but really? Let’s see, which has been better for Wisconsin: Jesus Christ or the labor unions?
Imagine if the governor came out and signed a bill forcing kids to learn about the positives of Jesus in textbooks? The ACLU would be in full crisis mode.
Where are the teachers? When a politician can not only say what to write — because of a special interest group — but also the importance of it? When they are out of power, who gets their turn to indoctrinate? Every member of the teachers union should be screaming at the top of their lungs.
They are changing our history, changing our traditions and indoctrinating our children.
‘A SLAVE HOLDER NAMED THOMAS JEFFERSON’: IS SMITHSONIAN‘S NEW ’RACE…
August 13, 2011 by Madeleine Morgenstern
Which major government-funded U.S. museum currently features an exhibit that classifies Thomas Jefferson as simply “a slave holder”?
That would be the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History, located in the heart of nation’s capital.
Developed by the American Anthropological Association,“Race: Are We So Different” offers “an unprecedented look at race and racism in the United States,” according to the Smithsonian’s website.
The Blaze visited the exhibit and found a couple of things that might surprise you.
A five-minute video at the front of the hall sets up the visitor’s experience, which in addition to describing Christopher Columbus as someone who only “colonized and conquered” the natives he encountered, refers to Jefferson merely as a “slave holder”:
“Race,” the narrator says, “is a powerful idea that was invented by society.”
“Many of the ideas we now associate with race originated during the European era of exploration. Europeans like Christopher Columbus traveled overseas and encountered and then colonized and conquered peoples in Africa, Asia and the Americas who looked, talked and acted much differently from them.
[…]
“In the American colonies, the first laborers were European indentured servants. When African laborers were forcibly brought to Virginia beginning in 1619, status was defined by wealth and religion, not by physical characteristics such as skin color. But this would change.
[…]
“By 1776 when “All men are created equal” was written into the Declaration of Independence by a slave holder named Thomas Jefferson, a democratic nation was born with a major contradiction about race at its core. As our new nation asserted its independence from European tyranny, blacks and American Indians were viewed as less than human and not deserving of the same liberties as whites.”
A display in another part of the exhibit features a historical timeline of slavery. The entry for the year 1784 states: “Thomas Jefferson, future U.S. president and likely the father of at least one of the slaves he owned, publishes ‘Notes on the State of Virginia.’” It quotes Jefferson’s writing, where he posits whether blacks are a distinct, inferior race from whites and if that would be an obstacle to their emancipation.
Jefferson did of course own slaves — hundreds throughout his lifetime. But his feelings on slavery were also much more complex than the exhibit suggests — in other writings he called it “an abominable crime” and “moral depravity.” He drafted Virginia’s 1778 law banning the importation of enslaved Africans and separately proposed slavery be outlawed in the new Northwest territories.
But “Race: Are We So Different?” does not cover any of that. None of the exhibit’s written displays examines these nuances; the only other details offered are on a looped video with a historian who says Jefferson knew it was “a massive contradiction” to both own slaves while professing the “lofty ideals” of America — a brief distinction that is easy to miss.
When contacted by The Blaze, Kelly Carnes of the Natural History Museum‘s press office said she could not speak to the exhibit’s content because it was not created by the Smithsonian. Damon Dozier of the American Anthropological Association did not respond to requests for comment.
At the end of the day, a casual Smithsonian visitor is likely to come away from one of the nation’s preeminent museums thinking that one of the Founding Fathers was truly nothing more than a racist slave owner — and remember, since it’s a government-funded museum, you as a taxpayer are paying for it.
Other features of note:
- A display titled “Racism’s effects on health“ says ”numerous studies have linked the stress of racism on African Americans to high blood pressure, adding evidence to the claims that racism contributes to the high rates of hypertension among them.“ It adds that racism may also affect health through ”limited access to nutritious food and safe environments for exercise; increased exposure to environmental toxins; reduced quality of health care.”
- A display about the history of affirmative action in the U.S. declares, “The legacy of white privilege still runs far ahead of efforts to compensate for it.” It features a note about two 2003 Supreme Court affirmative action rulings, which it says upheld “the limited use of race as a factor in reviewing student [university] applications.” While Grutter v. Bollinger did uphold the use of race for admissions, the ruling in the second case, Gratz v. Bollinger, actually held that the use of simply assigning “points” to someone based on their race was unconstitutional. Beside the display’s text is a photograph of the 2003 court, including Clarence Thomas, the sole African American justice. Thomas has long maintained his views opposing affirmative action, something nowhere to be found on the display.
You can take a virtual tour of the exhibit here. “Race: Are We So Different?” will be on display at the Smithsonian through Jan. 2.
a12iggymom's Blog 