(Edited, corrected, now that I'm back on a real computer)
A friend sent along this article from an organizer of "Greenwich Indivisible" with the comment, "Disgusting; bringing national politics to the Greenwich RTM".
Couldn't say it better myself. Here's the woman, Miss Jennie Baird, in her own words:
I’m part of the Trump Resistance… unless it interferes with my tennis game.
— snip —
My little world was Greenwich. And while Greenwich is known as America’s hedge fund capital and as a bedroom community of the rich, the truth is more complicated. Greenwich is actually the most racially diverse town in Connecticut—a state whose demographic hews to the nation’s. Connecticut has the fourth-biggest education achievement gap in the country, and the second biggest income gap. Within Connecticut, Greenwich is near the top for both. The town’s backcountry estates and seaside mansions are a stone’s throw from elementary schools where nearly 60% of students receive free and reduced lunch.
Many well-to-do residents work global jobs and have a cosmopolitan outlook (they’re often referred to as “train people” by long-time townies). They’re politically moderate and are more versed in issues playing out on the national stage than in their own community. As one local politician chastised me, “You and your friends need to put down the New York Times and read the Greenwich Time!”
So I did. And my friends did, too. And the more we read, the more we learned. Our municipal government is populated by many well-intentioned volunteers. But it’s also teeming with single-issue NIMBYs, specific local economic interests like realtors and contractors, and an activist partisan cohort whose views don’t necessarily reflect the views of the majority. It’s also a bastion of long-tenured local personalities who are deeply suspicious of newcomers. None of these groups have typically had to battle a contested election to retain power.
With all 230 seats on our town council (called RTM) up for grabs in the Nov. 7 election, my friends and I set about educating our friends about local issues and why we needed to get involved.
The initial response was enthusiastic. But I soon discovered that people who had a lot of energy for resistance after January’s Women’s March had less inclination to get involved in something specific and tangible as time marched on. They had sick children, new puppies, re-entries to the workforce, college applications, and yes—tennis games. Getting elected and serving on the RTM would require time, commitment, and some feather ruffling. It really was easier to call your Congressman and more fun to attend a protest rally.
But my fearless “comrades” hosted cocktail parties and coffee klatches for months. They met up for walks and drinks with any casual acquaintance who demonstrated an inkling of interest. We hosted a Facebook page and wrote letters to the editor. But basically, it went down the way the old commercial described: She told two friends who told two friends and so on and so on.
Still, as the September deadline to petition onto the ballot approached, many women were wavering. They had back-to-school stress, didn’t want to be seen as agitators in their community, and faced ridicule by conservative uncles. “I’m just not that political,” was a line we got tired of hearing but had to develop a response for.
Right before petitions were due, I stood in front of a hall of women and paraphrased Louis XIV: “Sheetcaking, c’est nous!”
This November marks the first time in living memory Greenwich will see contested RTM elections, with over 110 new candidates standing for office, at least half recruited by my friends. Over 60% of these new petitioners are women.
That’s a victory itself. However, like women across America standing for office for the first time, we face enormous obstacles.
The establishment doesn’t like challenges to their authority. Despite a non-partisan rallying cry focused on civic engagement (we’ve recruited Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliateds who share our values), we’ve been branded as “pussy hat wearing radicals.” As one local blogger wrote, “Hold onto your pocketbooks! Mandatory transgender education is next!”
The same blogger’s community “outed” individual candidates, encouraging followers to call their employers and urge their firing. They also suggested no one vote for any new petitioner with a female name. [Except for any suggestion that readers call the Pussy Hats' employers and urge their firing, that would be me: thank you for noticing].
And some RTM incumbents who previously stated they would welcome contested elections, have now attacked the well-meaning efforts of one first-time candidate who volunteered to compile a comprehensive “Voter’s Guide.”
By her own admission, this lady and her friends not only didn't follow local news since they landed here, they didn't even know our town has an RTM or what its purpose is. Only when Trump showed up as her new president did the author bother to pick up a local paper and discover that there was a local political body that she could convert into a vehicle to protest national issues and, while she was at it, use that body to transform the town into a municipality that reflected her views on what "social justice" looks like.
These "Trump Resistance" members have falsely described themselves in the press and in their literature as non-partisan, and claim a diverse membership comprised of men and women, Democrats, Republicans and Independents: nothing could be further from the truth. They're a band of far-left women, mostly wealthy housewives with nothing much to do now that summer's ended and those handsome country club tennis pros have returned to college. And, given the author's emphasis on wealth disparity in town and her condescending references to "long-time townies", it's pretty obvious where she and her stealth group intend to take the town: nowhere good. (Another giveaway is her reference to "comrades" and the guillotine mob of the French Revolution, but never mind).
So we can expect to see up to 50 angry women, all suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, invading our local town meeting, demanding, what? A sanctuary city? Resolutions demanding the impeachment of Trump? Gun control? Rent control? The possibilities are endless.
And that's just national issues. Locally, more pools in Byram, more efforts to spread the wealth of Greenwich earners to the non-earners? I'd say yes. What is just as disgusting as their attempt to convert the RTM into a forum for whackos to shriek their disapproval of conservatives is Greenwich Indivisible's pretense of being a non-political party and the refusal to identify their politics and intentions: hence my terming them "Greenwich Invisible".
Some readers have pointed out that many of these ladies will soon tire of the drudgery of attending RTM meetings and I agree, but they won't disappear entirely: count on them to show up for big, budget-busting proposals and anything else representing an effort to "redistribute" wealth. Danger, Will Robinson.
I repeat my original suggestion: don't vote for any female petition candidate: we may lose a number of very able (and stable) women who aren't members of this coven of shrieking banshees, but all 50 of the Indivisible candidates are petition candidates, so kill them all (that's an ironic reference to famous quote, just to reassure these ladies that I mean no physical harm) and let God sort out the innocent. I don't know whether she's a petition candidate or incumbent, but be sure to avoid casting a vote for Jennie Baird.
(Regular readers will know that I'm trolling here, but the beauty of women like Jennie and her "comrades" is that they'll read this and still email it to each other, howling. Such fun.)