From the "non-partisan" Greenwich Indivisible website.
/
Self-identifying greenwich invisible pussy hats
Too good to bury in the comment section, Riverside Dog Walker has very generously provided this material:
"If you want to take the measure of this group, all you have to do is read
their modus operandi as posted on their Indivisible Greenwich website https://www.indivisiblegree...
No wonder they don't want to publicly identify themselves since no
reasonable person would suppose their tactics. I've cut and pasted
their approach to meetings. MoC stands for Member of Congress, but I
assume they will bring the same approach to RTM or any other gathering
they choose to plague. These self righteous people would be
entertaining if they weren't so dangerous."
All of the posts on this group are based on their own statements: we report, you decide.
TOWN HALL MEETINGS
Get there early, meet up, and get organized.
Meet outside or in the parking lot for a quick huddle before
the event and distribute the handout of questions, signs etc.
Get seated and spread out.
Head into the venue a bit early to grab seats at the front half
of the room, but do not all sit together. Sit by yourself or in groups
of two, and spread out throughout the room. This will help reinforce the
impression of broad consensus.
Make your voices heard by asking good questions.
When the MoC opens the floor for questions, everyone in the
group should put their hands up and keep them there. Look friendly or
neutral so that staffers will call on you. When you’re asking a
question, remember the following guidelines:
Stick with the prepared list of questions.
Read it straight from the printout if needed.
Be polite but persistent, and demand real answers.
MoCs are very good at deflecting or dodging questions they don’t
want to answer. If the MoC dodges, ask a follow-up question.
Don’t give up the mic until you’re satisfied with the answer.
If they try to take the mic, object, then say politely
but loudly: “I’m not finished. The MoC is dodging my question?”
Keep the pressure on.
After one member of the group finishes, everyone should
raise their hands again and should move down the list of questions and
ask the next one.
Support the group and reinforce the message.
After one member of your group asks a question, everyone should applaud to show that the feeling is shared.
Record everything!
Assign someone in the group to use their smart phone or video camera
to record other advocates asking questions and the MoC’s response;
exchanges caught on video can be devastating for MoC's. These clips can
be shared through social media and picked up by local and national
media. Please familiarize yourself with your state and local laws that
govern recording, along with any applicable Senate or House rules, prior
to recording. These laws and rules vary substantially from jurisdiction
to jurisdiction.
AFTER THE TOWN HALL
Reach Out to Media
Approach the media at the town hall, and offer to speak about your
concerns. When the event is over, you should engage local reporters on
Twitter or by email and offer to provide an in-person account of what
happened, as well as the video footage you collected.
Share Everything
Post pictures, video, your own thoughts about the event, etc., to
social media afterward. Tag the MoC’s office and encourage others to
share widely.
I draw your attention to the instructions given above: straight from the playbook of the Communist Party of the USA
Sit by yourself or in groups of two, and spread out throughout the room. This will help reinforce the impression of broad consensus.
When you’re asking a question, remember the following guidelines:
Stick with the prepared list of questions.
Read it straight from the printout if needed.
Former Greenwich resident Jim Himes, who claims to be representing our interests in Washington, endorses and supports Greenwich Invisible's plan to politicize our RTM.
Sad.
Exactly how little do the members of the Invisible Party know about the RTM?
/
So i mailed a letter addressed to "the mayor of greenwich", and the post office sent it back as undeliverable. just because I'm a woman!
They can be excused for knowing nothing, I suppose, because by the admission of the party's founder, until Trump was elected, they'd been too busy reading the New York Times and playing tennis to bother reading local papers, and were astonished to learn that there even was a representative town meeting. Her words, not mine.
So, naturally, they have no idea of the difference between incumbent RTM members and those campaigning for the first time: "petition candidates". And, because of that ignorance, they interpret a call to vote against all female petition candidates as a demand that reader vote against all women. The poor dears, they've suffered a triggering moment, when all they needed to do to avoid that pain was to learn something about the government body they seek to join.
Here's a suggestion for the Invisble Party: release a list of your slate of candidates and specifically state your political goals. That way, voters can decide whether they support or oppose your movement, and vote accordingly, and no blanket boycott of new women candidates will be necessary. It's your secrecy that's causing this, and nothing else.
The furious emails and texts i'm receiving from Invisble Greenwich members insist that the group is "a movement, not a party". Here's a pretty standard definition of a political movement:
A group of people working together to achieve a political goal.
And that's the problem: although these people don't know it, the RTM has always been deliberately, by choice, a non-partisan, not bi-partisan — there's a difference, though the Invisibles don't know it — body, and many people want to keep it that way. The Invisibles want to change that, and because they won't reveal who they are, the only way to fight them is by taking advantage of what little we do know about them: they're all women, and they're all petition candidates. The odds are huge that a female seeking election for her first time is one of the "50-60" Invisible members, so I've suggested that denying your vote to any female petition candidate is likely to weed these people out, and keep the RTM the non-partisan organization it's always been.
Another reason, besides lack of taste, to avoid farmed salmon: sea lice
/
A sea trout, but you get the picture
She was probably visiting from Florida
/
And a PB & J for the brat outside
Mother leaves her six-year-old in taxi while she darts in to rob a bank.
In fairness, she'd probably have been charged with child endangerment had she left the child unattended, or brought her with her to work. What's a mother to do?
And traffic soars!
/Scratch a Pussy Hat and the yowling can be heard all the way from the kitchen. Music to my ears.
Indivisible Pussy Hat RTM candidates, by district
/
Oh, no, not our names!
District 1
Luis Reyna
Tony Lopez
, Elizabeth Sanders-Mills
Melinda (Mindy) Smith
District 5
Jennie Baird
Stephanie D’Alton-Barrett
Joan Thakor.
Susan Jaffe
District 7
Elizabeth Perry
Miriam Kreuzer
Luis Reyna
(BTW - Kimberly Fiorello is NOT an Indivisible Greenwich/MarchOn/MoveOn Member)
District 8
Lura Kotin
District 10 (NW Greenwich):
Joanna Swomley
District 11
Karen Giannutri (co-founder of "March on Greenwich")
But four good guys:
Victoria Bostock
Lisa Stuart
Margaret (Peggy) Heppelmann and
Kimberly Salib
Send in the identities of other members of the Greenwich Indivisible Party and we'll post them here.
Thank you, Greenwich Free Press
/
Our Town Meeting will certainly be more colorful — and noisier. (though I'm guessing that these particular Greenwich party members' vaginas are safe from molestation)
Besides revealing the Greenwich Invisble party's goals and trashing various conservative candidates Democrat operative Leslie Yager despises, Greenwich Free Press has posted a link to the League of Lady Voter's list of RTM candidates, showing which are petition candidates. I don't remember whether the actual ballot indicates which are incumbents and which are petition, but just in case, you might want to print out your own district's slate and bring it along as a cheat-sheet on who not to vote for.
Check out the profile of Greenwich Indivisible's founder, Riverside resident (District 5) Jennie Bird, and see if you can count the number of lies and misrepresentations about herself and her intentions that she spews in just one paragraph:
Q: What are three important issues facing Greenwich voters today?
1) Partisanship is driving an ideological divide in organizations that should
be neutral and serve the interests of the community, not party politics. See, for example, the current debate over charter change and the Board of Education. 2) Communication. Too many people don’t even know what the RTM does or what issues it faces. It’s time to modernize and improve communication between local government and residents. 3) Budget: We need to nd smart, effective ways to invest in our community, while being scally responsible stewards of our town’s natural and nancial resources.
Current RTM committee assignment:
Number of terms served on RTM: 0
You really want this person representing your interests?
"How we recruited 50 (left wing pussyhat) candidates to run for office in Greenwich, Ct"
/
Greenwich Indivisible Pussy Hats are coming for your RTM
(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.)
One more day of mediation classes, then I'll be posting again
/It's been an interesting course, and I'm enjoying it, but I've been disappointed to discover how today's generation of "woke" would-be mediators allow their political sensitivities to displace their supposed neutrality. I intend to bring the matter up today, when we're scheduled to discuss "ethics". I'll post about all this when I return, which may be sooner than the 5:30 quitting time, if I'm chased from the classroom by angry feminists and TDS sufferers. Until then, stay out of any courtrooms with modern jurors sitting in judgment.
