Obama, raised fatherless, denigrates men, harms children, and promotes single motherhood with executive order signed yesterday.
On March 11, 2009, in Washington, President Obama signed an Executive Order creating the White House Council on Women and Girls; and by fiat, seeks to devalue fathers and men, and promote single parenthood as something young girls should achieve, and reinforces the creation of a whole new class of special victims “both at home and abroad” (whatever that means). Read release from the White House posted on their website.
Men and women in the role of parents, are two sides of the same coin and have to be seen as a single unit or ‘being’.
President Obama signs an Executive Order creating the White House Council on Women and Girls.
When speaking of men and women in terms of the family, or with respect to children, they are both two sides of the same coin. You can’t separate them, if you praise one, by inference you automatically disparage the other. The concept of parents as a team, indivisible, united, tied together in a symbiotic relationship, physically and emotionally, is being destroyed in this country by changing the notion of single parenthood from something to be avoided at all costs, as broken, defective, abnormal, shunned and shameful to be something to be promoted as good, heroic, supported, praised and worse of all, something that is ‘normal’.
It’s as if someone ran around proclaiming his right foot was something special and needed special treatment and protection above all other feet. What does this say about the left foot? About the person? Do you see the absurdity in this idea?
Exalting women, especially for something that normally should be a negative, devalues men, fathers and hurts children.
Obama, raised fatherless himself, is a “defective product” of our single parent, fatherless society he so often praises. Children raised fatherless often have a distorted view of women, their proper role in their relationships with men and their abilities and issues. They also have a distorted view of fathers and men. The distortion always tends to be sympathetic and positive towards women and single mothers, and negative and disparaging towards men. It is as if the mother’s anger towards men, their constant blaming for their dismal situation, lack of money or resources on the father, is transferred to the child.
This transference is done slowly, insidiously, subconsciously and not just from the mother, the emotionally developing child picks this blame game up from other sources in society such as television, Hollywood and politicians. Even if the message is very subtle, (and it normally is) the child gets it from inference and deduction.
What else would we expect? The single parent child is constantly hearing how difficult it is for his mother and how she “struggles”, how much she sacrifices for her children, how heroic she is.
First Lady Michelle Obama joins in the applause at the Executive Order signing ceremony Wednesday, March 11, 2009 in the East Room of the White House, creating the White House Council on Women and Girls. White House Photo/Pete Souza
If we have such a wonderful heroine, logically we must have an equally evil villain. Logically therefore, since the father is the other half of the coin, and all the other kids have fathers, and the father is not around to defend himself, the child sees the father as the villain.
Making “violence against women” a special class of crime creates a special class of victims, and therefore, logically, a special class of criminals and villains, all to be treated differently, worse then ‘regular’ criminals. Is not violence simply violence? Why can’t we just be against violence? If we somehow raise violence against women to a special place as being especially evil, are we saying that other forms of violence is somehow less evil? Are we now saying the men who commit violence against women are now especially evil? Worse than ordinary criminals?
If there is no ‘bad’, then, there is no ‘good’.
Obama and the liberals are invested in coming up with new ‘bad’. The liberals have always loved to constantly create new and more classes of victims. Why? Because if you don’t have victims, you don’t have a cause, a movement, a crusade, a fight. We all know that in a fight there are two sides, evil vs. good. Therefore, since the so-called ‘victim’ could only become a victim by an act of victimization by someone, and that someone logically must be an evil villain, the liberals now have a cause to join and, of course, they will join the fight on the side of “good” so they feel good about themselves!
Why would they need to feel especially good about themselves in the first place?
This is because that they know, perhaps subconsciously or instinctively, that what they are doing, is inherently wrong to begin with. Mothers, somehow sense that depriving a child of their father is wrong and being a single parent is not normal and is difficult on them both. So to compensate, they seek to make themselves feel better, they seek out praise and re-enforcement that they are doing the right thing and, therefore, based on the fact that they are good, the father obviously is to blame.
Good and bad are basic, instinctive emotional feelings and concepts. So is blame.
Don’t they realize what they are doing? No. If you want a quick fix and you operate on emotion as mothers are designed to do, you cannot evaluate your situation based upon logic or common sense. It simply is easier to explain to the fatherless child who yearns for his long ago rejected father, that “daddy is bad”. The liberals have seized on this as a way to get votes from females. Why else would Obama so often praise single mothers, denigrate and insult men and fathers in his “Father’s day Speech” in a church no less.
To sum it up Obama, a defective child himself is repeating the cycle of his fatherless upbringing. He has helped to create a whole bunch of women good-doers that want to feel good about themselves as they go about destroying families, their children and themselves.
They are taking a big sharp knife and stabbing it as hard as they can, in their left foot; simply because they hear it is good to spite their right foot.