Just Let Me -- G -- Indoctrinate You!

Friday, October 19, 2012

It's from Belly Laughs to a NewsBusters Thing

Dear America,


I am out of breath; not sure if I can keep up; between binders and big bird, from Biden to Benghazi, there is not enough time in the day, nor enough space on a page, to record everything, everyday, in the day and the  life of America.

But it's days like this, when we get to report seeing both candidates acting out of character and yucking it up at the annual Alfred E. Smith dinner in New Yarrrk last night -- and we suddenly find ourselves getting rewarded with a few giggles right smack in the middle of a rather contentious campaign.   We are joyfully reminded of our connection to one another, along with our ability to laugh at ourselves......and we feel good.  We feel genuinely, whole-heartedly really good.

The feeling lasts about a nano-second in 24/7 news cycle, but no matter.

Fast forward to a little visit with Jon Stewart -- aka the exact same day -- take it away Mr. President --

"Here's what I'll say: 
If four Americans get killed, 
it's not optimal. 
We're going to fix it. All of it."


"It's not optimal."  ah no you di-dint

I'm sorry, did I fall down a rabbit hole again?  How did we get here?  We go from shock and horror, to two full weeks of falsely blaming a reprehensible video made by some idiot and throwing him in jail for his rightful expression of free speech, to 'no, no, I said it was a terrorist attack from day one'...to today...and this:  "it's not optimal."

I guess the notion of getting to the end of the Libyan fiasco will have to wait to see the light of another day.

The president also added this:

"Every piece of information that we get, 
as we got it 
we laid it out to the American people. 
The picture eventually gets fully filled in."


Earth/Satellite communications to Obama:  A DRONE filmed every minute of the attack upon our consulate as it happened -- aka real time on the day of.  And you know what else?  Your Situation Room knew it.   But heck, to save us all a whole lot of time in the future -- especially yourself -- why wait?  Why not just flick a switch and air it in real time on cable?   Or would you rather me say, on our "Black & White TV's"?   You know, America really loves it's reality show.

For a real live take, read the post of Eli, here.

A drone knew more than the president; all he had to do, as duly noted by Bryan Preston of PJ Media/PJ Tatler, was stay up past his bedtime to watch the real live feed.

So let's review, on one hand we get the message 'still not ready to call it a terrorist attack' -- this on September 13 -- aka the day after the infamous Rose Garden speech; while on the other hand, we get 'nine days later, same verse same as the first.', thus, per communication well received from the president via the second debate, taking a position in direct contradiction of his own White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney.

Memo to Mitt for Monday:   track the two week "terrorist" time-line to the day of it's true presidential debut (October 16) and take us all through it, one by one, in real time.  See also, The Hill; Family Security Matters; the Heritage Foundation for any extra help.

And then, go back to the question posed at the second debate that was NEVER answered by the president:

Who was it that denied enhanced security [in Libya] and why?

The thing is America --  if ordinary people in ordinary time can piece together the truth and make grand overtures to what really went down and when, then why can't a president?  Right, of course he can; so why the delay, why the denial, why the deliberate decoy by distraction?  [see also Rules for Radicals]

Intelligence matters; truth matters.  But to coin a phrase well worn by the president, making up stories to enhance optimal support and perhaps save a re-election campaign "is not what we do."

And  Mitt -- Make him say it; on behalf of the American people, make him adMitt that he made a big mistake and that the video was not part of the truth coming out of Libya.

AND read this stunning piece from Krauthammer, here.

The reality is, you kinda sit in the catbird's seat; you're like a drone flying at 10,000 feet with the amount of information at your fingertips.  Even though the next debate is focused on foreign relations, I wanna give you some something good to read that centers on the general essence of the president's agenda and you.   But first, speaking of you, you really rock when you are direct, speaking in simple terms, breaking things down when your naturally genuine, thoughtful, experienced background rules the day....And now here's some opinion to hopefully pump you up, offering more talking points just in case your people are running a little low -- it's from Rich Lowry:

"President Barack Obama has been onstage with Mitt Romney now for a collective three hours and has yet to enunciate anything within hailing distance of a second-term agenda.

He wants to “win the future,” he just doesn’t have a very clear idea about how to do it. His slogan is “forward,” but his campaign is unmistakably backward-looking. His case for reelection has about as much to do with the last four years of the Bush administration as the next four years of the prospective second Obama administration."

Convince us of the bigger, brighter future that awaits, foreign and domestic, as you let this final thought from Rich sink in:

"Obama hasn’t taken his opponent or the public seriously enough. He has allowed his reelection to be driven by his barely concealed personal contempt for Romney, and has assumed that what voters most need to hear from him is fusillades against the other guy. It can’t be pleasant for Romney to be at the receiving end, but the president has inadvertently handed him an incalculable gift: He has ceded him the future."
Obama is spending millions of dollars on an empty, childish, yet calculated, rhetoric relying on ridicule to rally another four more years, or one thousand two-hundred twenty-four days in the life. Binders, Big Bird, Benghazi, and Bain -- a re-election bid brought to you by the letter B and the number 19 days left.  The voters are beginning to realize he is not the man of substance they thought he was; and he is certainly not bringing the change in Washington many believed he was capable of bringing; it's a let down and it's a pretty big deal.

By the way, don't do anything extreme with what I am about to say -- like don't quit your prospective day job -- but you seem to have a wee bit of a comedic genius inside you... you so funny...gosh, I needed that.

[while our president is just so predictable, give him a day in New York, he hits the circuit...Jon Stewart, Dave Letterman...flashing his smile, making things up as he goes along, making up lies to cover up everything we already know]

Make it a Good Day, G

"get the transcript"
post script

AND one more thing.  Did Candy Crowley actually have the Rose Garden transcript with her at the debate?  Wide speculation is that she sounded like she did. Hence, the in-your-face moderator collusion with President Obama happening on the fly, in real time.   She appeared to have had the answer at her fingertips, confirming that Obama called the Benghazi attack an act of terrorism.

My take, after delving in, it seems she was talking out the side of her big fat mouth, having noted after the debate she had 'studied up' -- see here...

Candy to Anderson, via NewsBusters:

"Well, you know again I heard the president's speech at the time. I sort of re-read a lot of stuff about Libya, I knew we'd probably get a Libya question, so I wanted to kind of be up on it. [OR DID YOU get a message to THE PRESIDENT to redirect the Libyan question his way? ?] So we knew that the president had said these acts of terror won't stand or whatever the whole quote was. And I think actually, because right after that, I did turn around and say you were totally correct. They spent two weeks telling us this was about a tape, and you know this riot outside the Benghazi consulate, which there wasn't. So he was right in the main, I just think he picked the wrong word. You know, they're going to parse and we know about what the definition of 'is' is, but you know in the end, I think John's probably right. I think there is a lot more to do with jobs and the debt crisis, and all of that kind of stuff. I just think probably it was one of those moments, and I could even feel that here. You know, when you say something, it's just that was the natural thing to come out of me. Actually he did call it an act of terror, and when you know, when half the crowd clapped for that, and the other half clapped for, but they kept telling us this was caused by a tape. In the main and the thrust of what Governor Romney was saying, which is why I went back and said that. But I just think he picked the wrong way to go about it. If that makes sense?"
What is even more questionable, as it would turn out, is WHY would the president even say "get the transcript" at all?  Why like that? Why turn to Candy for a little help, when she is supposed to be taking the role of an UNbiased moderator?  More important, who talks like that in the middle of a debate?

So, are we to understand, transcripts and back up material from memory, are all doable in a debate now?  Going to the audience, phoning a friend, like we are playing Who Wants to be a Millionaire, is fair game?

Really, Mr. President?  No, seriously, why would you 'go there' in the first place...Let's say if you wanted  all of us to follow up at our leisure later on this issue -- wouldn't you have directed your words out to the audience better and chosen a slightly different tact?

But nooooo, you kept going after her, didn't you?
For you add only seconds later..."Can you say that a little louder, Candy?"

What is that?  What a fool you made of yourself and the office of the presidency...am I the only one in the world who sees it?

 Here's more on the whole charade.  And Here.  And Here.

No comments:

Post a Comment