It's Opposites Attract Thing

Dear America,

 so we left off trying to decipher which side was picked...

you know,
in Egypt.

Given last night's pre-season Monday Night Football game on ESPN -- it didn't really matter the side, win or lose.  It was pre-season no less and no more.  Half the time the star players aren't even on the field; where's the fun in that?

Having said that, however, ESPN did pick a side; it was during half-time; did you catch it?  Oh, it happened so nonchalantly, so innocently, hiding in the shadows of a birthday celebration for Jon Gruden (turning 50!) -- if you popped into the kitchen for another brewski, you may have missed it altogether.   Gruden's sidekick, Mike Tirico, handed him a mock, large scale, AARP card on national TV.   Just like that!

Mike, mike, mike, mike, mike didn't even offer Gruden a fair and balanced alternative to the uber-liberal, obamacare tooting, hidden agenda oozing, piece of bureaucratic AA-BS worthy of retirement itself.  Did AARP pay for that plug, or what?  Inquiring minds wanna know.

Oh whatever.
Let old Gthing -- in the fifty-something, something category, herself -- give you another way to go:  AMAC.  It's the Association of Mature American Citizens (over 50) and offers a patriotic, conservative alternative route to take...think of it more like running a reverse, if you must; or perhaps, a quarterback sneak, right up the middle; maybe even a sweep worthy of a tweet for moving your feet to defeat the other side.  Whatever play gets you through the day.

But needless to say -- I stopped watching the game right then and there.  It was only pre-season; who really cares, right?

Like yesterday (give or take), we are continuing on a theme -- it's all about the picking of sides today...

And let's get another thing absolutely clear!

It was just a kiss -- not a kiss kiss, okay?

Speaking of the Russian lipstick lesbian kiss seen 'round the world -- smoooooch.  Care of French24 news online, as featured on Drudge over the last couple of days, the two who lip locked were just happy!  IT WAS NOT TAKING A SIDE, okay!  HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT!...we are both happily married...not having any relationship...it's insulting, what you --  in the media -- are saying...

Okay.

Now it may be true, girls; you know -- that whole happily married thing, and all.  But let's face it -- you two were making a statement in support of a side.   Given the impossibility, in your country, to speak freely about gay relations clear of penalty or punishment -- a relay sneaky peak of resistance, behind enemy lines, raised the rainbow flag without coming out and saying a word.  It's done and done.  Boom.  Of course you aren't making a statement; the statement not making a statement refutes any semblance of a statement.   At the end of the day, it was truly a marvel of defiance and beauty and wits.

And now to Obama --

Are you -- are you halting aid, or what?
And more important -- is this picking a side, or not?

If you are -- you know, NOT aiding and abetting the Egyptian Military who overthrew President Morsi, representative of the Muslim Brotherhood, in a coup -- then does that mean you are essentially supporting the Brotherhood?

So says someone, somewhere within the administration, according to The Daily Beast, but care of Fox News (did you catch that; that was like a double reverse on the fly):

The decision was we're going to avoid saying it was a coup, but to stay on the safe side of the law, we are going to act as if the designation has been made for now. By not announcing the decision, it gives the administration the flexibility to reverse it.

Oh I get it now.

Remember now, like our Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, once said -- back in 2011:

"The term 'Muslim Brotherhood'...is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam," Clapper said. "They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera.....In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally."

And thank you, Politico, for the help down memory lane -- because not every thing can be five cents or come from Fox News, right?    (For the complete Politico post, go here).

But back to Clapper.  The Brotherhood is simply about the pursuit of happiness for social ends, for the betterment of the whole, while it's a rather "heterogeneous group, largely secular," too; "there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood" all over the place; and there is no "overarching agenda" and no more a concern than the golden arches of MickeyD's.  And to that end -- the Brotherhood has "eschewed violence" in every way.   Yay team!

If we are no longer sending aid to the Egyptian military, we are choosing to support the other side -- which, lo and behold, is the Muslim Brotherhood.  Oh what to do, what to do.  The art of war, and the art of picking a side without saying a word.

Welcome to that sweet spot between a rock and a hard place.

Not to worry; the thing is -- me thinks the side will be picking for us (again).  

Oh, the Obama Doctrine; it just loves leading from behind, doesn't it now?  [And like the Egyptian PM, Hazem el-Beblawi, said to ABC , responding to the rumors of aid-gate  -- "ah, it would be a bad sign...ah you know, humans, ah, you can survive...ah...don't forget, we had Russian military support for decades...ah...]  Indeed.

Oh to be back at the place when we really have a choice.  

It's gonna sound tres cliché, much like everything I say -- but our defense could sure use a rest; just where, oh where, is the offense when we need it?

Make it a Good Day, G

It's Narrative by the Nose Thing

Dear America,

It's not the issue whether Obama and Biden KNEW of the security decisions made by lower level bureaucrats prior to the attack in Libya on September 11, 2012 --  WELL IT IS, but it isn't --  but thanks anyway, Hillary.

“I take responsibility...The president and the vice president wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals, [who are] the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision." thank you Daily Caller here.

The nose grows.

Sure, there is the clear and present danger that it was indeed another anniversary of September 11th, and Libya could have been guarded better all the way around. There is that.  And that's hindsight for you, right?  That would be using our noggin, but nooooooo....

While the Bahamian Embassy probably wasn't necessarily the most critical hot spot to protect...just sayin'...and tried to find my backup for that statement, but can't find a thing on it anymore, like anywhere...so strange...

But no matter...this is where "the State Department" placed their priorities of budget and resources.  Note: dating all the way back to April.  Go Chevy Volts instead of keeping our diplomats safe and sound.

But for a president who says he gets INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS every single day -- or at least, reads them -- "the intelligence" under sworn testimony pointed to a TERRORIST attack within about 24 hours.  I would think this point would have been mentioned, in writing even,  in said INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS, don't ya think?

So -- you would think -- connecting all the dots now -- that the president's narrative would have been more measured on the whole video thing.... with more emphasis on the terrorist attack thing..... with his actions moving with stern diplomatic intention, accordingly.  [and maybe even cancel a few campaign speeches in the immediate aftermath...]

IF the little lowly intelligence peons, the "security professionals,"  realized we were dealing with a terrorist attack, why the nonsense?   Regardless --

"In a briefing to Capitol Hill staffers delivered the day after the deadly Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the killings appeared to be the result of a terrorist attack.

Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick F. Kennedy -- who exercises responsibility for all department personnel, facilities, and operations, and who is one of the department's most respected civil servants, having served in his position under both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations -- delivered the assessment in an unclassified, half-hour conference call with staff aides to House and Senate lawmakers from relevant committees, and leadership offices, on the evening of Sept. 12. Capitol Hill sources described the call to Fox News."

"Fox News and other news organizations have previously reported that earlier on Sept. 12 -- within 24 hours of learning about the murders -- the Obama administration made a secret determination that Benghazi was indeed a terrorist attack.  Doing so enabled them, under the terms of a 2001 anti-terrorism statute, to move men, money and materiel around more freely, and position these assets to meet the threats in Libya and other parts of the Mideast that had recently seen attacks on U.S. installations.  Kennedy's assessment accorded with that determination."

You know that thing that happens when you tell a lie...and you have to keep telling a lie, perhaps pose an even bigger lie, and a bigger lie --

In ANY EVENT,  the president did not have to blame a stupid video for two weeks making him look like an idiot, then.  He didn't have to go there.  Remember now, he was still squawking about "the video" and tying it to the American deaths in Libya at the United Nations -- on September 25th!

Does this administration really think we are that stupid?

Does this administration really think the real intelligence isn't going to be brought to light, eventually?

The continuing evolution of this lie is simply ridiculous.

Okay -- so the administration IGNORED the threats and attacks in Libya leading up to the ambassador's death, along with three other Americans [FOR MONTHS we are told].  Is that news any better to hear?  Hello, Mr. I read my Intelligence Briefings, like, everyday -- that's gotta be enough....

The nose grows.

Okay -- so Obama and Biden were not included in security briefings?  They didn't know that there were issues apparently -- and that little tidbit is from the horse's mouth and according to the vice president right up front in the middle of a debate.

The nose grows.

Yet today, we find out from  Hillary, that only low level "security professionals" were dealing with this sort of thing....If Bush/Cheney had even insinuated something to that effect, there would have been hell to pay -- would not every American be alarmed and outraged?

Okay -- so Hillary is taking full responsibility for outrageous security breaches and leaving the Libyan ambassador vulnerable to attacks?  Really now?  really?  well then she should be asked to resign, right?

The nose grows.

Okay -- so considering the attacks in Libya were accomplished using our state-of-the-art weaponry -- is this just 'same verse same as the first' -- only bigger -- in tandem with another big mistake called "Fast & Furious"?  Is that what they are about to fess up to, I mean, reveal?  We gave the Libyan rebels weapons to fight the bad guys -- to become liberated and fan the Arab Spring -- and then we turn over the consulate guard to "Libyan insiders" [and who's idea was that?] -- and then --  lo and behold, they turn on us, using our state-of-the-art weaponry  against us [including that which was handily given to them freely or simply taken right out from under our noses]?  

The nose grows.

can you tell?  g is a wee bit upset...I can't even stop to breathe right now.

wow.
so let's keep the good news coming..

The web was ablaze with stories immediately following the attack in Benghazi.  Even as late as September 21st, "AllahPundit" from Hot Air made enormous leaps of intelligence connections.  See here.

What does this do?  It outlines proper CONTEXT -- albeit from someone outside the "security professional" domain -- but my goodness, this kind of "intelligence" at this point is simply everywhere.    AND this is four days before Obama is speaking before the U.N.

Okay -- so Hillary is covering for Obama the day before the biggest night of his life. Co-in-kee-dink?  I think not.

The nose grows.

But at the risk of beating a dead horse -- at what point would the president and vice president receive bonafide "intelligence briefings" outlining a need for concern?  Where is that red line?  What else were in the intelligence briefings that day?  And when I say that day -- pick one -- 9/12, or 9/16 [the day UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other puppets were on TV], 9/21, 9/25.... 10/11...Has he read the one for today...yeah, yeah, that's a good question; what's it say for 10/16/12?

“There were six better stories."  according to the NY Times -- and likewise, according to THIS administration.  More to the point: a planned terrorist attack just didn't fit the narrative...

He's said it before -- and I'll say it again -- it's always about telling a better story to the American people.

As the nose grows... 

The nose knows...  we smell something that stinks to high heaven.

But no matter, new subject and more story.

Here's the  opening paragraph on the official White House biography page on President George W. Bush:

"The airborne terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the thwarted flight against the White House of Capitol on September 11, 2001, in which nearly 3,000 Americans were killed, transformed George W. Bush into a wartime president. The attacks put on hold many of Bush’s hopes and plans, and Bush’s father, George Bush, the 41^st president, declared that his son “faced the greatest challenge of any president since Abraham Lincoln.”

Now here's Obama's opening paragraph:

"Barack H. Obama is the 44th President of the United States.
His story is the American story — values from the heartland, a middle-class upbringing in a strong family, hard work and education as the means of getting ahead, and the conviction that a life so blessed should be lived in service to others."

You have got to be kidding me -- "values from the heartland, a middle-class upbringing in a strong family, hard work and education as the means of getting ahead, and the conviction that a life so blessed should be lived in service to others."   Wouldn't it be more like a broken family, living on an island -- and if not there, Indonesia, on foreign turf?  But sure... having rather angelically transcended a seemingly conflicted childhood:

• being of mixed race (hating his whiteness), 
• being of mixed religion (having Christian, Black Liberation, and  Muslim influences), 
• being of mixed ideology (wanting to believe in self-reliance, and yet betrothed to wealth re-distribution),
• being raised by grandparents, as all three of his parents failed him miserably.

Sure, this notion of "values of the heartland, middle-class upbringing" is exactly what I would have come up with to describe Obama's family roots.

And this just in -- no, wait, it's old news, but what does that matter, right?  Anyway, it's just a post documenting the actions of our handsome, intelligent, super-smart and super-cute Editor-in-Chief
standing in as president.

oh...ya get it now?   

The thing is, radicals make their own rules and make up stories all the time; it's what they do; it's all they know.   Don't y'all know that by now?

Can't wait for tonight's debate.

Make it a Good Day, G

Dear America,

the media can create whatever reality they want to create.

case in point, the last 24 hours over the Glenn Beck story...as in, "Beck was a quick burn..." words distributed by the AP within minutes; building up to a "Fairwell to a Fearmonger," which is funny considering it came out of The Daily Beast.

case in the second point, the "no light between" meeting up with John Boehner --  brought to light by ABC, and basically insinuating he must be getting water boarded by the Tea Party to comply with their demands...or else.

Keep it up lamestream.  Keep it up.

Yes, the guy who anchors the THIRD Highest Rated cable news show (otherwise known as THE Glenn Beck) will be transitioning later this year into a new realm of broadcasting.  It's TRUE!  Everybody is ecstatic about it.  But if you only read lamestream, then you would think Fox News took Beck out back, buried him up to the boot on the neck and began stoning him, with Soros invited to throw in the first stone.

But that is the media for you, they just can't help themselves; the counterclockwise spin is embedded into their DNA -- that is merely my observation, anyway...of course, after making reasonable connections, applying scientific backup, factoring in my own CSI experiments, and finding the fingerprints left on each stone turned myself.  look it up.

Oooooh and Harry said, Boehner is "afraid" of the movement.

and Chuckie said, "[ref to Tea People] ...they're the people who say they don't want compromise. They're the people who say they relish a shutdown. And the bottom line is, if he can resist them—not give them their way on everything—I think we can have an agreement..."  you go ahead and run with scissors with that Schumer.

ABC laid it all out...with George Stephanopoulos poking Boehner with provocative claims "[Dem's say] you won't buck the tea party" -- huh, huh, whatta gotta say about that, huh Johnny?  Now give me your milk money.

I watched the president return to the podium in the briefing room after meeting with Reid and Boehner.  It was late.  He looked tired.  And what does he do?  But for the lack of a better analogy, he pulls a Palin; he should have just kept his mouth shut and just gone upstairs to bed.  He should have just let it be. 

But approaching the press with something he could not hide -- a worn out look on his face -- he began to to say things like...

"We just had a productive meeting...

 We discussed the impasse...

with respect to the budget...

the meetings were frank, 

they were constructive, 

and what they did was narrow the issues 

and clarify the issues that are still outstanding.

I remain confident

that if we're serious 

about getting something done

we should be able to complete a deal 

and get it passed 

and avert a shutdown. 

But it's going to require 

a sufficient sense of urgency 

from all parties involved. 

It means that people have to recognize 

that a government shutdown

has real consequences for real people."

...I'm absolutely convinced that we can get this done."

Obama, late, Wednesday Night
somebody wake me up when he's done...

why did he even come out?

he gave us nothing new...he didn't even make us feel very confident in the process...and throwing in a worn out strategy, telling a random story about a random citizen who might be adversely affected.  Nice fluff but it didn't make it anymore presidential or newsworthy (and by appearances, not even his own heartstrings seemed to be all that into it).  

Give it a rest already, Mr. President - - the over saturation of the market is unbecoming and somewhat uncomfortable watching; and time and time again, I don't know how you do it, but somehow your arrogance precedes you in nearly every official capacity -- and that isn't a good thing.

Leadership is not passing judgment and condescension down the ranks.

Leadership is not belittling the "quibbling" over the people's dollars and common sense.

Leadership is not ridiculing the opposition when in front of the smaller... safer... perhaps potentially pliable voter audiences.

Leadership is not status quo -- voting present -- just showing up -- and otherwise avoiding taking a stand on exactly that which YOU said YOU would do when YOU came to WASHINGTON (do you remember the old refrain, "I will go line by line...I will cut the deficit by half in four years...").  

You keep saying to everybody 'it's not that complicated' -- that it's clearly 'not about me -- but about you guys, over there, not doing what you need to be doing'...

acting more like the parent who says, 'do as I say not as I do'...YOU don't stop there.  YOU grind it all home with that protruding thumb of yours from the podium, 'let's be grown ups...it's what the american people want...can't you guys just play like adults'?

How about a game of pin the tail on the donkey?  anyone?

Interesting slate of numbers over the last several years, most startling is the reality of today against the promises of yesterday; using a blog from PolitiFacts, the last couple of thoughts highlight this stunner: 

"To the contrary, the CBO projects the running total of the country's national debt — which was around $7 trillion when Obama took office — will increase to nearly $12 trillion in four years" 

hello, anybody paying attention?  So Obama has not only NOT CUT the deficits by half  -- but he has DOUBLED our National Debt! (and with time left on the clock...joy joy)

Today, we are well over the conservative CBO projection on the National Debt by over TWO T's. 

Taking this into account, along with the Obama Administration making a mockery of it's own plan to "cut deficits by half before the end of his first term" -- suffice it to say, we only wish we were running Bushie's Billion dollar deficits.  Doomsday and fearmongers unite on principle and panic, for we are headed into another straight year of seeing red to the tune of TRILLIONS, not billions. 

but you go ahead, call me crazy.  see if I care, na na nana na.  sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.

And since I am having so much fun with myself this morning, how about we take a poll:

It's called Pick the Shutdown:  A.  Football   B. The Fed

indeed.

and how sad would it be if the 2011-2012 NFL season was canceled?

On a totally different note, Jamie Oliver, the Brit running around trying to redo our school lunches, was apparently shunned by LA (wonders never cease).  In any event, Oliver's response, a recipe right out of Alinsky's rules said this, "[that's cool] you only have to affect 2% of the population to make radical change."

Two percent.

Now whether that is a truth or a dare, the idea that it takes simply a nudge to create real change is very real.  This administration proves it everyday.  The nudges come by way of propaganda, regulations, moratoriums, ridiculing, mocking, judicial activism, DOJ's operating above the law, mainstream media married to the mob mentality -- for solidarity, you know -- for the good of the country, and all...

case in the third point: 

"All of this means one thing:  

the only way for America’s energy supply 

to be truly secure 

is by permanently reducing 

our dependence 

on oil."

Obama, 

New Age Energy Speech 

March 2011

Obama is crystal clear.  It is not about our dependence on foreign oil that is in the way, it is OIL itself. With 70% of our consumption going for transportation, that is a whole lot of nudging going on.  

And let's have a reality bites moment:  all it takes is a look at how we live our lives to know better.  The number of trucks that deliver our food and goods to stores --  the number of SUV's that drive the car pools --  the number of sports cars -- that may go to zero to hero in sixty seconds, but overall, don't they just blow a whole lot of gas out of a two-seater for nothing?  Isn't it all for show and tell?  We love our cars (and our car choice more).

And really, how could we RV, or take long summer road trips down back roads and country lanes in a cramped, midsized four door, if we have to get off the juice? Anyone fathom to guess how unrealistic traveling with solar panels is --  or how difficult it would be having to go from electrical jump to jump in a timely fashion, and calculating every move we make?  

I would like to think we could make a car that runs on sugar, too. But really? 

Especially considering I don't believe for half a second that we are being told half the truth surrounding oil in general; so, are we just supposed to trust a system created around OPEC, speculation, investment, and return on the dollar of sheiks and billionaires and the power elite?  Is that it?  

Not to mention, times Have CHANGED -- do we really trust the world wide oil reserve calculations?  Have we not already improved and innovated our way further down the road enough to think that what may have been out of the question then, is now very much a possibility now?  Does the end of the question and answer period start before we even begin nowadays?

The thing is, this morning, I want real journalism to find it's way back.  If I want opinion, let me choose to go to that opinion, but force feeding me garbage, as if I have no brain to think for myself, packaged up in neat and tidy assumptions, masquerading as unbiased journalism, pulleeze.  That is simply wrong.

Doesn't Katie Couric, Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopoulos, Brian Williams, want America to live within it's means? Do they not see the writing on the wall like the rest of us?  Are they seriously okay with running trillion dollar deficits, and doubling our debt before the decade is done? Don't they welcome diversity of opinion as much as the next guy?  Isn't it reasonable to believe not everyone has all the answers, whether left or right?  Isn't it time the mainstream media made a pinkie promise to the other half of Americans they seem too quick to chastise in some way, shape or form, every night of the week?

Glenn Beck leads a show that is the THIRD highest rating in cable news, with good reason; Boehner leads a House of Representatives from left to right to center, with a passion (if also a few tears).

Obama leads in what?   

Penalizing American oil companies, 

Regulating our lives,

Mocking public displays of disgust over unlimited government spending,

Formally criticizing Israel and the building of settlements,

Extinguishing America's Free Market,

Devaluing our American Dollar,

Upending the best health care system in the world,

Suing the state of Arizona and siding with Illegal Immigrants,

Siding with Unions, over Americans, in Wisconsin,

Siding with treating some terrorists like Americans, and some Americans, like terrorists.

Siding with democracy in Egypt, but not in Iran -- 

Supplying "humanitarian support" in Libya, but not in Ivory Coast.

NOT taking a serious stand against our deficits, national debt, and holding Congress to the fire.

NOT going line by line and making honest to goodness cuts.

NOT cutting the deficit by half (yet) (not even close).

in other words, he leads in waffling on every single principle and value we, in America, hold dear.

the list could go on forever.

and yet, none of it will be on ABC (at least, not in the way the story should be told).

Make it a Good Day, G

really long winded today... and I'm really not sorry for any of it.